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

The time has come!

Filed under: Child Support — Tigerseye @ 11:20 am Tue 21st October 2008

While I don’t condone party political broadcasts on a forum like this I believe what happened last night is a positive step forward in our cause.

There I was sitting with 13 other candidates for Wellington Central with a crowd of maybe 200. I was the newbie in the room pressing flesh with the likes of Sue Kedgly, Stephen Franks and Grant Robertson. With Heather Roy to my right and Michael Appleby to my left I stood and gave my speech very nervously to the crowd. I swear they could actually hear my heart pumping while my hands were shaking like a leaf in a Wellington breeze. But I held my head up and let rip with the policies that I believe in whole heartedly.

Amongst other, less relative topics to this site, I let it be know that while the government is surgically removing the man from the family, several hundred thousand children are becoming Fatherless. Some on a day to day basis, and some – permanently. We will ABOLISH THE CHILD SUPPORT ACT, which is completely sexist and unfair legislation, in favour of a case by case approach.

Too many people are making too much money from the suffering of others – the others being the non custodial parent. We will ABOLISH THE FAMILY COURT and replace it with family mediation.

We will set up a ministry of MENS AFFAIRS and push firmly for gender equality.

When the bell rang to signal 3 1/2 minutes I thanked everybody and sat down to a large round of applause. It was over and I could breath again. My heart slowed down and my hands stopped shaking and I could begin to feel proud of myself for doing what I had just done. It was hard to concentrate on the speeches of the others after me and it was only after the night was over I was told that the only round of applause louder than the one I received was for Stephen Franks.

The word is out, our voice has been heard yet there is still much work to be done. I know of many who are doing the same thing but we need more supporters! Who is up for the challenge?


  1. Tigerseye, what party are you standing for?

    Comment by blamemenforall — Tue 21st October 2008 @ 11:46 am

  2. I didn’t want to reveal that in the initial post as I didn’t want to make it sound like a political sounding board. I am standing proud for the Repulic of New Zealand Party.

    Comment by Tigerseye — Tue 21st October 2008 @ 11:50 am

  3. Well done, who are you so I can vote for your party.

    Comment by Doneover — Tue 21st October 2008 @ 12:03 pm

  4. Good on you mate! Now that your initial nervousness is over and provided you can get your message in the public eye you (we)could do well.

    We NEED a Ministry of MENS AFFAIRS. The women have their Ministry. Why shouldn’t men?

    I agree with replacing the CSA in favour of case by case approach…but Jeez, it’d be expensive wouldn’t it? Who would pay? How could we guarantee the calibre of the mediators? Look, the Court appointed a Lawyer for my young son when i applied for a Variation of Parenting Order because my boy wanted to spend more time with me. It should have been a simple matter. It wasn’t, simply because the Lawyer was an asshole. He did not respect my sons natural desire to spend more time with me, he ignored an abusive situation, he took no notice of an attempt by my ex to mislead the Court and instead promoted my ex’s best interests rather than my sons.

    Is it any wonder our kids revolt and turn against society when they see society will not assist them? The point is, one asshole lawyer has the ability to destroy a child life. In this case I have approached the Law Society in the hope they will strike the s.o.b off.

    But why are the Courts and the Lawyers so much against placing the kids into Dads care? I suspect it is because the Welfare System would go broke in that so many Mums would claim a benefit in lieu of Child Support.

    Then again the Courts should perhaps consider this is the least expensive option comparable to the cost of the crime and violence and the cost of keeping our boys in jail.

    Comment by Morris — Tue 21st October 2008 @ 12:31 pm

  5. Thanks for your comments Morris.

    As you know NZ looses at least $1B of taxpayers money a year because of all the stuffing about. Having a separation go through mediation will of course cost money, but not as much. If the matter cannot be resolved then the party who cannot agree to the mediation is welcome to take the matter to court at his or her cost. Remember, by law you are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law – not the other way around though the family court seems to have their own rules. It will take away the incentives for (mostly) women wanting to kick the husband out on his ear, take the kids, the house and the money on a weekly basis – IT WILL BE MEDIATED! IT WORKS! At present the woman has every governmental incentive to go it alone adding to the Fatherless children statistics.

    Mediation will help solve problems within the family and at the very least prolong the time before the final decision is made to separate. At that time, and recognised by law, equal parenting will be ruled unless there is a very good reason not to.

    As for the calibre of the mediation… well paid and passionate counsellors will be doing the job, not too-high paid sexist judges that only see dollar signs in splitting the family. If all else fails it goes to court. The private stuff has all been aired during mediation so the court becomes an open and public court – as courts currently are. That way we can keep a fair trial fair. What’s more, if an allegation is found to be false then of course this is fraud and he or she will be charged accordingly.

    Keeping the family together is the aim and if that cannot be achieved then a fair and amicable arrangement will be ruled by the judge after everything has been heard.

    Comment by Tigerseye — Tue 21st October 2008 @ 12:58 pm

  6. To add to my post at #5 I must point out that when I talk about the judge making the fair and amicable ruling, I am, of course, speaking of worst case scenarios going to court (not the Family court which will be abolished.)

    Comment by Tigerseye — Tue 21st October 2008 @ 1:55 pm

  7. Thank you for your support Duneover,
    My name is Justin Harnish and I stand for Wellington Central – party vote The Republic Of New Zealand Party.

    Comment by Tigerseye — Tue 21st October 2008 @ 2:20 pm

  8. Good stuff.

    Some ask why lawyers (including judges) have been put in charge of decisions about our children, or even in a position to influence those decisions. Lawyers play lawyer games and charge heavily, and they are likely to have no training whatsoever in the kinds of knowledge and skills required to make good decisions for children.

    I was attracted to a proposal that when parents cannot agree about children matters, this is taken to a panel of appropriate people. The panel will be gender balanced, will include some expertise in child development and will include representation suitable to the case. For example, if Maori are involved the panel should include Maori kaumatua from a suitable iwi in it. The panel represents the community around the disputants. The community has traditionally made such decisions and there seems no reason why that cannot continue. One legal expert may be important to ensure legislation is adhered to. I reckon that the panel’s decision is more likely to be accepted by both disputing parents, and such a decision is much more likely to lead to healing and co-operation between the parents than are many Family Court decisions. Of course, we can maintain current processes designed to help the parents come to their own agreement, such as mediation and counselling. All such processes would work better out of the legal Court context.

    Comment by blamemenforall — Tue 21st October 2008 @ 5:15 pm

  9. Thanks Blamemenforall,

    Obviously there is some fine tuning to be done and I like that idea of a panel of. for lack of a better word, peers. Some what of a jury which would be brilliant for a fair outcome.

    Thanks again for that.

    Comment by Tigerseye — Tue 21st October 2008 @ 8:17 pm

  10. Tigerseye wrote:

    I don’t condone party political broadcasts on a forum like this

    Party political broadcasts are welcome on MENZ if they directly concern gender issues, Family Court, Child Support, etc.

    Comment by JohnP — Tue 21st October 2008 @ 9:58 pm

  11. Congratulations Tigerseye, this was all news to me and the Republicans have my party vote.

    Comment by Gerry — Sun 26th October 2008 @ 4:28 pm


    Seeing the progress and successes of some of Glen Sack’s campaigns in US, make me think such an approach is required here. He is virtually overturning a hysterical anti-dad “Domestic Violence” campaign on Dallas buses, it is TRULY TRULY INSPIRING !

    In short what is required is 1 central figure to “speak” for men in NZ, and he (or she) must co-ordinate “campaigns” against anti-male items in the press, the courts and society. He should have campaigns ONLY for major items, to avoid campaign fatigue. This man must be a central point for contact with the press, and must be used to dealing with them.

    Other men must respect the fact that there must be only 1 man who will speak for ALL men in NZ, all jealousies must STOP , for the GREATER GOOD of Dads everywhere. Men’s groups are fractured, this is OK, but there must be only 1 who should “speak for Kiwi men”. This person would then get lots of media attention and organize men to “flood” institutions, courts, people, with complaints.


    Comment by Perseus — Tue 28th October 2008 @ 11:26 pm

  13. (This man is not me, by the way),

    Contrast the way that in NZ, there are DV campaigns featuring only female victims and nothing is done to counteract these campaigns, that use tax payers money, more than half of which is collected from men !

    i do not know how to choose the man (or woman) to represent us all, i am just floating ideas, but IT IS AN IDEA THAT WILL Succeed ! The most important thing is for EVERY MAN to support this “spokesman for men”. This man must be media friendly, not annoying and most important of all NOT THREATENING or too agressive.

    The choice must be made by someone else on here, he must know how to update websites , of course. Glen Sacks is not the greatest oral spokesman (see him on YouTube), but seems to write really effective articles and campaigns. He must co-ordinate campaigns, display Email addresses for all of us to respond to, i know that this has been done to a limited extent already on here !


    Comment by Perseus — Tue 28th October 2008 @ 11:31 pm

  14. Come on New Zealand, men in USA are starting to achieve something, we are just going along getting nowhere, with all the splintered fathers groups. In USA , i think a tipping point has been reached finally ! Real women , not lesbians and feminists, are beginning to rally behind dads, they know that all the Family Court CRAP is harming families and something is wrong. John, we need a leader with knowledge of websites, and co-ordinate it all like Glen Sacks

    Comment by Perseus — Wed 29th October 2008 @ 12:37 pm

  15. A simple thing would be to find out all the sponsors of local women’s groups and refuges and explain fathers point of view and the fact that all these refuges are telling women what to put in PO applications simply to make false allegations to split up families . WHY ISN’T ANYONE ALready doing this ?
    DV is mainly an industry, the womens groups need more publicity to get more money which will be used for increasing anti-father publicity, it is a circle

    We must hit these evil groups’ pockets

    Comment by Perseus — Wed 29th October 2008 @ 2:08 pm

  16. Gerry, in regards to # 12, thank you so much for your support.

    Comment by Tigerseye — Wed 29th October 2008 @ 9:10 pm

  17. Perseus: Yes, you speak sense. However, be aware that some people are challenging individuals and groups who express support for anti-male policies. I have posted on Menz a number of letters that I have sent to MP’s and leaders of various groups challenging them in exactly that way. I wrote to all the businesses that sponsored the agency producing the misandrist “cake” adverts. I have noticed that a number of prominent people including MPs and even Henare from Wimmin’s Refuge have started to change the way they speak publicly about domestic violence, e.g. referring to “people who commit domestic violence” instead of “men”. It works, probably even better than letters to editors which however are also important for general community awareness raising. Unfortunately it takes a lot of time and there are not many doing it. How many who spend time doing excellent posts here have actually written to anti-male spokespersons or responded to encouragement from others here to participate in letter-writing campaigns?

    Comment by Hans Laven — Thu 30th October 2008 @ 4:10 pm

  18. OK, Hans, i am pleased to hear that you sent the letters, but what we need is a MASS mailing.
    All the anti-male, anti-family bias is obvious really, where are the women supporting us , it is them who will make the change happen too
    I will keep up the mails, informing sponsors of womens’ refuges that these refuges are telling women how to make false claims of domestic violence. The legal workers will not want this however, and in a small country like NZ, things will only really be changed from outside

    Comment by Perseus — Fri 31st October 2008 @ 12:42 am

  19. We have enough of the current system also. My partner and I have shared custody of his kids and still have to pay child support although we have the kids on a week on/week off basis and paying school fees and sports/activity fees. We certainly don’t mind paying the fees as we know where the money is going but his exwife who chooses to work part time and hardly seems to work at all demanded more money from us per month so she could move houses. We refused and suddenly she now wants full custody basically so she can get more money and basically wanting us to become her babysitters! Last year we found out that she was conning WINZ by claiming for the weeks we were paying for afterschool care by claiming for our weeks so that she basically didn’t have to pay anything at all. We only found out because the OSCAR appointed system mistakenly gave us the end of year invoice and not to his exwife. On querying the invoices we were told it was standard practice that WINZ are charged for the weeks/days the boys weren’t even at after school care! Someone is obviously prompting her to go for gold and take us for all the money she can get … we both work fulltime but why should we if we have to pay for her lifestyle! She is perfectly capable of working and earning a fulltime salary as she only has the kids every other week. There should be some accontability … and now her boyfriend has moved in as well and she still wants more money! I can’t believe how vindictive and bitter exwives can get when they lose sight of what is best for their kids … to have their children’s father around for the kids whilst growing up! It’s an utter shame this type of situation is allowed to perpetuate itself in this day and age!

    Comment by Joy — Thu 26th March 2009 @ 10:45 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