Crying Wolf – 60 minutes documentary
For people who are falsely accused of rape, the extent goes much deeper than a bad reputation. Lost spouses, lost jobs — lives left in ruins.
But the damage doesn’t stop with them. There are people who are not receiving police attention because the valuable police resources are tied up with these false complaints. Genuine victims of sex crimes suffer because of the false claims made by others.
So just how many complaints are fake? On one side you have the politically correct feminists, saying almost none. On the other side you have the men’s groups, who say the majority are made up. Which is true?
Please note correction of date. It is the 17th not the 24th November.
Date and Time: Monday 24th November, 7:30pm
Over the last 2 years I have been keeping a record of all the incidents of false accusations that I noted in the paper. There are 18. And these are only the ones that make the media. How many more are there that are hushed up. I am also disturbed by the number of suppressed names and police advising complainents to “Let it die down”
I believe in each case the person making the false complaint should be required to make reparation of all out of pocket expenses and incur a police record.
I am also concerned at the supressed names as the complainant is under age.
That Database is starting to pay dividends. Next projects is comments on our dodgey judiciary and their satraps, lawyers, psychs, case managers, Social Workers, etc.
Comment by Alastair — Sat 15th November 2008 @ 6:39 pm
Falsely accused of domestic violence and sexual abuse is
hard to handle after seven miserable years.
You should all try it and see if you get angry. Yeah right, no
wonder the fathers rights movement is as weak as cats piss.
Comment by dad4justice — Sat 15th November 2008 @ 10:10 pm
Dad4justice, I wanted to delete the last part of comment but I don’t have that authority. There is nothing wrong with anger but … well, I don’t see anything wrong with showing your frustration at the movement either.
But it is uncalled for. I don’t think that men who haven’t had false charges directed at them are weak as cat’s piss.
Comment by julie — Sun 16th November 2008 @ 1:19 am
I like visiting your site Dad4justice.
Hey Alistair, do you keep up with the Peter Ellis website?
Comment by julie — Sun 16th November 2008 @ 1:49 am
I have to agree with Dad4Justice really, if you look at the posts from this site from the beginning 10 years ago, NOTHING MUCH HAS CHANGED !!!!!!!!! Men were in the same position then as they are now, it is all just about saving government money, finding the most suitable way for making men pay up by defathering their families. There will have to be MAJOR anger for anything to change, Fathers4Justice has got sympathy in England, but still nothing is changing. If we get angry as a group everybody will say, look how violent they are, but if we accept it all, nothing is going to change.
Comment by Martin Swash — Sun 16th November 2008 @ 5:26 am
On the contrary Martin The mens movement has accomplished, not much, but we are moving. We have been painted a very dark shsde of black by our opposition. Public statements such as “As weak as cats pis” do nothing to enhance our image. We would do well to look at our opposition and emulate their methods, namely support men who achieved. An example, recently I posted to suggest that men, and our fairer supporters, contact their MP’s to congratulatethem on attaining/regaining office. After that keep in touch. Ensure your MP is aware of the issues and the changes we desire. Attend party functions (Of all hues)Ensure we write positively. It’s an art. Progress will be slow but meaningful. We are seeking a major shift in an orcestrated system of disinformation.
Have we goals? Personally Yes. Get rid of the MWF, or create a ministry of mens affairs. Again on an individual level demand Male GP’s. Male WINZ case managers, and refuse to deal with females, demand to see a man.
Thats for a start. A bit of brainstorming will produce much more.
Finally, Encourage your male friends, and the correct thinking ladies.
Comment by Alastair — Sun 16th November 2008 @ 9:18 am
Martin, I also get frustrated with the movement. But then I have come to realise most men nor women are actually part of a movement. That the work is left to a few. And those few are up against a very steep mountain.
There are so many statistics missing in all sorts of areas that affect men and boys. We don’t even have a men’s affairs nor do we have men’s studies at University.
The stuff coming out and funded for women is mind boggling sometimes and then they have a whole network on a wide scale (the whole world) and a big influence to gain access to money in the UN. They have done really well for themselves.
People can see with their own eyes the injustices. I can’t forget how important this all was to the men on the street and women who were relatives and friends when Wayne walked to Parliament.
But complaining and getting angry doesn’t change the system. Someone has to do the other work. The research, the push for funding, the teaching through their own seminars, the meeting with judges and so forth, the lobbying and then of course the on the ground community work.
And yet, changes happen every day on the ground. A conversation leads to a meeting and a meeting leads to a program and a program leads to a network and a network leads to lobby and lobby leads to policy change and policy change leads to law change.
Every time another men’s groups opens another door, a cheer comes from me. Every time a man or women gets out there to speak up for men’s issues a cheer comes from me. Every time a politician speaks up in government a cheer comes from me. But that’s just me.
I still know we need lots of voices and workers. And I know that it is slow to make change. But it is happening as fast as the people who want it and work for it are capable of.
Comment by julie — Sun 16th November 2008 @ 9:47 am
Julie said
“And yet, changes happen every day on the ground. A conversation leads to a meeting and a meeting leads to a program and a program leads to a network and a network leads to lobby and lobby leads to policy change and policy change leads to law change”.
What laws do you think have changed to give men in NZ more rights in say, the last 10 years specifically as a result of successful lobbying by men’s groups?
Comment by Skeptic — Sun 16th November 2008 @ 10:06 am
Skeptic,
What laws do you think have changed to give men in NZ more rights in say, the last 10 years specifically as a result of successful lobbying by men’s groups?
I seem to be walking in this at a time when men’s groups are helping women clients also. I am not sure if the law changes required are just for men.
Could you give some examples of what law changes men have tried to change in the last 10 years?
Comment by julie — Sun 16th November 2008 @ 10:44 am
Just ONE example will do eh Julie.Yeah right.
Kind regards must go and visit another falsely accused
father of rape, locked up and rather unhappy on
protection at Paparoa Prison.
Yes dad4justice has got clearance to visit the falsely
convicted but that’s another story.
I have enough replies from MP’s to wall paper a 3 bedroom
house. Judge Boshier is ducking for cover because he
knows his Court is one sick unit!
Unlawful gender discrimination runs unchecked in state
agencies that claim to act in the child’s best interests.
Clearly these departments are guilty of malfeasance and
criminal negligence?
Comment by dad4justice — Sun 16th November 2008 @ 1:05 pm
What’s up with everyone that d4j can’t speak with his own tongue without everyone jumping down his throat? What are we – babies?
I can tell you this much, d4j didn’t draft these vile laws that forbid me from protecting myself should some lying opportunist name me as father to her child in order to exact an income.
He hasn’t declared me a nuisance to all children, and so therefore must not be seated next to a child on a plane.
He isn’t syphoning off my taxed labour in order to curry favour with women voters, give them them health priorities, better educations and keep them out of prison.
No, and none of a lot of other awful, bad law.
That came from smiling, agreeable men who never get angry, who never say things exactly how they see them and who do the rudest most unjust things. Clearly the manners and the man have little in common. Why then be so worried about how you are perceived, by people who couldn’t think less of you in the first place?
Tis better to be feared than loved – Machiavelli made the observation, and explained his reasoning well. He was talking about leaders though, not those who wish to be led.
Comment by Rob Case — Sun 16th November 2008 @ 1:47 pm
What laws? What laws discriminate against men?
I am sure you can do better than what you have Dad4justice. What you do is fabulous but if you know the exact laws it would be better.
And Rob, the same. What laws?
Comment by julie — Sun 16th November 2008 @ 11:00 pm
In practice, NO law is against men, It is the interpretation in the Family court where the Bias showsv through. For example though totally gender neutral, let an abused mat try to get a protection order. For women, especially with their refuges backing, they (P/O’s) are available from the tops of wheatbix boxes.
Deal with cyf as a male – The cyf act is gender neutral, however CYF certainly are not. Again Child support Act is Gender neutral, the interpretations most certainly are not. Shall I go on?
Comment by Alastair — Mon 17th November 2008 @ 2:08 am
The laws are just cleverly worded to avoid complaints, but justice is NOT done, there is an agenda to be on the woman’s side in family caught disputes.
I had several police statements of my wife’s violence to me when i defended the P.O, but they were not even considered.
The “Lawyer for child” just asked her what she wanted and there goes another defathered family
I repeat: N O T H I N G H A S C H A N G E D I N 1 0 Y E A R S
Comment by Martin Swash — Mon 17th November 2008 @ 4:43 am
Julie — I have addressed two government select committees and written to many dumb MP’s regarding a point of law that I found offensive and discriminatory. The law is contained in the Care of Children Act Section 54 — procedure for dealing with proceedings involving violence.
The part of the law that I find very disturbing is there is no onus on the Court to make any inquiries on its own initiative in order to make a determination on any allegation. I have campaigned strongly on this disgraceful bias law and the advice given from various barristers is that I have a valid point, but the brain dead parasitic politicians and other throw away drone’s who think they’re knowledgeable have no perspective as to the horrific damage this bad law causes. If we had a balanced Court system and an effective Fathers Rights Movement I could change the law for the benefit of many dads.
Many lawyers know I am on the right track – pity the weak
Fathers Rights Movement didn’t understand.
I can mincemeat crown law lawyers in a fair Courtroom ( if one exists).
How thick are kiwi’s? Nothing will
change in the next 10 years unless we get
ruthless and determined.
Comment by dad4justice — Mon 17th November 2008 @ 7:30 am
To Martin & Peter,
I have but one question, What are YOU doing to help the situation, and was what you did, if anything, effective.
Did you effectively communicate your message? Communications is an art form. Among our movement we have professional communicators. Have you ever sought their help?
One at least is totally disillusioned by the personal abuse he has received from our so called “Activists”
Certainly refering to people you wish to communicate with as “Brain dead” and threateaning to “Make Mincemeat” of people is not designed to win friends or influence others.
Remember we have been given 2 ears, but only one mouth. Listen!
Comment by Alastair — Mon 17th November 2008 @ 9:21 am
Grow up Alastair, remember talking to me after my Batman
stint at Parliament a few years back( Backbenches Bar)?
[childish insult deleted by moderator] ,how dare you talk to me
about winning friends and influencing people, as you have made an “art form” out of pc bullshit.
Get a life matey and stop the two faced approach.
Comment by dad4justice — Mon 17th November 2008 @ 9:35 am
#17
Pete, No one could ever mistake you for politically correct or a gentleman.
Was their a point to your outburst?
I hope your spleen feels much better now you have that pent up hostility out.
Comment by allan Harvey — Mon 17th November 2008 @ 12:11 pm
I am at a loss as to how we can progress, any violent behaviour will be counter-productive , governments themselves have created the “Domestic Violence” hysteria deliberately, it seems to me.
Obviously the worst thing would be if Dads argue amongst themselves.
For me only women themselves can stop this extreme injustice to us, women who put families first and REALLY and TRULY think “of the children’s best interests”. The lawyers, extreme feminists and politicians wield power and wealth, and will want to maintain the status quo that keeps them all in clover.
Men are independent, self-sufficient, hard working (in general), not manipulative like women, we selflessly work(ED) to clothe and house our families. We can be made into armies to fight other men, but in a non-violent idealogical battle we cannot seem to win. I cannot yet work out WHY other men have formulated such laws which discriminate against their own sex, is it to keep the population down ? Why ? Does anyone know ?
Yes, i think things are beginning to move (albeit v. slowly) as Alistair said, but there will never be a revolution (which is required) unless MOST males experience the injustice of how the state treats men. We are all left with bitterness and for many, our lives will never be the same again, after being abused by the state, and the let down of a complete lack of justice. Then realising that it is NOT ONLY YOU, the same SHIT has happened to MOST MEN in your position. All we can do is to seek personal happiness and hope that the bitterness will cease one day. Also there is some comfort to read that you are not the WORST OFF, many men have experienced EVEN WORSE JUSTICE
Comment by Martin Swash — Mon 17th November 2008 @ 12:33 pm
1. There are of course laws that discriminate directly against males: the “male assaults female” offence for which there is no corresponding category for female offenders, and the “unsupported woman” benefit entitlement. However, more to the point, much legislation over the last few decades, although cleverly worded to sound gender neutral, has been based almost entirely on feminist preferences and propaganda. This includes most family law and especially the DVA, and much criminal law. The kinds of offences more likely to be committed by men have had their tariffs (prison terms etc) increased dramatically while also having the protections against false conviction reduced dramatically. There has been little corresponding change in offences equally or more likely to be committed by women, such as false accusations, perjury, fraud, even though the lives of victims can be devastated. Bradford’s removal of reasonable disciplinary force represents a well-intentioned feminist preference to ban masculine ways in child rearing.
2. Progress is starting to be achieved although it’s very small beginnings. For example, politicians and community leaders are less likely now than even a year ago to make generalized or gender specific, male=offender and female=victim statements disparaging of men. It still happens but it is reducing from what I have seen. Some independent researchers have been brave enough to announce findings that contradict feminist propaganda. Turner’s male-friendly election policies, although inadequate, represented a first. It’s important to remember that the suffragette movement took a lot longer than 10 years to achieve any change, and it wasn’t until the 1970’s after perhaps 100 years that a general requirement for female equality in law was put in place.
3. Strong, politically effective action will be useful. Verbal abuse, name-calling, slander, threats of violence etc are likely mainly to set back the movement in terms of its developing public support or through direct state repression. We need to remember that the Clark government enacted legislation under the guise of anti-terrorism that gives the state totalitarian power over any group that talks about violence, civil disruption etc. Little benefit will arise if all posters here and known men’s movement supporters are raided, their computers seized and possibly terrorism charges laid attracting long imprisonment on remand before trial and even longer sentences after conviction. The grounds used to justify the so-called Tuhoi raids (that actually targeted many non-Maori political activists too) are less than what is contained in various posts on MENZ. We cannot afford to allow unrestrained members jeopardizing the movement politically or legally. Please be careful and be very afraid; I don’t want to have to say “told you so”.
Comment by Hans Laven — Mon 17th November 2008 @ 12:35 pm
Very well put Hans. Those who have seen the police affidavit will certainly support you
Comment by Alastair — Mon 17th November 2008 @ 12:40 pm
And to Alistair, in all groups facing injustice , for maximum effectiveness, there is usually a pragmatic wing AND an intellectual political wing. BOTH ARE REQUIRED , even if they do not agree or understand one another. Both wings can only be united by a good leader. Several women should be involved too, if possible. The governments will try to infiltrate any such group and already has, i am sure
I agree with you Alistair about the communications, we need publicity and sympathy to better our cause most effectively. In England everyone remembers the suffragettes and the woman who threw herself under the king’s horse and she died, i don’t think men are capable of that, well not 21st century christians anyway.
Alternatively, We can wait for women to become more and more violent (which is happening, my wife WAS that’s for sure, but she did get the kids, the house, the furniture).
PS Hans, the ONLY aim of the suffragettes was the right to vote , which they achieved within 20 years, MEN have acheived virtually NOTHING in the same time period
Comment by Martin Swash — Mon 17th November 2008 @ 12:46 pm
What the suffragettes did to achieve their goals :-
Suffragettes carried out direct action such as chaining themselves to railings, setting fire to mailbox contents, smashing windows and on occasions setting off bombs. One suffragette, Emily Davison, died after she stepped out in front of the King’s horse, Anmer, at the Epsom Derby of 1913. Many of her fellow suffragettes were imprisoned and went on hunger strikes, during which they were restrained and forcibly fed and had reached the height of their campaign by 1912.
The British government passed the so-called “Cat and Mouse Act” to prevent suffragettes from obtaining public sympathy; it provided the release of those whose hunger strikes had brought them sickness, as well as their re-imprisonment once they had recovered.
—————————————————————————–
The womens’ right to vote movement also had 2 wings, the intellectual peaceful “Suffragists” wing and the radical “Suffragettes” wing. Both wings depised of each others’ methods
They were considered “terrorists” at the time, afterwards they were thought of as GREAT women, who changed the world.
Comment by Martin Swash — Mon 17th November 2008 @ 1:14 pm
#22
Martin, your grasp on history is poor. The woman killed by the King’s horse at Derby in 1913 is not known by name by many. The same woman did two other stunts spending census evening in 1911 at the House of Commons in a cupboard so she could record that as her “place of residence”. She also bombed David Lloyd George’s new home in 1913. Most commentators say she was a fruitcake. The whole reason why she ran across the track is unknown. Her death/suicide was news but wasn’t strategically planned.
The name that is remembered among English Suffragette’s is the Pankhurst family whose political strategies and media awareness was much higher than the fruitcake Emily Davison. Kate Sheppard here in NZ ran a pretty good campaign as well but she didn’t resort to silly stunts. Membership of her Temperance Union, good structure of her organisation, public meetings and two petitions is how NZ women won the vote.
Comment by allan Harvey — Mon 17th November 2008 @ 1:23 pm
She was called Emily Davison, i have visited her gravestone in Northumberland, on it, it says “Deeds not words” (which WAS, presumably, strategically planned), She went to Oxford University and achieved a first class honours degree with money raised by herself
Emily Pankhurst chained herself to the railings and was force fed in prison (ordered by Winston Churchill the Home Secretary), she was more “upper class”, but the main thing people think of when “Suffragettes” are mentioned, is the woman who killed herself at Epsom, fruit cake or not !
There, my “grasp on history” is not as bad as that ………… hehe, i get the impression that you would have been on the “Suffragist” wing of the movement, Allan, but BOTH wings were needed as i said before
Comment by Martin Swash — Mon 17th November 2008 @ 1:36 pm
“I have to agree with Dad4Justice really, if you look at the posts from this site from the beginning 10 years ago, NOTHING MUCH HAS CHANGED !!!!!!!!! Men were in the same position then as they are now,…”
I agree with Martin. In fact on balance things are worse. Take Child Tax for example.
Comment by Dave — Mon 17th November 2008 @ 2:25 pm
Hi Martin, I had not seen your post 23 before I sent my #24 one.
Yes, you are completely right where I now position myself.
Davison did time inside, was force fed, and several other fruitcake things.
Interesting the comment the two groups fought against one another.
As you know Martin I have not always been mild and intellectual. I was once a radical in my youth but found it rather ineffective.
Allan
Comment by allan Harvey — Mon 17th November 2008 @ 2:26 pm
#17 I’ve deleted your abusive comment dad4justice.
Alistair could not be the person you talked to at Parliament because he wasn’t there. If you take the opportunity to apologise and promise to refrain from such attacks in future, I won’t ban you.
I hear my wife Felicity is in the promo – I haven’t seen it.
Comment by JohnP — Mon 17th November 2008 @ 2:33 pm
Lol Allan , i am just trying to imagine you as a radical teenager !
No, but that is what the liberal wing Suffragists thought, they just expected “things to change, because that is what seemed correct”. Their passive expectations were up against a government who implemented such horrors as the Cat and Mouse act, force fed the women, ordered them to be abused in prison.
The liberal wing would never have got anywhere faced to such heavy handedness
Same as today for men, we are facing the great injustices of CS, False Allegations using POs, no custody policing for Dads, our lives being totally devastated. Governments perpetrating all this to Dads JUST TO SAVE MONEY, they will resort to all sorts of tricks to save their own MONEY. Governments WILL NEVER CHANGE WILLINGLY – that is the bottom line, they have TO BE CHANGED like the Suffragettes made the British government change, despite the despiccable things that that government did!
CHANGE WILL NEVER NEVER COME FROM WITHIN, but we must get sympathy from the public, NUMBER 1, yes , and we need many women on our side, and also a terrible injustice to occur to evoke the real wrath of Dads throughout NZ, maybe we need martyrs like Emily Davison, men crying is twice as powerful than a woman crying, women to be seen atacking men protesting peacefully, maybe other things ………..
But the bottom line is NOTHING WILL EVER CHANGE AS IT IS ! A few gender neutral changes to the statute books, is just the government trying to diffuse possible anger, being P.C, and clever, rearranging deckchairs on the Titanic stuff
I have been reading about NZ suffragettes, as you say, Allan, it was mainly connected to the Temperance movement, and NZ was a “New” colony, with a malleable legal framework, I guess that the government wanted the women to influence the working men not to drink as much.
England was a country with long fixed traditions, unwilling to change, and used heavy tactics to try to defeat the Suffragettes
Comment by Martin Swash — Mon 17th November 2008 @ 3:08 pm
OK, nice comments. Lucky all groups go through this stage of in-house fighting. Someone will lead the way by example and it will stop. That is what happened to Waitakere Maori and hopefully it is happening with the GLBT. (gays and lesbians) Yes, all groups have to overcome the fighting before progressing. So hurry it up will YA? (wink)
Dad4justice you MUST stay. You are too valuable to lose. IMO. And I will kick your arse (just a saying) if you don’t negotiate. You represent too many suffering people to not try.
Comment by julie — Mon 17th November 2008 @ 3:21 pm
Yes what he says has the sympathy of lots of men on here, including me
Comment by Martin Swash — Mon 17th November 2008 @ 3:26 pm
Martin, I know an old school suffragette in NZ. She is very interesting and opinionated. I told her today that she was speaking rubbish about the elections and why Helen didn’t get in. Not all they say is right. And they are not really focused. Never have been. Plus NZ is not like England. Women in NZ got the vote 3 years after the men and NZ was known as something called “4th sons”. NZ was destined to be social.
Comment by julie — Mon 17th November 2008 @ 3:27 pm
4th sons ? What are they Julie ? Yes i knew about the 3 years difference (40 years after france gave ALL men the right to vote), i highlighted this to the tutor on my “Anti Violence” course that i had to do (i never touched her once despite her violence BTW, but still had to do this course).
Yes, we need to emulate some of things that the Suffragettes did, but also allied to being more clever like Alistair said earlier.
Comment by Martin Swash — Mon 17th November 2008 @ 3:44 pm
I see that Paula Bennett has become Minister in charge of the MSD. She was elected to the Waitakere electorate. We expend so much energy opposing MSD. What a prime opportunity to get to know the minister and promote our point of view. We have a strong mens movement on the North Shore. You all have a golden opportunity to wield some influence. (Sob Sob my local MP didn’t make the cut 🙁 )
Comment by Alastair — Mon 17th November 2008 @ 5:01 pm
The now Labour MP Dr Rajan Prassad QSD said I was a
gentleman and personally told me that I am a VICTIM of a
wrong system. I personally handed him as Families
Commissioner my factual case chronology (over 7000 words) and he said he was “shocked” after he read it !!
I apologize for the mistaken identity Al, and John ban
me if you want as I don’t care no more !
Comment by dad4justice — Mon 17th November 2008 @ 6:15 pm
I can vouch that dad4justice is a gentleman and a fine guy who goes out of his way to help others. His anger is just a rational response to the way he and his have been treated. He is also big enough to apologise when he makes a mistake – which I think is a fine quality in any person.
Comment by Dave — Mon 17th November 2008 @ 6:59 pm
Dad4justice,. John doesn’t want to ban you. He didn’t say this to me but I know he is no idiot.
Why don’t you do what I do and spit the dummy at another site outside of our country? And put your best foot forward for NZ men and women.
It won’t matter what you spit because we all know the load you carry.
Comment by julie — Mon 17th November 2008 @ 7:30 pm
The Doco was Excellent. Felicity Goodyear-Smith is obviously our friend!
I have recorded it and also have an Electronic copy of the Newspapers reports on Marion Anne Carter.
In my opinion the accuser should be liable to the same penalty as the person they accused. Additionally liable for reparation of the falsely accuseds legal costs.
Comment by Alastair — Mon 17th November 2008 @ 7:58 pm
Well she’s certainly my best friend!
I’ve removed your well-intended offer Alastair – posting copyright material on the web (even on a foreign server) is somewhat risky, but offering it for sale is a definite no-no.
I tried to capture the video so I could post it here, but my stupid software failed to get the audio. Grrrr!
I’ve got another couple of options to try – if I succeed in getting my hands on a copy I’ll upload it for those who missed it (such as Felicity who is currently in Puerto Rico at a conference).
Comment by JohnP — Mon 17th November 2008 @ 10:33 pm
Found it!
Crying Wolf is available on the TV3 website here
Comment by JohnP — Mon 17th November 2008 @ 10:45 pm
The DVD was not intended to post John, but for personal use. I have a DVD recorder with a large Hard Disc. For your personal and Felicities use there is a free copy if you wish.
Comment by Alastair — Mon 17th November 2008 @ 11:04 pm
I can hardly believe that there was something on NZ TV not anti-male
One day there will be a programme about false claims of domestic violence , then that is when we know we are making progress
Comment by Martin Swash — Tue 18th November 2008 @ 1:29 pm
A wanton disregard for the political climate has distorted our views on the best way to combat the situation we find ourselves in. Far be it for me to tell you all how to reverse what has happened in our governed society but shall we remain in the past that’s where we shall stay.
The women who fought so bravely for their freedom of speech and voting rights have given us rise to fight against the oppressors. Furthermore our right to political freedom has been tainted by the suffrage of those women though a politically correct society would prevent us, the men, to do likewise.
We cannot remain passive nor can we be aggressive to the plight, though we can achieve great heights through passive aggression. We are but men, on this landscape that affords us little though our voice can still be heard!
Left, centre or right — who gives a donkeys kidney when we are talking about the god given rights our country has lead us to? Yet, to be told our opinion means squat makes us all angry men looked down upon by our own society. Times have changed, people have changed and generations have changed. We are not fighting the same battle as our fathers were 10, 20 or even 30 years ago.
So, you ask, what do we do? Well, for a start, let’s define for all that read our posts just what we want to change… lets also work as one. Defining what we want changed is the first step. Allan, Scrap, Hans — this is your time so don’t waste it. Start a new thread to define exactly what it is we are moving towards. IN UNISEN. 1 goal, 1 step at a time.
We have been given the gift of time, though some may argue. 3 years from now NZ will vote again. As one we can salvage what has been lost through separatism. We need to speak as one. I am fully aware, in case the point is raised, that we have groups pressing forward in our quest but as a unit we are still very disjointed with our goals. It’s been pointed out several times that nothing has changed… there is a reason for that.
To dwell on the past will force us to reminisce on our follies — in the immortal words of Jim, “Onwards”. Please feel free to email me at [email protected] for any suggestions or information that may help.
I’m not here to just talk — I’m doing. Don’t criticize, help me. Don’t scrutinize, give support. Don’t mock, for I’ll ignore. Constructive criticism is my fodder. Please forgive my ignorance if I show any. It’s our time.
Regards
Justin Harnish
Comment by Tigerseye — Tue 18th November 2008 @ 11:27 pm
Justin, i will wait for the new thread, good idea !
I have only experienced 2 years of how men are discriminated against, so i have little historical perspective, but despite this, i get the impression that there is some momentum in favour of us, although the hysterical anti-male DV campaigns are still increasing.
I think one of the things that we need is a focus, a hero AND there is one in the making, Jolly Stanesby, currently doing 2 months in 19th century London Prison Wormwood Scrubs for climbing on a statue in Washington DC, putting up a Fathers 4 Justice banner. You can leave him a message on
http://users4.smartgb.com/g/g.php?a=s&i=g44-23174-53
There is a large demonstration outside the prison as i write this
Comment by Martin Swash — Wed 19th November 2008 @ 12:14 am
Martin and others, Jolly is doing time in the pokey for being on the roof of Hariett Harman the Deputy PM. The protest occurred early June 2008. Surprisingly Mark Harris was treated with tolerance by the Judicary (Discharge)but Jolly copped a sentence. Two other repeated the protest a month or so later and can also be expected to be dealt with punatively.
I attach a news report from the day after the protest.
A Fathers 4 Justice protester today vowed to remain on top of Harriet Harman’s roof until his fellow protester had been released by police.
He also accused officers of using ‘heavy-handed’ tactics in trying to wrestle him down.
Jolly Stanesby and fellow demonstrator Mark Harris scaled the deputy leader of the Labour Party’s house yesterday morning dressed as ‘Captain Conception’ and ‘Cash Gordon’.
Mr Harris climbed down and was arrested last night but his fellow protester spent the night sleeping under a tarpaulin and insisted today he was staying put.
Comment by allan Harvey — Wed 19th November 2008 @ 9:25 am
Can I just say that NZ has plenty of heroes. C,mon this is New Zealand. Women over here are proud that NZ led the way for women’s rights on a world wide scale. And men will lead the way also.
Should I remind you that women here were the first in the wolrd to vote? And should I remind you that women started Plunket over here through a fine male doctor?
People overseas think NZ is behind. But we are not. We are leaders in the world. Especially around social issues. You know, I have read the GLBT site and seen newcomers to NZ who are lesbian and gay asking, “Where can we go out here?” The answers back are, “NZ is not anti gay or lesbian”. You can go out anywhere.
One guy spoke up about the mensline being helpful for gays. Another who is a leader said “Thank-you for saying this but I didn’t think gays could phone there because I thought the menz movement was anti us.”
Some men may remember the times in the past and be anti anything that is progress. But the reality is, “Societies are always going to progress even when they make mistakes.”
I hear that the Maori are going to be family friendly as in Dad and Mum. Look, the Maori have heaps of gays and lesbians and transgender who do wonderful work in the community. No wonder they don’t like either side. They just want to care for people. No strings attached.
Comment by julie — Wed 19th November 2008 @ 10:35 am
Oh Julie this does deserve a piece of repartee in reply, however in ine interests I will not post it.
I will say that Plunket as it was, was a fine organisation. I watched a wrap up of the Mia Glassie trial on TV1 close up last night to hear it said that old version of Plunket would probably have acted as a warning signal. I agree. It also said that there is nothing wrong with children being rempved from their families 🙁 I don’t agree! We only have to look to Australia and their lost generation.
Comment by Alastair — Wed 19th November 2008 @ 12:30 pm
Fruit Cakes are quite addictive and my mom always bake them every month..`:
Comment by Lewis Robinson — Wed 30th June 2010 @ 4:55 pm