MENZ Issues: news and discussion about New Zealand men, fathers, family law, divorce, courts, protests, gender politics, and male health.

Peter, the worm- man, Dunne is at it agaian. He probably even believes what his Child Support gestapo are telling him.

Media statement
For immediate release
Thursday, 28 February 2008

Worm-Man Dunne speaks on Child Support Revenue:

Minister Peter Dunne is welcoming initial figures that suggest the Government’s newly-implemented measures to ensure liable parents meet their obligations to their children are working.

The Child Support Amendment Act took effect in September 2006 and allowed for a write-off of penalties each six months proportionate to the amount of child support debt paid by liable parents who have agreed to and maintained a debt repayment schedule. (more…)

Hans Laven launches his campaign for Tauranga this weekend.

“At a time when children more than ever need the strength and authority that fathers can provide, the Clark government continues to promote a culture that blames and undermines men. It continues to preside over a Family Court that destroys parental goodwill and cooperation.”

full release here.

I remember last year talking to a female journalist over the phone about a story she wanted to do on single parents. At the time I was new to understanding what feminism was about and how fathers were being affected by it.

She told me that she had been part of a documentary team who interviewed Jim Bagnall and that she couldn’t understand why there was so much anger. It had thrown her and she backed away from mens’ issues. I guess women generally don’t hear words as much as they see reactions when it comes to men.

But since I had the chance to meet Jim Bagnall and learn about him I was able to tell her what he was about and what a remarkable man he is and where his frustration was coming from. It is really sad that the men’s movement has been so misunderstood by the public especially when what they were trying to tell the public was vital information. (more…)

FYI, here is some correspondence I have had with the Children’s Commission. I have had no further reply, and it is reasonable to conclude that Ms Kiro has made a claim about research that she cannot back up with evidence.

13/02/08

Dear Ms Kiro

Re: Your comments in Dominion Post Article “Keeping Our Children Safe”, 04.02.08

Your opinions underestimate the importance to children of an upbringing in which parents are in charge and thereby provide a secure environment through confident limit-setting and disciplinary consequences. Your opinions also overestimate the importance of social modelling theory and underestimate the role of other factors impacting on behavioural development, particularly behaviour training through reward and punishment, the management of immediate consequences.

You challenge the idea that parents “own” children, but you fail to acknowledge that the alternative is that the state owns our children, and you fail to admit that when the state attempts to usurp the role of parents the outcome is usually disastrous. There is simply no evidence in the history of human civilization that supports the idea that the state is better at parenting than are parents, except perhaps for a tiny proportion of the very worst parents. (more…)

There is a saying that those in glass houses should not throw stones.

But feminist leaders do not seem to understand that the majority of people are working class people. It seems that we are uneducated. Pathetic losers unable to care for our children. And not just the most of us as parents but our own parents and our grandparents. And our great grandparents and their parents and … I hope you get the gist of this.

We are as she says, “Gullible”. We are gullible because we follow tradition. We are gullible because we do not follow the new world order of raising our children which has only proven to be chaos so far. (more…)

We hear of all the good things that our school system is doing through research released by the Ministry of Education from our Labour Party. We hear about all the good things that NZ is doing to protect our children from abuse.

We hear how our children need rights and that they should be free to choose their own sexuality. How they should be free from physical, Mental or Psychological discipline or leadership that could fit into the broad definition of politically correct abuse. If a child fears or feels any negative effort it is not discipline to learn from, it is abuse.

Everything must be affirmative action.

We can even read comments by the right wing and left wing sites discussing the bits and pieces coming out and debating between themselves over which side is the correct side to run the country. Funny thing is that they are both the same. Middle ground pushing the same ideology and agenda just arguing over a minor detail here and there.

And then we have the people. Those who see reality and research that sneaks out to the public through the media. Research that is ignored by politicians because it is not supporting their ideology.

Our education system is going down hill and has been for many years. No matter what is political correct and what funding is thrown at the problem and what is hushed to get funding and save status of schools, we continue to go down hill. Parents have been saying it for years.
(more…)

Hi there,

I have some issues around Child Support and wanted to know if there was anyone out there who could offer me some advice.

I have an shared care agreement with my ex 50/50 but are getting stung quite heavily on Child support payments by IRD.

I earn considerably more than my ex but it appears she has reduced her hours of work so the ammount I pay via off setting contines to increase.

My ex and I are also supposed to split all child care costs although I have not recieved any compensation from her in over a year?

What to do?

Bob

I think the first thing you need to ask is what is the meaning of smart?

Smart means ‘intelligent’. Intelligent means ‘the power of reasoning and understanding objectively’.

I suppose some would know the answer to this instantly. But that would stop my article so I will continue on.

Who represents women these days and who represents men. Simple answer; feminists represent women and men are represented as themselves. I am starting to wonder whether women really are being discriminated against. I know we are. But it is not from men. It is from our selves. Our own sex.

Look at the facts of what is going on. (more…)

Extract from Green Party Press Release – Wellington tonight.

Green MP to speak at S59 book launch tonight

Green Party Spokesperson for Children’s Issues, Sue Bradford, will speak tonight at the launch of the book ‘Unreasonable Force’, a history of the campaign to end legalised physical punishment of children in New Zealand.

The launch takes place 6.00pm – 7.30pm Tuesday 19th February at the Loaves and Fishes cafe, next to St Paul’s Cathedral, Wellington.

“The ongoing campaign to overturn last year’s law change on Section 59 makes the book launch tonight especially relevant,” Ms Bradford says.

Half of mothers experience some form of manipulation or bullying at the hands of their children, even if it is as simple as the silent treatment, a survey shows.

Half of mums ‘abused’ by kids – study

A whole new industry has just been born! Half of all mothers are being violently abused by their children, “particularly teenage boys”! O the scourge! O the evil!

It is already well established feminazi propaganda that most women are (physically) violated by men – a current anti-violence t.v. campaign tells us police respond to a domestic violence incident every 7½ minutes (i.e. 70,000 call-outs a year). It is clear that not every violent incident will be reported to Police. It is also clear that Police are unlikely to respond to every violent incident reported to them. But how many such incidents are not even reported?

Statistics tell us that 2,347 sexual attacks were reported to Police last year. Women’s Refuge tell us that only 9% of rapes are reported. I might be a bit off track, but I figure sexual attacks are basically rape, attempted rape, and any physical attack where sexual activity (i.e. rape or attempted rape) is the primary intent or result.
This means the true figure would be over 26,000 sexual attacks each year, given only 9% are apparently reported. Women’s Refuge also report only 15% of the 9% of rapes result in a conviction, meaning only one rapist in 74 is convicted. I can understand that it is much harder for a women to report a rape than for her to report an episode of violence. Especially given there is a 73 out of 74 chance the rapist will not be convicted.

I can also believe that with the ever expanding definition of ‘violence’, it is unlikely most violent (men) would ever be charged, must less convicted based on these expanding definitions. This new study purports, for example, that ‘silent treatment’ is violence, as is threatening self harm. The likelihood of perpetrators of this type of violence to ever be charged, let alone prosecuted (at least under current law) is pretty well zilch. I cannot imagine anyone reporting such violent acts to Police, given there would likely be a complete lack of interest by the police in pursuing the perpetrator.

But how much violence is actually reported? If we were talking purely about physical violence, then the percentage reported may well be well-higher than that for rape – maybe even 50% reported. But if violence includes all forms of non-physical violence, than the percentage surely is far-far lower than for rape. I cannot imagine for a moment that our police would respond to a call-out whereby a husband is off sulking in his (wife’s) garage, and she feels violated by his ‘silent treatment’. In the absence of any sound basis to make any sound judgement, I would like to hypothesize the same percentage of violent incidents are reported to police, as for rape. 70,000 violent incidents responded to by the police suddenly becomes 467,200 actual incidents of (physical) violence – each year. (more…)