Opinions on Misandry (male sexism) requested
Hi John,
My name’s Andy and I’m a writer for Wellington’s student magazine Salient. I am researching an article on Misandry (male sexism), and am seeking to get some opinions for my article. I found your website on google and after a casual read through the material, I believe your [readers’] opinions would be valuable for this article.
The questions I am interested in asking are:
- Do you feel that society is becoming (or has become) sexist toward men?
- Can you cite examples where you think this is happening (or if you don’t agree, why you don’t)?
- What are some of the contemporary issues facing men in New Zealand? (And why do you think they’re issues?)
Like I said, I’m going through your website, and there’s a lot of good material there. If there’s anything else you feel would be useful to represent your position I’d love to hear it.
I’d appreciate it if you could post my request. All the research I’m doing leads to the conclusion that this is still a grass-roots concern, and there’s a lot of discussion that’s not reaching the public sphere.
Thanx JP.
I’m happy for Andy to quote verbatim (not out of context) any of the material I’ve posted on MENZ.
Comment by Stephen — Tue 5th September 2006 @ 2:18 pm
Yes, but in all western English speaking nations not just New Zealand.
The comvenient flip-flopping list between old chivilrious ideas and new equality ideas operates daily( when it suits the the state at a high level of society or on a individual level with the vast majority of women and effeminate men) Some examples are:
Women are given police and soldiers positions, but are not on the front line in battle, or when there is a riot, are put behind the line of large men.
Women are said to be equal to men in working ability plus, yet men aren’t as good at bringing up kids in the same people eyes and therefore lose even a hearing as to having primary custody of kids.
Medical funds are well known to go to female diseases, while women take vastly more time and funds from all levels of the health profession for both minor illnesses and imaginary ones.
Homelessness is very highly a male pastime not a female one. The state is much more ready to let such men die from this life, suicide and drug abuse.
If the media is contacted by women’s groups for comments supposedly shown on a telecast, that are just claimed to be sexist the story may be edited, go unbroadcasted, have the person fired from their job or even sued under some anti-hate speech legislation.
In reverse if men are the target the media shouts down critisim with calls of freedom of speech, and or, complains males should stop having such a thin skin or be
The school systems are under reorganization to allow female traits and skills to be marked above their value, while male skills are lessen in importance.
EX: Hence cooperation leading no where is prized over head strong leaadership with inflexibilty that can lead somewhere.
EX: In sports if someone is physically weak but does their pathetic best in any given sport they get high marks for effort, while in academic circles trying hard doesn’t mean anything if you don’t have the knowledge. Also competitive sports are being replaced with multiple forms of dance, where ranking of skills are vauge in the extreme. In some school systems sports and recess are being done away with all together.
History Class has major male players removed to glorify women whose accomplishments are sometimes 4th and 5th string at best in deeds.
Many subjects are becoming different forums of PC study over fact study.
Do the crime do the time. Women do crimes and get much less jail time, no jail time or even no record for bad crimes that men get the book thrown at them. The worst example is crib death where babies are murdered by their mothers, only to go on to murdering 2 or 3 more times before the police will finally investigate only to let the women off lightly for she is said to be mental unstable etc. All male crimes, it could be argued, are mentally unstable crimes too.
No one ever asks a women why being a coward is OK, why she didn’t do something more immediate to save someone than just call someone else to risk death in saving someone else. Female traits are always falsely rationalized into normal or Ok behaviour, when in fact they are often evil. Gossip and lying are a few more examples aside from outright cowardice.
I can give more but you will have to ask for them. The last area I will leave to others.
Comment by Intrepid — Tue 5th September 2006 @ 4:24 pm
Discrimination against men is widespread and pervasive in New Zealand. The reasons for this might have been able to be justified in previous decades but it can’t be justified now. This has an enormous cost on the country’s social and economic performance and future. Ironically anyone pointing out such facts is likely to be irrationally ridiculed.
Men’s life spans are much lower than women in New Zealand yet far more money is spent on women’s health than men’s. E.g. prostate cancer screening versus breast cancer screening. Much of the discussion on “men’s health” focuses on sex rather than on the critical issues facing men’s health. The statistics on men’s health problems versus the charities and spending on men’s health makes for sobering reading.
The education system is focused on girls and does not serve boys well. Some schools have recognised this and have special boys’ classes which incorporate more physical activities and other practices that suit boys learning. However such classes are the exception to the rule. Refer to the lower academic achievement of boys vs girls. This problem extends right through to tertiary education. Female students out number male in NZ universities at all levels of education. Yet in universities feminism practices and paradigms are pervasive. For example AUT has 60% female students with only 40% males. If you exclude foreign born students the gap is even more extreme. Yet the AUT student union has a Women’s representative, special women’s programmes and women only scholarships. There are no such structures in place for men at this university. This is probably true to varying degrees for all NZ universities.
Females in NZ get paid the same as males for doing the same job. The Ministry for Women’s affairs [note there is no Men’s affairs Ministry] promotes misleading statistics to try and hide this fact. That Ministry and other radical feminists want women to be paid more for doing the jobs that they often choose to do.
More rational/traditional feminists who wanted equality are aware that the tables have turn on their head and it is men who are now disadvantaged in most areas of NZ society. For example The Society for the Research on Women disbanded this year after about 30 years of existence since their objectives have clearly been reached.
On television we are bombarded with messages that men are incompetent and stupid. During one evening I keep a record and more than half of all adverts presented men as incompetent and stupid. Many of the other ads did not feature men or people at all. E.g. Mac Donald’s series of ads. Many daily prime time television shows also portray men in derogatory ways. E.g. The Simpsons, SVU, etc. The portrayal of men in other NZ media is not much better.
Men are portrayed as the only perpetrators of domestic violence when in fact empirical studies show that the reverse is true. Fathers in particular are demonised, yet this is one of the least likely groups to abuse children. More than half of child abuse perpetrators are mothers. The 2nd largest group are mother’s boyfriends. Biological father’s are significantly less likely to harm their own children than either of these groups. Yet services are exclusively provided for women and children not fathers and children. Prevention services are almost exclusively targeted at men — almost all fathers. The domestic Violence Act like much legislation is worded in general neutral terms but is applied in an extremely sexist manner to the point where is does not serve the purpose for which it was made.
The Family Court is biased against fathers. This creates fatherless children in 2 ways. Firstly there are those children who loose their relationship with their father’s directly as a result of the Family Court process, though no or little fault of the father. Secondly the knowledge that the Family Court is biased against father’s means that a much higher number of father’s simply give up trying to be part of their children’s lives after divorce.
Child Support in New Zealand is actually a child tax. It has no basis in supporting children. It is simply a tax based on the earnings of the parent that has least contact with the child — almost always the father. This creates fatherless children in 2 ways. Firstly, when combined with the DBP there are massive financial incentives for mothers to exclude father’s from the children’s lives for most of the time. Secondly, the costs and penalties are so high, that many father’s can’t afford to pay ‘child support’ and care for their children and many eventually give up.
The consequences for children and society of fatherless children are serious and widespread. {More references available}. It also creates a spiral of devaluing father’s and perpetuating the problems. The empirical research has been done in NZ but it is ignored by policy makers and the public at large.
Men are treated more fairly and are more highly valued over seas. Therefore many of the most talented men leave New Zealand in such large numbers that there are far more women than men of marriageable age left behind. {ref stats.}
I could go on, but I think you can see that sexism against men is indeed pervasive and is clearly a negative influence on NZ society and economics. What is most concerning however, is that there is this ideological denial of anti-male bias let alone the problems it creates.
Comment by Dave — Tue 5th September 2006 @ 5:48 pm
Hi Andy,
Wow, the above comments are hard to follow but I will give some NZ examples that will just add to them.
Definately, YES. From a females perspective many women are aware there is a gender difference where the men are valued less. Some defend the difference as if they are defending themselves. For to say men are getting an unfair share takes away some of our hard earned rewards.
Others just shrug their shoulders, saying they are aware but it is not their problem.
And then the younger females are taught that men are less and have just accepted it to be true. Men’s feelings are not valued nor their suffering (past and present)
It is definately happening in the justice system as above comments show. Women get lighter sentences and then we have a prison and possibly more to come that are hotel material.
Another example is an organisation I am familiar with. Its main centre has a female dorm, a male dorm and a parents and children’s facility.
The female’s dorm was beautified many years ago and they have big mirrors, new beds, matching sets of linen, new duvets, great showers and more.
The parent’s facility was next on the list but funding was hard for it is for both mums and dads. It had to be called a women’s centre to get funding and that is what it is. However, father’s do get to use it.
But the male’s dorms are falling apart. The showers and toilets are IMO under construction standards. The bedrooms are like cells and in a major need of repairs. The beds are probably at least a decade old. Seriously a male makes a bigger commitment to be there because they live like scum for up to 2 years. And there are safety issues.
This place is not biased themselves and there are like 8 males there to 1 female. The problem is that they can’t get funding for males. It is just not important enough to consider males the same as females at Government funding level.
Men today are not the ‘wife bashers’ society is portraying them to be. Today’s men are aware of the past and women are not accepted as less so they are not treated as less.
But with this perception that men are of less value, women are treating them as such. The roles of domineering have changed to the opposite. Men are getting the bash now. And there is nothing they can do about it because of fear they will not be believed and fear of losing ‘face’.
Comment by julie — Tue 5th September 2006 @ 7:01 pm
I agree with everything written above, except for one thing.
Julie wrote –
No Julie, You forgot it’s matronizing and wrong to try and speak for men!
So listen to this Kiwi man’s point of view.
There IS something men can do about it.
Many of us already have.
We leave. Or we stay and be very, very, very selective about which amongst them and how much contact we have with nz females. We accept the daily price of sadly having to hold women as circumspect to avoid yet another misandrist shafting from yet another priveliged member of the celebrity sex – women.
Whilst doing so we devote chunks of time and energy to speaking out against the raft of pervasive injustices against men.
In my opinion taken together these injustices mean that nz men are now generally treated as disposable second class citizen’s. And my opinion isn’t some newbie’s little pet rant. I’ve lived there over 20 years. I’ve got grey hairs and wrinkles to prove it.
I haven’t been stuck in some ivory tower preaching Social Science either. I’ve been out there working in every sector of social science – rest homes, prisons, psychiatric hospitals, drug rehab centres, frontline homeless shelters, a wide range of social service agencies, training rooms, on the street, you name it.
So unlike many of our so called experts in universities and parliament I’ve actually lived social science from inside it’s guts, not from some merely academic sociological abstraction.
I’d argue that now sexism against men (misandry) is so pervasive that the vast majority of people just take it for granted as ‘normal’.
And yet once folks get ‘it’, and recognise it’s existence it’s like an epiphany, an awakening to a deeper and more sinister reality than you’d wanted to accept.
Once you cross the rubicon there’s no going back mind you. It’s not for the faint-hearted. It’s a dark place many don’t want to even think about let alone admit accept exists and
IT’S WHY I DON’T LIVE THERE ANY LONGER, YET BATTLE AWAY WORKING TO EDUCATE AND FACILITATE EMPOWERING CHANGE FOR NZ MEN.
Comment by Stephen — Wed 6th September 2006 @ 1:02 am
Good points here Stephen. The idea that the elite are aloof and not in touch with the people is true now as it has always been in history with oligarchies. They try to claim we don’t understand when it is in fact they that don’t( as you state your real back ground and experience).
Second, the idea of leaving to fight another day is also just as important tactically. They have you in a zero sum game when you are forced to graze in their pasture, and their ideas of justice; where they apply pressure on police men to give tickets to men activists that don’t even know they have been ticketed is just such an example of the limited room to manuver in a fox world.
Some of this is removed when one has allies abroad and can act abroad with the state powerless to silence its critics. They use future jobs at the UN to feather their beds, but whine when men change the rules for their benefit and that of their kids in the long term. The high taxes and squeeze plays on men force many to tow the line just to see their kids which the state in many countries applies on men (which is totally understandable on the part of these men to give in and they lose no honor) yet this same state says its hands are tied to enforce court order and earn visitation and smiles when these men give in all the same.
Comment by Intrepid — Wed 6th September 2006 @ 2:20 am
I note that Andy found this website doing a Google search. So did I. Interesting that I couldn’t find a similar feminist NZ forum. There is a site called WOMENZ but there’s no forum. Feminism is the second “f” word in NZ. As soon as you start speaking of women’s rights you’re accused of being either crazy or a lesbian – I’m neither. I think the biggest issue facing both men and women is stereotypes. Not all men are bad and neither are all women.
Comment by Angela Church — Wed 6th September 2006 @ 6:01 am
Stephen,
Thanx for pulling me up on that.
Comment by julie — Wed 6th September 2006 @ 9:29 am
So the reality is that he is releasing figures are are meaningless as they cover only 35.89% of the 5865 orders made to the end of June.
Note he uses the phrase “seems to be saying” This is the resort of those who go to the data seeking an outcome. They are not listening to the “voice of the process” they are approaching the process with closed ears.
What the figures are saying are that if you are a Father then the legal process that decides the care of the child is heavily weighted against you.
This article is part of an onging spin campgain by Boshier and the Court that has been supported by Granny Hearld for years.
Regards
Scrap.
Comment by Scrap_The_CSA — Wed 6th September 2006 @ 1:40 pm
Dear Angela,
Thanks so much for dropping in and stating your cliche.
Comment by Intrepid — Wed 6th September 2006 @ 11:01 pm
Well this blows me away. There’s a tonne of feminism literature that I’ve been working through, and the bare minimum of a male equivilant. The reaction to other people I’ve been talking about this to has been equally virulent which means, if nothing else, that this topic deserves to be placed into the public sphere to raise it’s profile and get some good debate.
Thanks John for placing this topic up on your forum, and thank you everybody who’s taken the time to participate.
Regards,
Andy Feltoe
Comment by Andy Feltoe — Tue 12th September 2006 @ 7:56 pm