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

Anti-male initiatives

Filed under: General — Ministry of Men's Affairs @ 11:17 am Thu 23rd August 2007

As well as the gender-specific interrogation of female hospital patients, other government anti-domestic violence initiatives are arising. Check out the information provided by the WINZ programme. Note how the pictures show only a man abusing a woman and later feeling remorseful. Note also the emphasis on sharing information with other departments. So if some unqualified WINZ feminist suspects domestic violence people can expect to be hassled by police, CYFS etc. I have asked to view the relevant guidelines given to WINZ staff for identifying and responding to possible domestic violence, and for their training programme and training providers. I don’t expect they will want to pass on this information though.


  1. The Official Information Act requires that they procvide this information to you. To get the benefit of the Act, you need to quote the Act and the relevant cluase. Most Government Departments honour the Act well, but I have had difficulty in getting a familycaught judges to honour the Act. I have heard that other people have had similar difficulties with High Court judges.

    Comment by MurrayBacon — Thu 23rd August 2007 @ 4:56 pm

  2. Yes Murray on every count. It is interesting that so many inconsistencies can all add up to the same thing: we run the country as only some people see fit; to manipulate.

    However, from my stuff the HRC have replied and the complaint on the hospital intervention has been held up for a couple of weeks. I’m not too fussed really, the timing suits. That the policy in the hospitals is directly and unlawfully discriminatory is not something that can just be brushed away as easily many now are accustomed to think. Rick Barker, nore unfortunately, replied to my letter challenging the Court processes saying an investigation had been done, which quite clearly it hadn’t. This isn’t such good news for RB. Nor is it good news for parliament. My hand is forced. I replied using the OIA and he rejected to use it as required (as the conundrum you point to Murray) and I have begun a complaint that I will complete next week to bring this to the fore – thereby embedded for sure.

    This doesn’t yet bring the full detail of corruption into the public forum but it starts – stretching beyond my control, forcing the various departments to come to terms with what is in front of them – and believe me, for those who have even the slightest inkling of what I am talking about – let’s hope these politicians can extract from the depths of their personal existance a will to exercise in honour.

    Comment by Benjamin Easton — Fri 24th August 2007 @ 1:35 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