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

We’re Here To Help

Filed under: General — Ministry of Men's Affairs @ 2:14 pm Thu 29th November 2007

I watched this South Pacific Pictures movie last night and recommend it highly to all. It’s about Dave Henderson’s real-life fight against the IRD that shafted him. Many have been shafted by government departments and Courts, but few battle as effectively as Mr Henderson did.

Notable in the story were the gender issues. The problem apparently began when a male IRD officer made inappropriate personal comments to Mr Henderson’s partner. When Mr Henderson attempted to defend her honour by threatening violence, the IRD officer mounted a vendetta.

His partner, though initially happy at his chivalry, soon became stressed at the developments. She started attributing the problem to Mr Henderson’s own shortcomings, his anger and social impropriety (even though he behaved quite well after his initial outburst). She pushed him against his better judgement to share details about what was happening but as soon as he did she sulked and complained that he was raising his voice. She became angry with him when in his stressed condition he showed impatience towards her son. She berated him for raising his voice etc even while she was shouting at him about it. In the middle of it all she left him because it was too stressful, thereby wrecking the bond he had fostered with her son and leaving Mr Henderson bereft. When he eventually succeeded she was back to “I miss you”, and his chivalry extended to forgiving her readily for her abandonment of him in his hour of need.

Many men will find the themes quite familiar from their own experiences. Of a number of morals to this story, I will highlight only the importance of keeping detailed records of all communications and experiences when involved in a dispute.


  1. Hi Hans
    I’m sure if you read Dave Henderson’s book “Be very afraid” you would realise that he was not having a relationship with his secretary and that that part of the movie was based on fiction.
    It disturbs me the way that you misinterpret things at times.No woman pushed Dave Henderson into doing anything.
    The IRD strove to do all they could to destroy his life leaving him with only his beloved cat.

    Comment by rosie — Thu 29th November 2007 @ 8:41 pm

  2. Hi Rosie

    What do you suggest I misinterpreted? I saw a movie and commented on it. I didn’t say that any woman pushed Dave Henderson into anything, only that she was portrayed as being initially pleased he had stood up for her. The movie showed her then blaming him for what the IRD were doing, then abandoning him. If fiction, then very astute character development. And apparently, very convincing…

    Comment by Hans Laven — Thu 29th November 2007 @ 9:41 pm

  3. The only ones that you should have been picking on in that movie,were the IRD.IT was them who caused the stress in this couple’s lives to such an extent that neither of them were able to support each other anymore,because they were both too overwhelmed with stress.
    Maybe you think that the woman caused it all too because she went to the IRD’s office dressed in a short skirt.

    Comment by rosie — Fri 30th November 2007 @ 5:53 pm

  4. Rosie,

    Thank you for telling me what I should be doing. Maybe I will return the favour one day.

    I thought this site was called MENZ. Maybe you think it’s not ok for any man to dare to comment on a character portrayal of a disloyal woman in a movie. Or in fact for any man to dare to comment on women at all. Maybe you would enjoy some feminazi site a lot more where you can complain about men all day, call them stupid and blame them for all evil.

    Maybe you don’t understand the meaning of loyalty and this prevented you from recognizing the character portrayal in the movie. You seem to be much more interested in character assassination than in character development. Maybe you are incapable of rational debate without descending into personal insults and sarcasm. You wouldn’t be the first.

    By the way, I’m sorry to hear that you are disturbed. Maybe you could seek some professional help for this rather than persuing a personal vendetta on a site intended to discuss issues of relevance to men. Maybe you are one of those feminists who say “Men, not women are responsible for their own issues and should get together to address them the way we women did”, then as soon as men do that you attack, ridicule and heckle them and complain that men’s clubs shouldn’t be allowed.

    Comment by Hans Laven — Fri 30th November 2007 @ 8:43 pm

  5. I’m disturbed????

    Comment by rosie — Fri 30th November 2007 @ 9:42 pm

  6. I think Hans is rather confused – lol – go rosie .

    Comment by dad4justice — Sun 2nd December 2007 @ 9:30 am

  7. Good to see you back dad4justice, hopefully contributing in the positive ways you are capable of and avoiding explicit or implicit threats of violence that might see armed state agents descend upon us all.

    Comment by Hans Laven — Sun 2nd December 2007 @ 11:43 am

  8. “Armed state agents descend upon us all” .FFS – I guess I shall stay away from here .

    Comment by dad4justice — Sun 2nd December 2007 @ 7:15 pm

  9. You just stay where you are Pete, Hanz is just having a dig. When the words turn into meetings and constructive dialogue you are as good as any I have met at keeping the truth of circumstances at the forefront of the dialogue and rejecting deflective replies. You haven’t said anything aggressive that contravenes basic laws of courtesy so there is no need to react.

    Hope things are going well for you.

    Comment by Benjamin Easton — Sun 2nd December 2007 @ 8:58 pm

  10. There is something that disturbs me Hans and that is the way that you continuously put women down.Look back over the articles that you have posted.
    They all have a touch of an anti- women pen.
    You have a side to you that is not very nice.I could even go as far as saying that you have a cruel side to you.Which is quite scarey considering the profession you are in.
    Like Benjamin said “stay right where you are dad4justice”

    Comment by rosie — Mon 3rd December 2007 @ 1:44 pm

  11. Rosie,

    There you go being disturbed again. You really should take something for that.

    Your allegation is nonsense and is no more than manipulative rumour-mongering. Show me one example of me “putting women down”. Rather than coming up with any evidence of your allegation, you simply tell me to look back through my posts, thereby begging the question and attacking through insinuation. I am critical of some of the basis and some of the excesses of feminism. You are simply trying to label me unfairly, as you did when you suggested that I would blame a woman’s appearance for a male’s inappropriate behaviour. That offensive allegation was also based on absolutely nothing I said nor on any other evidence.

    Look back through this thread. You criticized my post, I replied respectfully, you then attacked me rudely and cruelly. Talk about a cruel side! However, it bothers me little and I can give as good as I get.

    Your vendetta against me seems to have started when I made a post highlighting the rape laws that had been changed in the 1980’s to meet feminist preferences. Unfortunately, the laws as they stand will allow convictions for rape even when a man’s behaviour is entirely benign and he acts in good faith. Men need to know this. For your own reasons, you didn’t like me pointing this out. Next, you went against me rather stupidly when I dissociated myself from a comment posted by dad4justice and pointed out that the anti-terror raids on Tuhoi were based on little more than comments like those he was prone to make. You came to his rescue and claimed he had never said anything threatening. I then went through some of his posts and highlighted numerous statements he had posted that made threats, advocated violence and were in their language quite violent. You then criticized me for effectively backing up what I had said and what you had challenged. Quite unreasonable and dishonourable of you.

    As I previously wrote, this site is called MENZ. It’s to discuss the perspectives and experiences of men in the feminist era. It’s needed to help men recognise and to challenge exactly the kind of feminazi behaviour you are directing at me. Thanks for providing a real-life example, but what exactly is your agenda by coming here and attacking men for discussing their issues?

    Sadly, I anticipate that all the reasonable debate in the world will count for nothing and you will simply continue to oppose and insult me for the sake of it. I only hope you will get some kicks from doing so.

    Comment by Hans Laven — Mon 3rd December 2007 @ 4:00 pm

  12. Every woman who speaks out against what you say will be accused of being part of the feminazi.Does that make my husband a part of it too because after reading what you said,he was also left wondering?
    I wonder also what Dave Henderson would have thought if he read what you took out of that movie.
    No doubt he would have thought that you wern’t worth bothering about.

    Comment by rosie — Mon 3rd December 2007 @ 6:50 pm

  13. I appreciate it when people speak out against what I say. Debate progresses understanding. But that debate needs to be honest, not manipulative and misrepresenting. And debate needs to be about the topic, not attacking the individual. At least, that’s how I prefer to debate.

    I note you still haven’t come up with any evidence to support your nasty allegations. Referring to someone else who was left wondering whether to agree with you or not hardly amounts to rational argument.

    Comment by Hans Laven — Mon 3rd December 2007 @ 7:11 pm

  14. My husband agreed with me alright.To be precise I agreed with him.
    You may have not liked his choice of words so I spared you that

    Comment by rosie — Mon 3rd December 2007 @ 7:57 pm

  15. Oh, there we go, someone agrees with you. That obviously wins the debate then. But hang on, I haven’t heard any arguments, just insults. And I haven’t seen any evidence for the horrible allegations you have made about me. Never mind, such irritating details as rational argument and evidence are just patriarchal repression after all. Keep up the derogatory attacks instead. Whatever gets you off.

    Comment by Hans Laven — Mon 3rd December 2007 @ 8:10 pm

  16. Rosie, surely there are some old copies of Womans Day laying around that you could read. If you cannot find them then maybe ask your husband, he may have them tucke away with his petty-coats.

    Comment by bert — Mon 3rd December 2007 @ 8:28 pm

  17. They’re certainly not under his shirt Bert.The IRD have stolen every single one of them.

    Comment by rosie — Tue 4th December 2007 @ 5:54 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