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

MENZ mentioned in ChCh Press

Filed under: Domestic Violence,General — JohnPotter @ 9:51 am Tue 18th October 2005

Headed: ‘Man —haters’ on abuse checklist , a story in the Press yesterday written by Kim Thomas notes the fact that we recently linked to an item on another site containing a checklist for spotting women who make false abuse allegations.

Thomas reports:

The Masculinist Evolution New Zealand (Menz) website says false allegations of domestic violence are commonplace. It is a view backed by another lobby group, The Union of Fathers.

Women’s Refuge is deeply angered by Menz’s promotion of the checklist, which it says minimises family violence.

Menz is affiliated with many of New Zealand’s male rights groups and has thousands of names on its database.

(Actually, I told Thomas that our number of subscribers was “less than a thousand”, but I’m not going to bother complaining about that.)

The article continues with Union of Fathers spokesman Darrell Carlin confirming that false allegations in order to deny a father custody rights are common in New Zealand.

The article continues:

Women’s Refuge national trainer Debbie Robinson said she was angered by Menz promoting an article, which undermined efforts to deal with family violence… New Zealand research showed that only 1 to 2 per cent of people with protection orders abused the process.

Even if this ‘research’ had any credibility whatsoever, Robinson’s attitude is astounding. Even her dodgy figures represent hundreds of children loosing their dads because of the Refuge’s ideologically-inspired campaign of social engineering. Just because bad things happen to ‘only’ a small percentage of victims, we can safely ignore them, according to Robinson. I wonder if she would apply the same reasoning to other social problems that affect 2% of the population?


  1. Letter to the CHCH Press:

    The Editor
    The Press
    [email protected]

    Dear Sir / Madam

    I would be very interested to hear Debbie Robinson’s justification for claim that “New Zealand research showed that only 1 to 2 per cent of people with protection orders abused the process”. I suspect that she has made up these figures After all, it was not that long ago that we were told that nobody made false allegations. It was also not long ago we were told that one in three girls would be sexually abused by their own fathers; a monstrous lie it was concocted purely to arouse fear and hatred of men.

    New Zealand has a huge problem with false accusations, and to trivialise is an affront to the many victims. I have been the victim of false allegations made by my ex partner, who knew that she was immune to her actions.

    Even though were too ridiculous to have been believed by most people, they were still sufficient to sever all contact between my children and myself for a long time, which was the intended purpose of these allegations.

    The only way to deal with this problem would be for false accusers to be liable to the same penalties that their victims would have received. Then they might not be so willing to play games with peoples’ lives,

    Yours faithfully

    Chris Marsden

    Comment by Chris — Tue 18th October 2005 @ 10:19 am

  2. Well I’m convinced allegations of domestic violence are commonplace. Why? Because that’s the experience I’ve had.

    Sitting at home, kids fed and asleep in bed and policeman plod turns up at our door. Their mum had rung and said I was “drunk and abusing” the children.

    The nice cop took one look and said not a problem, what’s Mum angry about? Well not in the best interests of the kids to go there, so I thanked him for his time and let it go. But now I live in fear of what is to come next.

    Where’s the next accusation going to come from? Is CYPs preparing a bed now for our children? Is some lawyer for the children waiting to say they know whats best for my children.

    Family violence goes both ways Debbie. It i not always physical either. How about getting the figures from the Police of the number of calls they get where there is no problem? How about training Womens refuge to promote anger management for women? How about contributing to reducing family violence by involving – not excluding – men from the lives of their children?

    Or even start with acknowledging it takes two to tango. All women are not victims. Some make false allegations and get away with it.

    Comment by Nik — Tue 18th October 2005 @ 11:03 am

  3. Our jury system is based on the premise that “better a guilty (Wo)man goes free than an innocent one be punished.”

    As a society we have deviated from that in our “protection “of females. The National Party talks of one law for all yet was quite happy to have many statutes based on gender. E.g. “Assault on a female” (Tough luck if you are born a small or weak man)

    Feminism is Narcissism wearing a skirt and is the enemy of the child. I would be a bigot to say that women per se are evil as I am sure if the pendulum of law was to swing in men’s favour just as many creeps would come out of the woodwork. As I have previously stated…

    Why do dogs lick their genitals??? ‘Cos they can.

    False allegations can be stopped only if the repercussions are feared. The argument that it would stop genuine complaints wouldn’t stand up in any debate.

    Comment by triassic — Tue 18th October 2005 @ 12:09 pm

  4. Yes guys I agree.
    I am delighted to see the checklist article by Rudov which I sent to MENZ has been stirring up the fems. That means they feel threatened. Good.
    I’m personally excited to see that femthink is being increasingly challenged by the use of such things as the checklist. I wish it were available to every man in NZ to give them pause for thought about the kind of women they’re getting involved with.
    On a personal note, I realised when I came accross Rudov’s checklist article that it reflected just about perfectly what I was subconsciously doing anyway – privately profiling every woman I met to judge if she was potentially abusive to me. I believe that after the way I’ve been abused by many women over 20 years in NZ (and having witnessed many other men being abused by women) that what I’m doing is rational and totally appropriate.
    Long gone are the times when I reflexively reacted with automatic chivalry and made excuses for women’s bad behaviour.


    And Rudov’s checklist is a great tool for me to use to see if they’re doing so.

    Given the terrible pillorying of men by most NZ women I’ve ever met and discussed men with, I’d say many NZ women have much work to do in getting switched on guys to trust them as empathic to thier menfolk.

    Comment by stephen — Tue 18th October 2005 @ 3:03 pm

  5. “The personal in the family court work within the static of false allegations , which their mode of operation encourages.” John Hirst – Kangaroo Court. Men show total disgust for the gender bias family court as it is founded on discovery even though the vemonous court is not interested in establishing the truth? How can it call itself a court of justice when it encourages perjury within it’s secret sinister walls? Well done for the media exposure dudes.In solidarity -dad4justice

    Comment by Peter Burns — Tue 18th October 2005 @ 9:40 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Leave a comment

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.

This site is cached. Comments will not appear immediately unless you are logged in. Please do not make multiple attempts.

Skip to toolbar