Women’s refuge and All Blacks game
It is depressing that the All Blacks have lost to France and many New Zealanders are feeling the ‘down feelings’ today. Funny to hear Psychologists and Psychiatrists coming forward to help NZ deal with the pain and give us advice on how to cope with this loss. It is all over the radios. The best advice given is for us to watch the rest of the championship, says one specialist.
If we are not already in pain; we have once again the Women’s Refuge Advocates and counsellors spinning the crap that the refuge hotline, police and the refuges have to deal with an increase of clients because men beat their wives and children because of the loss.
Since I had a day of relaxation and was a bit bored, I thought I would look more into this. And I have to say the news and discussion picked me up.
It’s a fact. The refuges do not get an increase of women because of the game nor any major game like this. There has been a few whispers over the years since this information was fed to the public but it is false. Not only does the refuges and refuge hotline not receive extra influx of women in turmoil but the police do not deal with extra call outs either for Domestic Violence.
I am awaiting a phone call to obtain the stats for these times of the year which are available to ALL groups. So I will be able to look at the trends. I did however hear that the rugby season is an increase but then there may be other explanations for that like ‘winter’. Yet, I did hear some males get nasty when drinking with their mates after a match they lost as a player.
But on another note. It was interesting to hear the disappointment from refuges about money. There seems to be corruption at the top. The money is not going to the refuges and they are struggling and even if they are given more money from the Government it will still not go to them. There are feminists who are ripping off their own movement. And the refuges are just simply being used and abused by the feminists who are cashing in. But what a neat day to spend with feminists. I hope they enjoy my website. hehehe
Oh and on another note. The women’s refuges are supportive of men’s refuges.
Posts RSS 2.0
We have known for some time that Family violence is all about money - Hence comments about the refuge industry
Comment by Alastair — Mon 8th October 2007 @ 3:37 pm
Julie,
How about some names.
Who’s starting these stories, how do they stand to gain from them, and what are their sources if they claim to have any.
Comment by Rob Case — Mon 8th October 2007 @ 5:55 pm
Rob check out this post
menz
and then check out the link in comment 2. The superbowl hoax.
Comment by julie — Mon 8th October 2007 @ 9:10 pm
Thanks Julie,
I’m aware of the Superbowl false statistics used to bolster the popular DV model.
However, I’m past getting mad. Time now to get the facts out and collect the evidence. Whoever starts these myths for profit needs to be exposed. Eventually this information may be useful for charging them.
Comment by Rob Case — Tue 9th October 2007 @ 11:41 am
and here comes the propaganda, right on cue.
Women suffer rugby backlash
NZ Herald
8:00AM Tuesday October 09, 2007
Many women became targets of violence as their partners took out their frustrations following the All Blacks’ rugby World Cup loss.
Women’s refuges say the demand for their services has been since Sunday’s defeat. “We’ve heard from police there has been an increase in domestic violence and they’re our biggest source of referrals,” said Catherine Delore, spokeswoman for the National Collective of Independent Women’s Refuges.
“The game isn’t the only reason for abuse but it’s always part of the excuse. The abusers tend to take out their anger on their nearest and dearest.”
Once again, feminist propaganda dressed up and presented unquestioningly as fact by the herald.
Comment by Paul — Tue 9th October 2007 @ 12:16 pm
Rob,
seeing as how I am now becoming more active in the Courts (I’ve just spent some of today with my head buried in some relevant Judicature Act 1908), I can probably help to realise the viewpoint you position of creating a forum in which to present evidentially the material you or others may collect.
Optimally this has already been achieved and I am still waiting to hear back from the Human Rights Commission on my complaint tabled against the August institution of the practice to ask any woman attending hospital if she has been subject to any form of abuse. Asking these questions of women is directly discriminatory and therefore unlawful against men.
If this comes through it would create a platform from which to launch. Bevan as well, I think, for the Republican’s has tabled a complaint on another practice relative to voting (?). If these initiatives hit their mark then they would best be substantiated to supporting information, and if that information isolating for working or relative examples was already compiled - then how efficient would we be?
Secondly, if this complaint process hits some kind of wall that mitigates the purpose of compiling the facts, then I will by then probably have started my (I have to do this anyway) research on directly entering the High Court in civil proceedings.
Murray Bacon and Craig Jackson have both independently expressed a view that it is necessary for someone to be keeping a journal of all of these events as relative to prove that direct as unlawful discrimination agaisnt men is rife, yet no man, from the menz movement, of whom I am aware at least has done such a collation.
If either Bevan or I have found an instrument to create a platform from which our views can be launched into the public, then it is possible that we are under researched and without adequate ammunition to retaliate against the massive bombardment we should anticipate and expect in reply! I can read the legislation, can you use scissors and paste?
Comment by Benjamin Easton — Tue 9th October 2007 @ 3:26 pm
Rob,
You ask to hold the feminists accountable. But who are you? Are you one man who is pissed off with the system or do you represent a group? Why would I risk my knowledge when you are a nobody in the system?
Comment by julie — Tue 9th October 2007 @ 4:18 pm
This is just noise. I was after a name. Now I have one.
Catherine Delore, spokeswoman for the National Collective of Independent Women’s Refuges.
Comment by Rob Case — Tue 9th October 2007 @ 5:43 pm
Good one Rob.
Comment by julie — Wed 10th October 2007 @ 6:47 am
Piece in the Wanganui Chronicle Wednesday morning: The police reported no increase in Family violence over the Weekend.
The Refuge reply - That’s because the game was early in the morning! Duh
Comment by Alastair — Wed 10th October 2007 @ 8:31 am
Rob, I am not dogging you as a person. I am wanting for you to be a voice. You may think I am just noise but truth is I am nagging at you. lol
I can’t go around saying women are false unless I start an anti feminists group for women.
You are a man. You have to have representation in this country. Else everything any of the men say is just a moan.
Comment by julie — Wed 10th October 2007 @ 9:27 am
You seem eager to talk around the comment I raised Julie. Namely, who specifically are these people who start false stories.
The notion that DV goes up after a big game has been proven to be a falsehood already in the US - a ploy to keep only a certain view of DV uppermost in the mind of a public that doesn’t have the time or inclination to examine the matter too closely. It is gossip spread by DV industry insiders.
One of the things we learn in the schoolyard is that the best way to do a gossip’s work is to repeat what she* says. The best way to undo a gossip is to name her.
*I’m using she in the current fashion of it meaning he or she.
Your post was that
Comment by Rob Case — Wed 10th October 2007 @ 11:14 am
The last 4 words of my previous comment weren’t intended and don’t relate to the rest of the comment (they are words left from an original start to the comment that floated around below my field of vision).
Comment by Rob Case — Wed 10th October 2007 @ 11:21 am
I’m not sure if you have missed the point Rob that Julie has made in her defence: it has nothing to do with your answer - or at least as far as I can read. You have answered defensively. Her last comment was to indirectly encourage you to be more proactive in a manner that can overcome the defences of those who spread gossip (to use your reply), clumsily as she recognises but never the less pushing directly in challenge for us better to communicate and direct our frustration at the problem of our oppression. I thought she was quite clear.
Remember the idea of making a lisy of advertisers? It hasn’t yet matured in a fashion that can be seen yet it lingers to memory. Optimally we could separate journalists or organisations that are damaging sons and daughters by exploiting markets to maintain the illusion that all men are made to be bastards. I’m busy getting ready for Court and tribunals of all sorts yet everything I am doing relates back to this site and it being a base unique to this country where we are proactive.
I’m not asking you directly to do anything different to what you do, as nor am I knocking you for any energy you exercise, yet agree with Julie’s tone, that each and every one of us - (myself included) will have to pick up our efforts if we are going to beat the things that we complain are set to hurt our sons and daughters and: to a lesser degree ourselves
Comment by Benjamin Easton — Wed 10th October 2007 @ 2:52 pm
Rob, what Benjamin says is true. I know that I don;t come over the best but deep down, I know this is a man’s job.
Comment by julie — Wed 10th October 2007 @ 8:56 pm
Today I made the following complaint to the Herald. Depending on their response the next step would be a complaint to the Press Council. That Council very rarely finds against any publication and usually dismisses complaints on the basis of legalistic details, but it’s still worth raising the question I think.
Dear Editor
I attach at the bottom of this document my letter to the Herald “Letters to the Editor”. Please consider it part of my formal complaint to the Herald.
Re: Article 09/10/2007 titled “Women Suffer Rugby Backlash”
1. The article stated as fact that “many women” had suffered domestic violence due to the World Cup loss, but no evidence to support this reported fact appeared to exist.
2. The article stated as fact that this alleged increase in violence involved partners taking out their frustrations on those “many women”. Even if there had been any increase in domestic violence after the match, your paper will not be able to show as fact that it was due in any measure to partners’ frustrations about the loss rather than, for example, excessive alcohol use or sleep deprivation.
3. The article published a claim clearly based on the most casual evidence (the Women’s Refuge person said “We’ve heard from police…”), made by someone whose industry will directly benefit from such propoganda, and that can be expected to cause serious damage to the reputation of men as a group. Yet no effort appeared to be made by your paper to make even the most basic enquiries to check the veracity or accuracy of this propaganda. For example, it would have been very easy to ask who in the police provided Women’s Refuge with this information and to contact that person for verification.
In my opinion the article was highly irresponsible and in publishing it your paper knowingly pretended that propaganda on behalf of an interest group was factual news.
My Letter to the Editor:
“Your article on 9 Oct stated that “Many women became targets of violence as their partners took out their frustrations following the All Blacks’ rugby World Cup loss.” This was stated as definite fact, then the next paragraph reported a claim by a Women’s Refuge spokeswoman that “she had heard from police” that there had been an increase in domestic violence. However, I understand that official figures show no such increase at all.
Where did your journalist obtain the facts (s)he reported? Is it not a tad irresponsible to publish slanderous claims that damage the status of men as a group without any effort to check those claims? Surely, when such damning claims come from a person with pecuniary interest in the domestic violence industry, those claims should be checked out? Are men now considered fair game for publication of any unfounded allegation against them?”
Comment by Hans Laven — Tue 16th October 2007 @ 11:58 am