- promoting a clearer understanding of men's experience -


MENZ.org.nz Logo First visit to MENZ.org.nz? Here's our introduction page.
MENZ ISSUES

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

Mon 29th March 2010

Towards more abuse of children by domestic violence industry stake holders

Filed under: General — gh @ 9:29 am

In today’ press, the violence industry is at it again.

To get funding they need to show the numbers up. So what do they do? they create them by encouraging women to break up their families. They have the tools for that. As one admits in this article you can’t encourage a woman to break and drop them her in a hole afterward. This is backed by reality. A woman who breaks through Women’ Refuge gets a free lawyer, the house and all the other assets. + the children of course and a salary for life. Who would refuse that?

Note Annette King, the ‘political’ captain of the industry proper.

As a result we get a new generation of hoarding youth who leave school early, takes to drugs, assaults police, the elderly.

As Fathers we say It is not OK!
The article is here.

JO MCKENZIE-MCLEAN – The Press

Domestic abuse cases are rising, but a high-profile campaign against family violence will run out of funding in June.

Work on a new phase of the “It’s Not OK” campaign is under way, but a decision on fresh funding is not due until the Budget in May.

The number of assaults on women is rising, with attacks in Canterbury climbing faster than nationally, police statistics show.

Christchurch women’s refuge staff said the number of families getting help was increasing by about 10 per cent a year.

Campaign spokeswoman Gael Surgenor said there was funding until June 30, but there was still work to be done.

“We are working on a new phase of the campaign. Its focus will be on giving and receiving help,” she said.

“I think we have created a supportive environment, where a conversation is happening that had not been there before.

“It will take a long-term effort to turn things around.”

A Ministry of Social Development spokeswoman said any funding decisions would be part of Budget announcements.

Lisa Close, a spokeswoman for a domestic-abuse survivors group, It’s Still Not OK, said while the campaign had highlighted issues related to domestic abuse, there had been an influx of victims seeking help who had been let down.

“It’s done its job — I don’t think it should necessarily be canned — but I think it needs to be working hand-in-hand to help protect victims, and address system failures.

“You can’t encourage people to leave [a violent partner], then completely drop them in a deep hole,” she said.

Police figures showed the number of assaults by males on females, nationally, increased by about 40 per cent in the 10 years to 2008, with 9630 assaults.

In Canterbury, reported assaults increased by 75 per cent, from 397 to 695.

The number of reported assaults on females in homes have risen from 313 in 1998 to 570 in 2008.

Christchurch Women’s Refuge spokeswoman Annette Gillespie said the refuge helped between 450 and 600 families each month.

Any funding cuts to the “It’s Not OK” campaign would be a concern, she said.

“It has been very effective [but it] would be quickly lost if they were to stop it.

“It has reached a wide audience — not just those affected by domestic violence.

“My impression is there’s less blame being placed on victims than there was five years ago.”

While domestic violence numbers were increasing, more people were asking for help, she said.

Labour deputy leader Annette King said losing the “It’s Not OK” programme would amount to “cynical manipulation of crime statistics”, as reporting of domestic abuse would fall if the campaign ended.
Ad Feedback

Awareness campaigns needed to run for years in order to change public attitudes, she said.

“If you stop highlighting the issue, everything will go backwards. It will be back to like it was when no-one was talking about it and family violence will continue.”

Love leads to abuse

A Christchurch woman strangled by her former husband says the physical assault was just one aspect of the abuse she suffered.

Therese Spinks, 47, was attacked by James Hunia Johnson, 43, at a Hanmer Springs holiday park last year after four years of marriage.

At a judge-alone hearing in the Christchurch District Court on Wednesday, Johnson pleaded not guilty to male assaults female.

Judge Philip Moran convicted Johnson after he was unable to explain bruises on Spinks’ neck.

Spinks told The Press that after an incident about two years ago, she called police and had a protection order put in place.

“I was devastated, I loved this man,” she said.

Spinks said she took Johnson back, thinking he could be “healed”. “They have a way of throwing out a hook and pulling you back in. Now I realise … he’s too damaged.”

Her husband manipulated and controlled her, she said.

“When something was important in my life, he wouldn’t even allow me that.”

At times he would build her up and at other times “devalue” her with subtle comments.

Spinks, who works in counselling, said she made excuses for her former husband.

In Hanmer Springs in September 2009, the pair argued in their cabin, Spinks told the court on Wednesday.

Johnson “shadow-boxed” her then started throwing her clothes out of the cabin, the court was told.

She grabbed a chain from around his neck and threw it outside, at which time he grabbed her around the neck and started choking her, Spinks said.

“I thought he was quite capable of killing me.”

Johnson was convicted of male assaults and female and breach of a protection order.

Sentencing was set for May 12.

– with Ian Steward

26 Responses to “Towards more abuse of children by domestic violence industry stake holders”

  1. John Dutchie says:

    Reply to all

    …Yep, here we go again with the usual Kiwi Feminist spin doctoring propaganda….Kiwi Woman all always the innocent victims from all us Evil Abusing Kiwi Men who have this evil monster ‘demon’ persona in us….Well you poor sweet innocent down trodden Kiwi Woman…A very simple solution to all of your terrible plight with us Evil Kiwi Men…

    Don’t get involved or even think about getting married to us Despicable Evil Kiwi Men…Unless of course we have been Feminized to your Feminist requirements….

    See Kiwi Woman…A simple solution for a simple problem……!!!

    Thank goodness only 26 more months before I out of here and returning permanently to live my days in Thailand where I don’t have apologized that I am Man…or even the worst Sin possible here in N.Z…I became a Father…That is the worst ‘Sin’ you can make in here in Feminism N.Z…

    Kind regards John Dutchie

  2. gwallan says:

    Police figures showed the number of assaults by males on females, nationally, increased by about 40 per cent in the 10 years to 2008, with 9630 assaults.

    What’s that in per capita terms? How much has the population changed? What is the equivalent rate for assaults by females on males?

    In Canterbury, reported assaults increased by 75 per cent, from 397 to 695.

    Assaults by whom against whom? Does it include only partner abuse?

    The number of reported assaults on females in homes have risen from 313 in 1998 to 570 in 2008.

    Again. Assaults by whom against whom? What is the equivalent for assaults on males in homes?

    Christchurch Women’s Refuge spokeswoman Annette Gillespie said the refuge helped between 450 and 600 families each month.

    Does that include calls taken from those they refuse to help? Refuges have done this with regularity and even counted male victims as being female on numerous occasions.

    Labour deputy leader Annette King said losing the “It’s Not OK” programme would amount to “cynical manipulation of crime statistics”, as reporting of domestic abuse would fall if the campaign ended.

    “Cynical manipulation”? There’s more projection going on there than in the local multiplex.

  3. John Dutchie says:

    Reply to gwallen

    …..Just my humble opinion on particular subject gwallen ….The so called ‘Tongue in Cheek’ unbiased ‘Statical’ figures with there so called calculations can be so easily manipulated to suit any political agenda that wants to dumb up support and more importantly to acquire more State Funding…Enough said

    Kind regards John Dutchie

  4. Scott B says:

    ““It has reached a wide audience — not just those affected by domestic violence.”

    This line says it all!

  5. julie says:

    In Hanmer Springs in September 2009, the pair argued in their cabin, Spinks told the court on Wednesday.

    In other words, both parties were at each other with words.

    Johnson “shadow-boxed” her then started throwing her clothes out of the cabin, the court was told.

    Now it has turned into one party reacting. Throwing someone’s belongings out the door seems to be a popular reaction from women AND men.

    But then Therese Spinks decides to react.

    She grabbed a chain from around his neck and threw it outside,

    Now the argument has turned into a physical fight.

    at which time he grabbed her around the neck and started choking her, Spinks said.

    I guess we can say she won the argument. What we can’t say is who started the argument.

    When someone, male or female starts to do an action during a heated discussion or argument, you know the argument has gone too far. The best thing to do is walk away and give them space. The worst thing to do is get your pride all twisted and think you can calm them down by doing something else to them.

  6. Dave says:

    Judge Philip Moran convicted Johnson after he was unable to explain bruises on Spinks’ neck.

    It concerns me that he has to prove he is innocent. However it concerns me even more that no one seems to pick up on this.

  7. Scott B says:

    Always the way. I have had to time and again prove why I should be in my chilrens lives. She never has to prove why I shouldn’t. All she has to do is say a few lies… if that!

    Justice does not exist in NZ!

  8. julie says:

    To get funding they need to show the numbers up. So what do they do? they create them by encouraging women to break up their families.

    I don’t think you want women staying in violent relationships so families stay together but I think your post looks like you think this.

    What you really should say is, “They create the numbers by advertising ‘It’s not OK to be violent’.

    What part of this do you have an issue with? Is it because women abuse the system created to care for abused women? Do you have a problem men are not getting help also? Is it something else?

  9. gwallan says:

    a) Monopolisation of funding, services and, most significantly, the community discourse surrounding abuse overall. They not only refuse to help victims of abuse they also control the wider discourse thus ensuring those victims are marginalised even more broadly.

    b)The most common issue I’ve seen expressed on the operational elements is that the refuges take a black and white approach. It’s disolve the marriage and nothing else. No consideration of any conflict management, couples counselling, just a one way ticket.

    c)Several years ago the Brewster Centre in Arizona shielded a client who’d raped the son of another client on their premises. They also cleaned up the scene of the crime preventing any forensic analysis. On it’s own it’s an obscenity but it appears there are quite a few instances of sexual impropriety in DV shelters which are not dealt with properly for political reasons. Too many of the folk running these services are there for reasons of gender politics rather than genuine concern for victims.

    If you backtrack through Carey Roberts exposes of the US DV networks you’ll find videos of interviews with several women who have accessed those systems. It’s not a pretty picture. Given that Australian and New Zealand operations adhere to the same idealogical bases there is no reason to believe things are any different.

  10. Ms IRD Officer says:

    Didims to you blokes.
    “Monopolisation of funding” If you stopped fighting among yourself you might get some.
    What are you doing in the area Gwallan and others. How many applications for funding have you made?
    You can’t complain about monopolisation unless you have applied.

  11. julie says:

    @ Ms IRD Officer,

    What are you doing in the area Gwallan and others. How many applications for funding have you made?
    You can’t complain about monopolisation unless you have applied.

    Actually, the funding is a major problem. I’ve spoken in person about it to major funders including government givers of money.

    Men just aren’t an option. It goes against rights because every group is oppressed to men. The white man in particular.

    It’s not just men’s groups who are feeling it. Every major organisation in NZ is screaming out for funding to assist men.

    All that is available is funding from the criminal system for men as perpetrators or criminals because radical feminism’s ideology states men are perpetrators and men are to be dealt with while in prison.

    It’s only very recently mental health has started caring for men but again, that’s for the safety of women and children.

    This is massive as a real life problem. The one thing that really needs to be organised is a major protest walk with all groups including some women’s refuges who won’t associate themselves with the feminist collective. They too struggle with funding because they’re out of the circle. Waitakere women’s refuge is one such refuge and to make sure they don’t go against radical feminism, we have the only developed men’s group ‘Man Alive’ which is run by feminist men.

    The way feminists see it, is that each year they get more money, they hit a target the government can’t lessen. Their goals are to increase that funding at every opportunity. They feel that if men get grants also, then men can’t have their funding taken away from them either, and they too can increase it each year. They don’t want men to be able to increase money because they can then start moving in different areas and destroy radical feminist ideology.

  12. gwallan says:

    @Ms IRD Officer…

    What are you doing in the area Gwallan and others. How many applications for funding have you made?

    If you’d been taking notice you might have realised that my active engagement is in the area of sexual abuse. I’m a board member of a twenty year old primarily state funded org for which salaried employees do the grant applications.

    Do you do anything aside from demean those who actually do care? What a nasty little person you are.

    @julie…

    The way feminists see it, is that each year they get more money, they hit a target the government can’t lessen. Their goals are to increase that funding at every opportunity. They feel that if men get grants also, then men can’t have their funding taken away from men and they too can increase it each year minimum. They don’t want men to be able to increase money because they can then start moving in different areas and destroy radical feminism.

    I find it all quite counterintuitive. The folk running these centres could easily expand their little empires by adding male victims to the demographic they target and by neutralising their rhetoric. That they don’t indicates that they put gender politics ahead of the actual services they provide. It’s very shortsighted. Just in the past year there’s been several instances of services losing funding because of their refusal to serve all victims. As governments tighten their purse strings – which WILL happen – many of those services will be outbid by those who will open their doors to all.

  13. John Brett says:

    Ms IRD Didumms
    We have a number of organizations represented by contributors to this site-
    There are two Men’s Refuges here, one run entirely by one man and his spare change, one by Separated Father’s Support Trust, which did get some limited funding for while.
    I have a meeting tomorrow regarding Mensline, which has apparently lost it’s funding.
    When you are a Men’s organization or a Family organization not on the Feminist aproved list, you find that Government organizations become just another part of the problem.
    For example, Police do not support Men’s refuges, and instead threaten those who have the audacity to have such non-PC ideas.
    Your IRD employer is indirectly a major contributor to Family Violence with it’s sexist and punitive culture.
    So, Ms IRD officer, instead of demonstrating your skill at sarcasm, tell us what positve contribution you are making please.

  14. Scott B says:

    Well said Julie.

    Time to get rid of the evil ministry of feminazi’s affairs!

  15. I have only just logged in (late lunch), but please support us women raising and believing in our kids. Sometimes we live on a thread, but we keep on going, because little hands around us is everything. I will read later.

    Educate and educate.

  16. John Dutchie says:

    Reply to Julie

    With no disrespect to you Julie…Your post was ‘right on the money’….And hence again I will say this Loud and clear,that is reason why I will not go near,or trust a Kiwi Woman ever again…

    Been to ‘Shell shock’ by them…And Julie, you might be very surprised how many good decent Kiwi Guys I know,that will not have a bar,or even look at a ‘Kiwi Woman’ as in for Marriage.

    …They are looking elsewhere and note,some have been very successful as finding a Wife…Can I blame them.??..No,I can not….And Good on them…

    Kind regards to you Julie…John Dutchie

  17. John Dutchie says:

    Reply to Mary

    What….!!!…Pardon.!!!……Excuse me.!!!!.While the majority of you ‘Kiwi Woman’ carry on ‘demonizing’ Manhood and Fatherhood….!!!! …Over my dead Body, Miss Kiwi Feminist will I ever so called Support you……

    Kind regards John Dutchie

  18. Dave says:

    We need to get the media to start questioning the refuge industry. Just because someone uses the refuge it doesn’t mean any kind of violence ever took place. I’d love to have the money to send some under cover women into a refuge. It would make for a telling documentary.

  19. Scott B says:

    What an idea!!!!!!!!!!

  20. Dave says:

    What I’d really like to see is more reporting of the fatherless state of our nation. Perhaps we should have a clock running on this site. Like they do for the USA national deficit. It ticks over showing the estimated number of fatherless children in the country.

  21. Scott B says:

    Great idea

  22. Hans Laven says:

    You don’t need money, just a female volunteer. I have previously asked for volunteers for this very purpose. For example, a woman can approach the local “refuge” with a story such as “I’ve spent the household grocery money at the pokies and I’m scared of how my husband might react when he comes home”. Then she maintains a careful line that the husband has never threatened or used physical violence but sometimes he has raised his voice when in a heated argument. When I previously suggested something like this some people replied that it would now be too late because the Misandry of Women’s Affairs, Women’s Refuge and other groups have spies monitoring this site. I still think it’s worth doing.

  23. Pete says:

    We did one with a family court lawyer.

    All she wanted from the lawyer was independent legal advice how to best settle the breakup legally. Even though she stressed many times that they had separated in mutual agreement and got on just fine, the lawyer was trying to push her into taking out a protection order against him.

  24. John Dutchie says:

    Reply to Pete

    Question for you Pete …..Was your ex partner Lawyer a Kiwi Woman…?????
    there is a reason why I ask this…

    Kind regards John Dutchie

  25. Pete says:

    Yes indeed she was a good Kiwi woman.

    I notice how many here have a go at Kiwi women in general. I strongly disagree with that. I see the vast majority of women no less trustworthy than men and supportive of our cause.

    Unfortunatunately, there are some very vocal rad-fems who use every opportunity to throw their weight around spouting misandrist crap all the while claiming they are doing so with a mandate from the fair gender.

    Try to ignore them.

  26. Pete says:

    Just to clarify: the lawyer was male and the woman seeking his advice was not my ex, she was an associate.

Leave a Reply

Please note that comments which do not conform with the rules of this site are likely to be removed. They should be on-topic for the page they are on. Discussions about moderation are specifically forbidden. All spam will be deleted within a few hours and blacklisted on the stopforumspam database.

Since May 2016 this site is cached. Comments will not appear immediately unless you are logged in. Please do not make multiple attempts.

« »

Powered by WordPress

Skip to toolbar