- 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.

Thu 17th December 2015

Find out your partner’s history of abuse

Filed under: General — Equality @ 6:55 pm

Given it’s so difficult for female violence and abuse to be acknowledged and counted, and police are biased so much as to wear and dispense “White-ribbons”, I’m sure people in the item excerpt below can be read as “Women”.
I get told so often things are getting better.
Even men say that, until they too get ground up by the injustice and gender hatred against us.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11562573

“People will be able to go to police and ask if their partner has a history of abuse under a new disclosure scheme — receiving a response within 24 hours in the most serious cases”.

32 Responses to “Find out your partner’s history of abuse”

  1. Downunder says:

    They’re giving you the answer to that here:

    The new disclosure scheme was announced by Justice Minister Amy Adams and Police Minister Judith Collins, and is part of a range of measures designed to reduce domestic violence.

    Domestic Violence is men’s violence against women. The bitch can pull the Santa Claws out at Xmas and it wouldn’t make an ounce of difference.

  2. MGTOW says:

    ……and calling her a bitch isn’t abusive , right?

  3. Downunder says:

    We’ve all got good and bad in us, right?

  4. Equality says:

    Maybe MGTOW has an agenda. One thing I have noticed and experienced, is how women are permitted [even encouraged] to vent steam and more; but let a male make the slightest emotive expression; he’s pounced upon with a vengeance. There is a double standard.

  5. MGTOW says:

    There’s no double standard. Search any of my posts and you won’t find any abusive comments made by me. My only agenda here is to encourage folks to express their ideas respectfully so that they have a better chance of being more widely accepted. On the contrary, if I were to load up my comments with abusive comments I’d expect some folks to switch off from what could be a very important posting. Far better in my view to display greater emotional articulation. Try “I’m outraged” or even “I’m extremely pissed off”. See the difference between that and resorting to using dehumanizing animal names such as “bitch”?
    BTW I’ve prevoiusly challenged female posters here at MENZ on exactly ghe same behavior.

  6. Downunder says:

    It’s a well developed political opinion MGTOW.

    The House of the Bitch (i.e. our parliament) encourages the qualities of the bitch in our women.

    No apologies for dogged use of this concept.

  7. MGTOW says:

    Oh dear, doubling down I see.
    It’s your prerogative to use abusive language.
    It’s preserved here for posterity too.
    Not something I’m ever likely to emulate.
    Good luck.

  8. Equality says:

    While ‘respect’ was one of the things that first attracted me, I am also tolerant and understanding.
    I think intolerance towards others who are in different circumstances, and may be in a situation of distress is unjustified.
    Are you going on the feminist sites and equally enforcing respect in their posts.
    I respect nobody as of right. If I respect you, then you have earned it. And I have to earn respect too. Respect has to be earned and isn’t a permanent medal when earned only once.
    I live in a world where people are human and have all the attributes most define as strengths and weaknesses that can be imagined. Some of my most respected and trusted friends are rough diamonds, but have a heart of gold, are true blue.
    On the other hand I have encountered and been the target of people who have the art of carrying out the nastiest attacks upon one , in the nicest and most polite way of course. I see that as cowardly, because in my mind they are boiling within, but set about to be deceptive by doing a performance which looks harmless to a quick glance, but leaves metaphorical blood on the floor. I’m sure we have all met them.
    I’m not defending “Downunder” here so much as defending “being human” and being one of the myriad of the variety which makes up person-kind.
    Finally, I doubt there is any member here who has not been sworn at; lied to; deceived; and many will have been maliciously conspired against and harmed.
    The impression is that you require them to stay in control all the time, even when under extreme stress and heartbreak. That would not be realistic.
    I can only hope you enforce equal standards equally upon the other side. If you do that, then you must indeed be very busy.

  9. Downunder says:

    Oh, WOW, were did the prerogative bit come from?

    It’s my choice, and pejorative too, but hell, I’ve got nothing on Shakespeare and they haven’t burnt his books – yet.

  10. MGTOW says:

    “Are you going on the feminist sites and equally enforcing respect in their posts.
    I respect nobody as of right. If I respect you, then you have earned it. And I have to earn respect too. Respect has to be earned and isn’t a permanent medal when earned only once.”

    No, I’m not wasting my time going to feminist sites these days, as I’ve already been down that road and gotten avalanches of abuse rather than being heard. Even so, I grant a basic level of respect to everyone which precludes resorting to dehumanizing animal-name calling despite disagreeing with them.

    “Oh, WOW, were did the prerogative bit come from?”
    It came from being educated by elders I very much respect for their character.

  11. Equality says:

    mgtow: we all are constantly abused and dehumanised. There are all kinds here, and I think all will suffer at least one of the following: anguish, hurt, health, abuse, injustice, false allegations and so on and so on.
    They have as much right to be here as you or I. They have as much right to express themselves as they choose; as you do and I do.
    It’s immaterial if you can “respect” their communication method or not. Obviously you are intending to write in a fashion you consider “respectable”, but this is such a minor matter – storm in a teacup over-states it greatly.
    But whatever none of us are respect police, nor can we or do we set the rules for others.
    I would have preferred you offered comment on the item referred to. Maybe that would have yielded some positive aspect to all this useless huffing and puffing.

  12. MurrayBacon says:

    I would like to second Equality. Respect is important, but this site is more aimed at comparing and contrasting ideas, so politeness is secondary to the breadth and the quality of ideas. It would be a pity if the need for feminised respect caused people to lose sight of sharply challenging each other’s ideas and constructive suggestions.

    MGTOW sounds like he wants to play “policeman” to Downunder. What a waste of something?……

  13. MGTOW says:

    Hey guys if you want to go around calling folks “bitches” or other dehumanizing animal terms, defensively clinging to your verbally abusive communication style like shit to a shovel, then go for it. See how far it gets you.
    Personally I think a more respectful communication style (OMG! branded feminized! What a hoot!) which eloquently makes the points without stooping to ad hominems will garner you more general support in the long run. To me it isn’t a matter of being a “policeman”, nor of failing to hear the underlying message conveyed which I heard from the get go. It’s a matter of communicating in a smarter, more politically savvy fashion to those people far and wide who read comments here.

  14. Equality says:

    Actually, I see no value in your post or your intolerance for the feelings of those on the list with you. If they can’t be candid about their feelings here, then where can they? and as I pointed out, this does not apply on feminist lists. You revealed you had stood up there and got abused. That suggests you get less abuse here. So which group is the more lofty?
    I do agree that we should not look upon feminist behaviour as a role-model for ourselves. That’s why I never talk about policy which would make us ascendant over them, and more than I believe they should be ascendant over us.
    But I think you miss the reality of human feelings, emotions and sense of natural justice. Even my dog has a sense of natural justice and is obviously aggrieved if he misses out.
    Of course all the bitches he knows are indeed beautiful lovely beings and if they could talk, I’m sure they would be offended by their name being used to describe some unjust female homosapiens.
    I have to wonder how hard it has been for you? Were you and your loved ones, your reason for living, ever taken to the brink of destruction, or beyond? Have you felt the terror? and if you have, you still condemn those who use language which you don’t approve of?
    Do notice, I’m not at all advocating the use of derogatory language, but I understand how and why its used, and such expression is natural/normal and in some small way can be a relief.
    Your posts don’t reveal that you have any understanding of such things and are intolerant of those who have been there or still are there.
    My recommendation is “Chill out” or maybe return to the feminist sites again, and again stand up equally for standards there.

  15. Downunder says:

    MGTOW Yeap, you’re being deliberately provocative.

    That’s the behaviour of Feminists and trolls. See, I can do the same to you if I want to play that game.

    Now you can obviously see that any abuse, is directed at the figurative dog in us, and you may genuinely not like this ‘sometimes’ confrontation style, or the language that is ‘sometimes’ used.

    I too cringe at the language and venom in some comments, from people that arrive here and let rip, but I understand why. What I don’t understand is how our fellow man could have been so inhuman as to raise, such ire in them.

    That’s the greater sin and that’s the rock I look under.

    I’m long past being here for myself, how about you?

  16. MurrayBacon says:

    #13 Actually a very good lesson. How to Win Fiends and Influence People, by Dale Carnegie. Old book and more important today, than when it was written.

    I do have to admit that I spit red hot tacks and bent nails at times, to survive.

    Don’t the policemen look so young? (Maybe I have a thing about policemen…)

    Anyway, I hope everyone can enjoy Christmas spirits, despite the harms that have happened around us.

    If we stop to observe, I suspect most will notice that for all of our own pain or our spices pain, our children have usually suffered much more than us. (Especially if we look to the future as well as the past.)

    If it takes a lot of extreme abuse of some people to stop all of this – then I say lets start this abuse now!

    Lets aim high (abuse).

    MurrayBacon – axe murderer (and troll in my spare time).

  17. Downunder says:

    Oh, Murray, you’re just a big sweet pussycat, really.

    We all know you paint those tacks red, but keep working on the swing, it’s coming along fine.

  18. MurrayBacon says:

    Where is the right place? (to do your shit)

    I have argued many times, that greater care about courtesy might lift http://www.menz.org.nz‘s persuading power. However, the people who organise and pay for the website don’t listen to me (thank dog).

    They appear to want to show the breadth of men’s experience, maybe with some tolerance that men might sometimes include women’s experience too.

    And in the end, I also now believe that sharing and showcasing men’s experience, the good, the bad, the ugly. Men’s responses are the ecstasy (sheer joy as well as the drug), the pain and the monotonously boring, it is all necessary to understand men’s experience.

    There are few such sites, so lets try to take care of what has been created and make sure it is available to everyone.

    I still believe that there is a need for a more moderated website, to showcase future positive policy proposals and facilitate constructive debate and analysis of those. But I have never got any support in that direction, yet. (Perhaps a private area for vibrant, active discussion of policy options and acrimonious debate.)

    People just don’t seem to be interested in policy analysis, even though they are willing to spend a lot of time complaining and griping about what policies are doing to them.

    Look back to learn…. I know how I prefer to spend my time, it is looking forwards as best as I can, for me and for my children.

    Anyway, I need to be getting my cleaned up tritium back into my bombs, in the suicide vests.

    MurrayBacon – wanting to get on with the job.

  19. Equality says:

    Hi Murray. In my past I was involved with two types of sites. One was where people [male and female] could try to benefit from others experiences, share their own and yes – vent too. I got trolled on that site by a female persona, whatever gender was writing it. NASTY….
    The other had a number of very high calibre people, many of whom had position as well as brains. I also think the one I was closest to had an asbestos hide, pure patience, kindness, tolerance and was working in the policy lobby.
    The former group tolerated people’s humanity and despair. The other was trying to make systemic changes for us all.
    But as far as I’m aware, MENZ is all there is. So its necessary that all types tolerate and get along swimming in the same pond.
    Although I may seem more moderate, I remember the terror. The system ensures I can never ever forget it. Many here will be still back in those dark times of terror, much like I was in the past. I look at them and its like looking in some mirror that shows me back then. One of my many nightmares is that every day, more and more families are being taken apart by this system, producing more casualties, and providing data which is easily twisted to support gender campaigns.
    People looked at me standing up for my family and kids, but they could only see me. They never cared to see the those who I kept safe and who depended on me; and yet those are the ones the gender campaigners claimed to care about “We only have the children’s best interests at heart!” – utter codswhollop.
    But Murray, I see the problem you mention. I don’t have an answer. I’m too wrung out to switch to policy, even if I had the necessary skills – I don’t. Yet I think most here are in difficulty one way or other and need a list they can discuss things and vent to as well.
    As for an academic friend, he has had to move on. I rarely see him nowadays. He sacrificed a lot, and took a lot of criticism. I know he tried to focus people towards addressing the policies, legislation etc, but a variety of reasons saw the support undermined.

  20. MGTOW says:

    Good to see some subsequent debate which is free of ad hominem and shaming language since my previous posts.
    I enjoy seeing such mature discussion.
    I previously wrote that I got the message the writer had posted from the get go, so feel somewhat condescended to getting lengthy feedback questioning my ability to hear human pain empathically.
    Perhaps I should have prefaced my initial comments by saying “look, I understand your comments are coming from a place of deep pain which I can relate to, but I’m afraid bandying dehumanizing language like “bitch” around is sadly going to switch off some of the wider audience” (not to mention get you served a protection order or worse in some other certain situations I can think of).
    Please understand my efforts here are not to upset already wounded men, but on the contrary to try and build them up politically. It’s for that reason alone that I encourage folks to avoid the use of dehumanizing ad hominem.
    I think a good point has been raised that this site is limited as there isn’t a place here for folks to simply vent their spleens which is separate from more cool headed policy discussion. That’s unfortunate as I’m fairly sure some feminists (perhaps many) and their sympathizers will come here and cherry pick the comments containing ad hominems to falsely spread as examples of ‘men’s generic violence’. Personally I don’t want to give the enemies of men such ammunition.
    There are open forums at Reddit where totally uncensored venting by men takes place which makes MENZ look like a choir of polite-mouthed angels by comparison. However, even they get picked over quite regularly these days by the likes of the feminist elements within the BBC – who then go on to bury men’s isues beneath their screeds of indignant calls for even more gynocentric pandering. So I think perhaps closed forums are the better place for those who desperately cannot contain themselves enough to avoid using dehumanizing language.

  21. MurrayBacon says:

    I love violence, extreme violence even more, I learned to love the Bomb, sex IS violence afterwards!

    We seem to live in a world where drones can shoot down unconvicted, innocent civilians in Pakistan, Lebanon, Iraq…Chechnya….. and where this is alright! (We could just convict them of something, before we murder them, to make it alright?)

    When a terrorist shoots a hundred people in a western country – drama drama – it isn’t alright!
    I look on thinking that gun control in USA could say many thousands, control of police shootings could save many thousands a year – but who cares about that?

    These stupid cordite/testosterone wars will only stop when USA and Russia show equal care for a Iraq or Pakistan life, as they show for their own lives. Truth is, they don’t care much for their own poor people’s lives….

    Yet these western countries allow white collar crime, impoverishing medical care, killing millions of their own people a decade – and this is OK!

    So, there is no logical solution to our storms in teacups on menz.

    Coexistence seems to be a workable solution?

    Anyway, if people would like a closed forum discussion of policy, please contact me in person. You won’t find me under axe murder in the yellow pages, but I ain’t too hard to track down…..

    Until then, you are all wankers and bastards.
    If you think you aren’t, you are on the wrong drugs, or are delusional! Sort your shit out by yourself! Violence is just for people who can’t enjoy sex. There seem to be quite a few around. Wankers are at least enjoying life. Maybe bastards too?

    Funny how you can’t enjoy sex without testosterone? (Actually this is as true for women as men… grrrr….)
    So, if we got rid of war, would we stop enjoying sex? it doesn’t bear thinking about. Where are my psychodelic drugs, at least you can enjoy them without testosterone. I am getting really confused…..

    Dr. Strangelove

  22. Downunder says:

    Just as well you don’t have control of MENZ MGTOW, or you’d probably be talking to yourself.

    The administrator has a very good understanding of the nature of a blog (as complex as this one has become) that caters for a variety of authors, multiple topics, moderated discussion where necessary and a forum that allows most people to have a say, and many people to keep in touch by subscription.

    It may not be the forum you want and it may not operate the way you want it too, and if one or two simple minded people want to copy lines to justify their cause good on them.

    It does a lot more good the way it operates now than the way you suggest it should operate.

    MOMA for example obviously has a forum independent of this site and post their collective views.
    You could do the same if you feel inclined.

    Become an author if you want.

    But otherwise stop trying to dictate and bully your way around other commenters, trying to determine who should be here and who shouldn’t, and who should be excluded.

    Like you say it’s a public forum, in the sense of the comments.

    If you’re not happy, take it up with the administrator off-line.

  23. MGTOW says:

    “Just as well you don’t have control of MENZ MGTOW, or you’d probably be talking to yourself.”
    I never said I wanted control of MENZ. To even hint at such makes no sense to me.

    “But otherwise stop trying to dictate and bully your way around other commenters, trying to determine who should be here and who shouldn’t, and who should be excluded.”
    I think in your rush to judge my character you’ve completely missed the point I’ve now repeatedly made in this thread.
    I’ll reiterate it here and perhaps this time you’ll get it.

    #7 “It’s your prerogative to use abusive language.”
    #13 “go for it. See how far it gets you”.

    Perhaps I will move on from MENZ all the same.
    As much as I’d like to help men in NZ to overcome dreadful forms of misandric discrimination, I don’t relish being too closely associated with those who have the same goals as me but can’t bring themselves to overcome issuing potty-mouth verbals for the greater good.
    I’ll think on that.
    Have a good day folks.

  24. Downunder says:

    I think you’re missing the point here MGTOW, and it is rather ironic that you should be using the acronym.

    Oh, WOW, were did the prerogative bit come from?

    It’s my choice, and pejorative too, but hell, I’ve got nothing on Shakespeare and they haven’t burnt his books – yet.

    I’m not here by some special right or privilege.

    I’m here because I want to be here.

    When I call the New Zealand parliament ‘The House of the Bitch’ that’s my choice.

    I accept you don’t like that, and I accept you think I’m a lessor person for my choice of words.

    So be it.

    I’m not out to silence your opinion, just don’t try to silence me.

  25. MGTOW says:

    “I’m not out to silence your opinion, just don’t try to silence me”
    I’m not sure what part of my repeated statements – ” it’s your prerogative” and “go for it” don’t you get, but I’ll have one final attempt to get through.
    Use all the potty mouth name calling you please, just don’t be surprised if you eventually get hauled up for verbal abuse.
    Also please don’t kid yourself that you’re doing folks like me who have similar goals to you yet choose our words more judiciously any favors politically. If anything I’m afraid your intransigent foul mouthed manner is an impediment to men’s progress because as soon as many folks see your verbal abuse they switch off and don’t take in your message. I’m sad to see that in the process you also give feminists and other detractors bullets to shoot us with.

    Now I am out of here.
    You can have the last word…..let’s see if it’ll be reasoned and respectful or an attempt to shame with further character judgments and ad hominems……..

  26. Downunder says:

    When you look at the successes of the ‘Men’s Movement’ over the last 20 years, the only real success was Union of Fathers, and you don’t like that do you?

    Did you go to the front line?

    Like hell you did. You were too busy being polite.

    And now you’ve got the arrogance to tell me you know a better way.

    When you’ve got the history to back your high and mighty attitude you can tell everyone about it.

  27. DJ Ward says:

    I agree with Murray
    Make love not war.

    Back to the topic
    “Police Minister Judith Collins”
    I missed something.
    How could someone who has performed so badly get her job back?

    “She pointed to the coroner’s rulings on Edward Livingstone’s murder of his two children before killing himself last year”
    That was caused by the anti smoking drugs making him go nuts, followed by drugs to fix that that made him go nuts, followed by drugs to fix that that made him go nuts, followed by all the things in his life that were being excluded, that made him go nuts.
    The herald have gone nuts.
    For continuing this feminist crap.
    I won’t comment on their honesty.

    When are we going to hear some real questions.

    “This scheme is about improving the quality of service that police provide to potential victims.”
    There has been a few comments at how broad potential victims is but be confident that Judith in charge will result in the police not giving a shit about men.

    The question would be.
    How pathetic of a service is it when males are not potential victims in the eyes of the law and police?

  28. Equality says:

    Well this expose of ego-sport has reminded me that the men’s movement is doomed by egos. Not addressing the issues, but attacking ones colleagues. This subversion from within is not new, and remains undiminished over my almost two decades of occasional involvement.
    Are the same people who were active then still active?
    I understand that nothing should be posted that could harm you in court – and that does imply a number here are disloyal to the cause.
    So MGTOW, Downunder was quite right about this driving others away.
    Goodbye

  29. voices back from the bush says:

    I have a friend who works for MSD who was very surprised when I showed her the herald article referred to at the top of this page.
    She said Cyfs is unable to reveal a partners criminal of abuse to a parent even if they suspect that the abuse is very likely to be continuing.
    Cyfs is supposed to be an organisation that cares about families and takes action where they see danger, yet their hands are tied by the rules so children in real danger remain at risk while other fathers are focused on as potential abusers to show efficiency.
    A father who taps his son on the back of the neck to correct him will be investigated, likely punished and expelled from his home.
    While a mother is able to physically restrain a child and take them into a bathroom and put soap in their mouths without this being considered abusive.
    While the mans behavior,if repeated would land him in prison for child abuse the woman will not be held responsible.
    Cyfs claim not to be biased, yet the entire lot of them are women.
    Discrimination can only be presumed if its an industry that’s dominated by men right?
    Its impossible to discriminate against males. right?

    Police are NOT involved with families.
    They only turn up to take a man away from the home, if there’s no man there (or no one to blame him) they do nothing.
    Yet they are the ones assigned to assessing risk factors of potential abuse within families?
    If they give out confidential information over the phone, how can they be certain of the identity of their confidant?
    Where is it written in policy that the police are able to break the laws of confidentiality?
    Shouldn’t only the courts have such powers?
    So now police will handpick confidential information to be released to jane public. Presumably she will be asked to keep the information private.

    But what if she doesn’t. What if her intention is to ruin his life and destroy his prospects.
    What penalty shall be imposed if her revealing information that police told her on the phone is reworded by her and told to his employer or some other woman that he left her for.
    How will police confirm if there is a sufficient risk to her or others and will the man be told to whom and what has been said about him?

    What assessment by police over the phone can be thorough enough that this situation is likely avoided.?
    Secrets among women are, most often, told to one person at a time.

    Show me a child that would rather have their mouths penetrated with a bar of soap than suffer a tap on the neck from a male and I’ll show you a country where violence and abuse is dealt with with basic intellegence fair consideration.

    Pixies Gnomes goblins fairies,and NZ Justice.

  30. MurrayBacon says:

    #26 Downunder, I see and share your frustration about moaners who stay off the sidelines.

    Like hell you did. You were too busy being polite.

    However, truth seems to be that the bulk of the public listen to neither MGTOW or to you. They hear a little bit, but nowhere enough to be persuaded. It is all so unreal…..

    May I suggest that both communications are desirable, necessary actually. Over time, the public eventually are working out what to believe and what to not believe.

    Good cop, bad cop…..
    I seem to remember being bailed up by police, after one of my bombs went off too enthusiaticly. My neighbour had obliged me, by letting the too enthusiastic police tear his house to pieces. By the time the enthusiasm police reached me, their adrenaline levels had cooled down to a level that could permit common sense and their kicking feet were tyred and saw.

    When I opened my door, they barged their way in. When I asked for their names, they all said something simultaneously and I couldn’t make out a single name. What an intellectual achievement?

    Anyway, in my fear, I noticed that one was being particularly nice and reasonable and the other interviewing ossifer was rude, in my face, ignorant and seemed unbelievably stupid. I found it off putting for a few minutes. But then it seemed only comical and time wasting, when I realised that their interrogation technique wasn’t leading to the information that they should have been seeking, to close the situation constructively and safely.

    So I played along, being particularly polite to the one who was working to be rude and unreasonable and gently challenging to the one who was polite.

    After about 20 minutes of achieving very little and then even less, I jumped back into my 8 cars and drove madly off in all directions.

    They gave me a lesson in communications, that I will never forget.

    In their lack of respect for me, I saw that I couldn’t and shouldn’t respect them. But the biggest lesson was the value of good cop, bad cop. It should never be used when more honest and direct communication methods can work. But when all else has failed, it is well worth considering. Use only with extreme caution.

    Unfortunately, fathers to public communications does seem to be in that desperate space? However, when more careful listening starts to occur, we must switch back to just sensible, honest and direct communications. This includes clearly communicating pain and suffering.

    When the public eventually decide to act, there will not be any role left in NZ for legal workers, in plundering family disputes. Lets make sure that the judgement on fathers or mothers isn’t so negative.

  31. Downunder says:

    Murray my first frustration is being told what words I can and can’t use. It’s my opinion, my choice, and my writing, and I’ll express it the way I want. I accept some people don’t like this.

    This is not profane abuse. They are provocative concepts, backed up by reasoned thinking, and far less abusive than many concepts the Family Court has dumped on us.

    We had this discussion 20 years ago and I along with others were labelled the undesirable lot that the ‘Men’s Movement’ didn’t want anything to do with.

    So we went away and got stuff done. What ‘The Men’s Movement’ couldn’t do. I don’t know exactly who ‘they are’, or who dictates their membership, or what hoops you jump through to qualify for their approval.

    The same people who did nothing then are still doing a lot of talking, labelling, demeaning, and getting nothing done, and good on them.

    The difference was that UOF didn’t discriminate. Membership was on the basis of need, not on your standard of English or your attitude.

    So we helped people.

    It seems that the ‘Men’s Movement’, empowers some people with an authority without basis. They are still playing the same broken record, and sometimes you get sick of hearing it.

  32. MurrayBacon says:

    Sorry if I wasn’t clear. I am trying to say that we are trying to communicate in an environment poisoned by putdowns by some women and familycaught$ judges. Media pick that up and publish it as fact, usually without any right of reply, as would be expected from professional quality journalists of old.

    So, to communicate in this harsh environment, the goody goody style comments cannot fully convey the suffering that some women, some fathers and many children went through and are still going through. The blunt, pithy, rude communications are every bit part of communicating the truth of what has happened and what is still happening.

    So, I apologise if you felt that I was criticising you.

    In my book, anyone who stupidly, or maliciously vandalises parent child relationships, outside of a working accountability system, is game for any restorative tactics available. Same for anyone who profits by threatening or compromising parent child relationships.

    It is outside my understanding, how the public can be so apathetic for so long, when there is so much being lost unnecessarily.

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