National: Just Another Feminist Government
The UN, inventor of a raft of fake “human rights” that actually deny us more fundamental human rights recognized since the Magna Carta, will love Helen Clark. Miss Clark has made it her life mission to wreck families in order to increase state control and to impose the fake kinds of right that the UN has promoted.
With Miss Clark off to spread her social corrosion much more widely in the world, we might now imagine that we have voted as a country to move beyond her club of women’s privilege. Surely National will be capable of sensible review of feminist initiatives and will come to recognize current widespread injustice towards men, the importance of family cohesion and the damage caused to the fabric of our society by politically correct fantasies? Well, sadly there’s not much evidence National will be any different from the last lot in these important areas.
In opposition, National forced its MP’s to vote for the Bradford law. National is progressing the “police protection orders” foolishness, and its minister Judith Collins is well known for male denigration especially in relation to “deadbeat dads” whom she so calls despite the established evidence that “liable” women are more likely than men to default on child tax.
Recently I wrote to Nick Smith, Minister for ACC suggesting that our recent (and it seems ongoing) increases in ACC tax (referred to as levies to obfuscate its real nature) could be countered if the Sensitive Claims Unit were disbanded and mental trauma concerning sexual abuse were treated through the health system as is the case for mental trauma from most other causes. For example, if your childhood was damaged by poor parenting, emotional abuse, excessive physical punishment, parental addictions etc, ACC would not cover you but you would be eligible to receive assistance through the health system. But if you were sexually touched once as a child you can expect extensive treatment paid for by the ACC Sensitive Claims service and perhaps a lump-sum payout of up to $120,000. (That amount would be unlikely for a minor sexual assault, but significant lower sums not so.) The Sensitive Claims Unit appears to be inconsistent with the accidental injury cover that ACC was invented to provide. At the time of its introduction it was described as a feminist coup. It functions mainly to promote women’s sense of entitlement to special treatment and to add to the redistribution of wealth from men to women. That is not at all to imply that victims of sexual abuse do not need and deserve help.
I also wrote to John Key suggesting that, at a time when government departments are being required to save money in this time of global economic recession, scrapping the Ministry of Women’s Affairs would be a good option. I argued that the existence of the women’s ministry is blatantly sexist and that its influence on other departments apppears excessive.
I received a reply in relation to both of my letters from Hon Patsy Wong, Associate Minister for ACC and Minister of Women’s Affairs. Her reply made it clear that this National Government is as captured by feminist ideology as the last one was. She claimed that there were still “areas” of disparity between the genders in workplaces, “such as” pay and promotion opportunities and that women are the majority of victims of sexual and domestic violence, and somehow this justified the ongoing Ministry. No reasoning was provided to show how having a women’s ministry was the best way of addressing these issues.
The issue of pay and income has been commented on extensively here in the past. Remaining disparities are unlikely to be related to discrimination in law or custom, and an entire ministry is hardly needed to develop further initiatives to counter the impact on women’s careers of their child-related roles.
Men are the majority of victims of violent and other crime overall. Men are more likely to be murdered and injured through assault. So under Ms Wong’s reasoning, there should be a Ministry of Men’s Affairs bigger than the Women’s Ministry. Or we could compromize and accept that neither ministry is needed.
In short, don’t expect any change from this National government from the pro-female, male-exploitative and male-denigrating policies of previous governments. Feminist privilege is here to stay unless we actually start voting against it.