David Willetts has suggested women are to blame for the disadvantages of working-class men (Minister blames feminism over lack of jobs for working men, 2 April). He does not acknowledge that women of all classes are poorer than their male counterparts and even now are subject to widespread unfair discrimination in the workplace and exploitation and violence in the home.
The coalition's proposed cuts to jobs, benefits and services will disproportionately affect women, who are the overwhelming losers in the current economic crisis. Instead of admitting this, Willetts cynically pits working-class men against all women. Given the widespread incidence of domestic violence and murder in this country, and the fact that this is known to rise steeply in situations in which men feel under financial pressure, his comments are deeply irresponsible.
If Mr Willetts had suggested that equal rights for black people had caused greater inequality for working-class men, he would have rightly been dismissed by David Cameron. He should resign.
Jean Calder
Brighton
• There are so many points to take issue with in David Willetts's recent comments on feminism and social mobility, I'm not sure where to start. First, he seems to assume that the UK's economy has been stagnant since the 1960s, resulting in a smaller share of the pie for men as more women joined the workplace. This is laughable. Aside from the economy obviously having grown in the past four decades for other reasons, a larger workforce is capable of generating more output, which makes more jobs available. Second, if opening up education has magnified social divides, is he suggesting that keeping a certain segment of the population uneducated is a means of achieving social progress? If so, I really do wonder how and why he is universities minister of all things.
Radhika Saba
London
• John Harris's "child-men" (Puerile and proud of it, 1 April) may possibly be the result not of female empowerment but another social phenomenon. In past times most young men left school at 14 or 15, and reached their majority at 21. They thus had five or more years in which to learn the requirements and benefits of adult life before taking on the full responsibilities. In the intervening period there were stages – motoring licences, for example – which gave a step towards that responsibility. Now education continues as a general rule until 18 – the same age as majority. So young men are precipitated from student to adult almost overnight, with very little time to come to terms with their new status, and with a strong desire to experience the benefits, but not the responsibilities. Girls, keen either to make a career or to get married, are far more focused.
M Monro
West Horsley, Surrey