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

News Review, June 2009, Part 2

Filed under: General — Ministry of Men's Affairs @ 3:02 pm Sun 12th July 2009

Lots more news, considered in the light of modern gender politics. It really is incredible to take note, every day, right in front of our eyes, of what is happening to damage men, and to see the constant evidence against massive bale-bashing propoganda that seems to continue regardless.

There is a lot of material here and I hope some enjoy the read. Having all these articles together might be a useful resource in lobbying etc. If at some future time the links expire, I am now keeping a copy of the full text of the news articles discussed and I can provide them on request.

I have already commented extensively on the Richard Worth scandal. Surprise, surprise, the woman who made a police complaint has now withdrawn her complaint because it was not substantial enough to proceed with. I know the attack on Worth “couldn’t have happened to a nicer guy”, but the biggest scandal in this case has been the willingness of two women and Mr Goff to attack a man through the media by incomplete and untested stories. These people have happily taken advantage of existing anti-male stereotypes, knowing that by spreading rumours of sexual impropriety through the media they can damage a man’s reputation even when their allegations are later shown to be false, misleading or out of context. Even worse, by backing out once the damage is done, these people cleverly protected themselves from having to answer for their statements and allegations. Here are some of the key stories in this nasty saga: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

The constant erosion of people’s rights and protections against the power of the state is often defended on the basis of some perceived good. The Domestic Violence Act represents a huge step backwards for respondents’ rights and protections but this is excused in favour of the claimed higher aim of protecting domestic victims. In another example, legislation currently being considered would see police being allowed to stop and search cars at random without a search warrant. Law and order advocates will say “we need to stop criminals transporting guns, burgled items and P labs” and “if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to worry about”. But this assumes far too much faith in the integrity of the police, other agents of the state and whatever fashionable political ideology is driving them. At present, police could not achieve much by planting an illegal item in a car they search without a warrant because this would not be admissible in Court due to improper process used in gathering that evidence. However, if police are allowed to search at random it will make it much easier for them to develop fake cases against people they don’t like. And guess which gender will suffer most? The same gender that is currently suffering from the Domestic Violence Act’s abandonment of important legal protections. The story here concerning illegal disclosure of DNA information is also notable for the fact that the female offender is receiving police diversion for her very serious crime against privacy.

Another act of bravery and community responsibility by a man. Hail men!

Women commit the most serious domestic violence too. Note that all the examples given below and in part one of the June News Review were all current and easy to find. How dare any organization mount domestic violence prevention campaigns that mention only men as offenders?! How dare the authorities allow such gender discrimination to continue? 1 2 3 4
And this one also shows us another example of a female offender receiving a much lighter sentence than would a male who did exactly the same thing. Note also the judge’s chivalrous bias when he referred to her murder as being a tragedy for her too.
Note also that this murderer’s lawyer described her as “a normal, nice person” and it seems the judge saw her in the same way. But previous news reports referred to her as having a personality disorder. Many men who participate in groups such as MENZ have had their lives shattered by women with personality disorders. These disorders are not evident to most of us until we get emotionally tied up with the sufferer or get to know them well. Personality disordered people can present very normally until they experience emotional threat or impediment to their wishes. We then see unbelievable irrationality, selfishness and dishonesty, driven by deep insecurity and need to defend the ego, the sense of self. Early childhood insecurity such as that brought about by parental addictions, serious domestic violence, removal from parents etc, are a key indicator for the possibility of personality disorder. The Family Court is beset with cases involving personality disorders but has difficulty recognizing them, particularly so when the woman’s claims when consistent with widely accepted stereotypes about men tend to be believed in the absence of good evidence under the so-called “balance of probabilities” argument.
And in the case of this female domestic violence offender CYFS must have been too busy visiting and threatening good parents for smacking their children to deal properly with real child abuse.

Women are dangerous offenders on alcohol and drugs too. How dare ALAC or anyone else mount campaigns that imply only men cause harm when inebriated?! How dare the authorities allow such gender stereotyping, discrimination and harm to one section of the population?

This story appears to be one of those cases where a woman goes along with sexual activity then later feels embarrassed or guilty about what she did so simply blames the man for what happened. In addition, it may be another of those cases in which Women’s Refuge pressures clients to wage its preferred war against men. Luckily, the criminal court still tries to maintain some semblance of objectivity based on facts, and this man avoided being another victim of misandry.

Female violence can be different from male violence, but not necessarily less violent: 1 2 3 4

Men continue to be killed and maimed in their jobs while women continue to complain that they are not paid as much on average for their much safer jobs.

Here’s a good example of building bad stereotypes about males. One young thug gets out of a van and indecently assaults an unfortunate young woman on the footpath, and the headline claims “a vanload of boys assault teen”. I hope this offender is caught and punished for his appalling behaviour. It would appear that most or all of his companions were behaving in threatening and unpleasant ways and we would like to see them also taught a lesson. But they did not all assault the woman, and we don’t even know if they knew what the offender had done. Why is it seen as acceptable to exaggerate and lie about men’s wrongdoing? It fits in with the feminist propaganda that all men are rapists, I guess.

And here’s another example of fashionable stereotypes about men conveniently being used for dishonest, ulterior motives. Luckily, in this case some poor sod wasn’t apprehended, interrogated or charged by police before the girl’s lie was uncovered.

A small proportion of men are violent thugs whom most of us would happily bring to justice. This man is one. Some would say that the female victim was foolish to hitchhike drunk and alone at 3am in an unpopulated area. I would prefer a society in which this was safe, in which men and women could be relied upon to protect or at least not to harm a vulnerable person. Indeed, the vast majority of men can be relied upon to be socially responsible, as evidenced by this woman’s own history of having “hitched all over the countryside” in the past. And I support women who hitchhike because by doing so they are helping to protect what is left of a caring society. However, I do not admire (though I might compassionately understand) the victim’s decision to shower afterwards, then to wait until the next day to inform the police expecting them to find and prosecute the offender. Much public education and many school programmes have informed women to protect forensic evidence by not washing after sexual attacks. If you are burgled but wait a few days before informing police and in the meantime wash all surfaces and dispose of anything left by the burglar, what’s the chance the police will find the burglar or even try to?

MP Dr Hutchinson can be congratulated for helping to bring about an enquiry into prostate cancer screening. This article gives quite a good summary of the issue. It seems that screening may not be a good idea because the high false positive rate would lead to much unnecessary treatment causing more harm overall than the disease does. But in my opinion the enquiry should go beyond just considering screening. A public campaign may well be a good alternative, aimed at educating the public about symptoms and at encouraging men to overcome their reluctance to see the GP and get a finger put up the bum to check for the cancer. When several massive health campaigns are funded purely for women, it’s reasonable to expect something more to be done for this lethal male disease if only to demonstrate a little gender equality.

Mr Garrett, another MP in the gun for allegedly “lewd” behaviour, in this case comments to a colleague disclosing something of his sexual thoughts about a female who wasn’t there to hear. When told about this by Mr Garrett’s “colleague”, the woman complained and that second-hand information was enough to see Mr Garrett publicly reprimanded. Unfortunately we are not informed about exactly what Mr Garrett said that was considered to be such a heinous crime. How then are men to know what the rules are and where the boundaries lie? We are left with the impression that women are the new royalty, the godly class, who cannot be discussed except in the most deferential terms. Men should not imagine they are permitted to pass comment about women. Men’s natural interests and any expression thereof are dirty, bad, disallowed. Anything men say must conform to feminist approval but the rules will be kept vague. But the ways women choose to comment on men’s bodies are always acceptable. Women’s preferences set the rules for men while men’s preferences don’t matter.

On a lighter note, if you are ever subjected to entrapment, South Canterbury firefighters might be able to help. If Richard Worth had only known about this…

Maternity care in NZ has been a political sparring match for many years now between midwifery and medicine. We seem to read too often about tragedies that could have been averted if medical intervention had been provided earlier when birth complications were evident or predictable. The popular move back to midwifery and away from sterile, insensitive and over-controlling medical approaches was understandable. What is not often explored is the way this became a vanguard battle of feminism against what was seen as a male-defined medical approach. In my opinion, the extent to which policies have been influenced by feminist ideology rather than the welfare of birthing mothers and babies is the extent to which the current system is flawed and failing its customers.

This story highlights some important aspects related to the section 59 debate. The law change assumed that, as well as being preferable, alternatives to smacking are well-understood by parents and adults dealing with children. The fact is that a great deal of confusion remains about how to manage children’s dangerous or undesirable behaviour. Few adults understand the learning principles underlying the use of various behaviour management techniques such as time out and punishment. This childcare worker attempted to come up with a consequence she thought reasonable for what she saw as a child’s dangerous misbehaviour, but it wasn’t acceptable to the mother apparently on cultural grounds. Further, it wasn’t sensible as behaviour management because it lacked any actual aversive effects and provided the child with one-to-one adult attention during a novel activity. None of the experts contributing to the news story were even reported to mention that. In our society there is insufficient understanding of child behavioural training principles and associated sophisticated techniques to simply ban quick and effective forms of punishment that have always been a mainstay of child discipline in the human species and for other mammals who raise their offspring.

Men are primarily the victims of violence in our society. But the campaigns we see and fund through our taxes only see women as worth protecting.

More male-denigration in a new alcohol campaign, this time by the NZ Transport Agency. So far, only men are shown as ever causing harm through excessive drinking. Is that reasonable? Not according to the facts.

Contrary to the picture painted by the likes of Deborah Coddington who sees male sex offenders as the neighbourhood bogeymen that we need most protection from, our neighbourhood burglars and drunk drivers, male or female, are much more likely to damage us and our children. Where then is Deborah Coddington’s burglar register and drunk driver register? Where are the lynch mobs protesting at the release of burglars, drunk drivers, fraudsters and arsonists into their street?

In Part One of the June News Review I mentioned a story about a male teacher facing disciplinary proceedings for sexual misconduct with a pupil and I asked whether he might get to keep his career as women teachers often do in similar circumstances. Well, here’s one example.


  1. Well done Hans for putting all these resources altogether. Many thanks indeed. A great collection.

    Comment by Gerry — Mon 13th July 2009 @ 1:24 am

  2. It seems that screening may not be a good idea because the high false positive rate would lead to much unnecessary treatment causing more harm overall than the disease does

    You will find this reseach interesting Hans.

    PARIS – WOMEN take note: Not all breast cancers kill. One in three women diagnosed with breast cancer in public screening programmes are being treated needlessly, a new study has found. The reason is that their tumour will not be life-threatening, the British Medical Journal (BMJ) reported on Friday.

    Could be worth a thread on the case for and against screening

    legislation currently being considered would see police being allowed to stop and search cars at random without a search warrant

    Checkpoints – tasers to force people to comply to police wishes, banning orders – do I live in a western Democracy or in China?

    Where then is Deborah Coddington’s burglar register and drunk driver register?

    PLease dont give her any more ideas!



    Comment by Scrap_The_CSA — Mon 13th July 2009 @ 9:17 pm

  3. Note also that this murderer’s lawyer described her as “a normal, nice person” and it seems the judge saw her in the same way. But previous news reports referred to her as having a personality disorder.

    Legal training, through it’s focus on legal relationships and carefully ignoring the human elements of relationships, can be seen as an impediment to human understanding and caring.

    This is why you shouldn’t let anyone diagnosed as having legal training make important decisions in your life.
    Cheers, MurrayBacon the diagnosed axe-murderer.

    Comment by MurrayBacon — Tue 14th July 2009 @ 11:16 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