6 Year Old Boy on felony sex charges
My initial reaction to this headline was to burst out laughing; and then I read the article. Whilst not in New Zealand, with globalization and “trickle down” effects; it could well be a sign of things to come. Just to set the scene; here’s a brief extract:
I can’t imagine six-year-olds get a lot of mail. Why would they need to? And in addition to the danger of being hit by a moving vehicle, they aren’t even tall enough to retrieve it from the box. However, a young boy in Grant County recently got some interesting mail when he received an official summons by Grant County District Attorney Lisa Riniker, bringing a first-degree sexual assault charge against him after he played ‘doctor’ with two five-year-old friends.
More of the disgusting details here –
The Badger Herald: 6-year-old’s felony charges overzealous
I wasn’t sure which category I should add this to – but given that 6 year old boys can now be up on felony sex charges, I suspect gender politics is appropriate!
And whilst a 6 year old boy is being emotioanally crushed WITH officialdom’s sanction, this is happening in Africa to our brothers – http://www.avoiceformen.com/featured/28000000-african-men-to-be-coerced-by-u-n-to-make-the-cut/
The program is to cut 28 million men’s foreskins off (many to be sold to cosmetics companies to make ant-aging creams for women) has been roundly criticized by many in the medical and scientific community.
This horrific program is directly overseen by the United Nations Development Program who are headed by none other than former prime Minister of New Zealand – Helen Clarke.
Yes, that’s right Helen Clarke will be responsible for the sexual mutilation of 28 MILLION African males.
If anyone was looking for evidence she’s a misandrist (bigoted man hater) here it is.
Sorry about the typo in the first sentence.
Although emotioanally crushed is kind of an apt expression for this grotesque misandric situation!
@ Skeptic, do you know if that information is available anywhere else besides the A Voice for Hypocritical Bigots website? I wouldn’t mind reading the details but if AVFM the only source available I can live without it.
Yes, I do know there are sources available elsewhere, but insulting a premier Men’s Rights Activist website and well respected friends doesn’t incline me to want to help you find those sources.
Calling folks at a Voice for Men website hypocritical bigots without explaining why you hold such prejudice is simply sandpit behavior. So why would I trust valuable information in the hands of someone behaving so immaturely? (pearls before swine and all that).
Besides which it’s a very simple matter for you to use a search engine like the rest of us.
Why expect me to do your work for you after the childish insult?
Do you expect me to be servile?
Crikey, I get the impression that perhaps Wayne isn’t your real name, but a cover for some entitled femalist princess.
Thanks for the free advertising for a Voice for Men website – http://www.avoiceformen.com/
For those interested in the topic of 28 MILLION AFRICAN MEN BEING SEXUALLY MUTILATED under a dubious UN Program directly supervised by New Zealand’s former PM Helen Clarke, there is a whole radio show devoted to the topic here –
I expect the show’s very generous Men’s Rights Activists will provide impeccable references to back up their claims.
Hi Skeptic. It wasn’t my intention to upset you. I’m sorry if I did.
Thank-you for confirming alternative sources existing for the information posted at A Voice for Hypocritical Bigots. I was simply asking a fellow MRA if he knew if he knew if those sources existed. I’ll find those sources and read them now that you have confirmed those sources do exist.
My name is Wayne and is definitely not Waynette. I used to post here using the username “SickofNZ”. I co-authored the “Status of Men Index” with RC (who posts on this site). I’m no entitled princess. Wayne is my real life name.
I’ve been a regular participant and donator at AVFM up until a few days ago when Paul’s right-hand-man, JTO, authored an article where he made a vicious attack against Christianity, comparing Christians to feminists in a most disparaging way. And that is in spite of their site rules forbidding such divisions amongst MRAs who have faith in creation or faith in evolution. JTO’s article is certainly bigoted and hypocritical and expands AVFM’s enemy to include Christianity with feminism.
I won’t ever frequent that website again and nor will I donate the crumbs I have left in my wallet to a community where the hatred of men is encouraged when they don’t aspire to JTO’s preferred faith. That is if you can call atheism and homosexuality a faith.
Again, thank-you for confirming the existence of alternative sources for that information.
I don’t see JTO being hypocritical.
He’s atheist and up front about it is all I’ve seen of his postings.
He doesn’t claim to a faith as in religion, so your comment about his faith makes any no sense to me.
I’d need to see a link to the ‘disparaging’ comment you claim he’s made before commenting further.
I have seen christian guys posting at aVFM recently, so clearly some feel OK about the site.
For the record I compare some christian men with feminists myself – some are keen to pay homage and sacrifice themselves to women. They wrap up such attitudes in religiosity as though that validates it. Ugly stuff to deal with as it only encourages female narcissism.
In November of last year the World Health Organization, in conjunction with various other worldwide health organizations like UNIAID and the Presidents Emergency Plan For Aids Relief, released a document entitled, “Joint Strategic Action Framework to Accelerate the Scale-Up of Voluntary Medical Male Circumcision for HIV Prevention in Eastern and Southern Africa 2012-2016.”
This document outlines a multinational plan to circumcise tens of millions of men in Sub Saharan Africa over the next four years. The scope of the plan includes branding circumcision itself so young people will want to have it performed as well as school programs that actively “recruit” young boys to have the procedure done and to encourage them recruit others as well. In spite of repeated assurance throughout the document that human rights would be respected, it included provisions for a “sustainability phase” intended to eventually make male infant circumcision compulsory in the region.
As several good folks have pointed out there appear to be several parties which have converged to create the mass male genital mutilation plan.
However, it doesn’t surprise me entirely to see this chilling misandric African development when I think of one of the major players.
Former New Zealand PM Helen Clark is the first politician to lead the United Nations Development Program. It is the third highest position at the United Nations.
The United Nations Development Program is directly responsible for overseeing the HIV programs in Africa. She is also the Chair of the United Nations Development Group, a committee consisting of the heads of all UN funds, programs and departments working on development issues.
The UNDP mandate is –
Building democratic societies
Preventing crisis, enabling recovery
Protecting the environment
Halting & reversing HIV/AIDS
Growing national capacity
Pertinent background –
Ms Clark, served as the socialist Prime Minister of New Zealand from 1999 until 2008.
Under the Clark leadership, a sweeping Labour party social engineering agenda was put in place with Legalised prostitution, Outlawing parents smacking their children and the contentious Care of Children Bill which makes gay and lesbian couples equal to traditional families, as well as making it easier for casual boyfriends/girlfriends of biological parents to be given “parental rights” over a child in defiance of objections from the other biological parent.
A socialist feminist since her teens one telling ingredient in the Clark mix appears to be an almost pathological dislike of men, as she illustrates with such quotes as:
“I remember being greatly influenced by Kate Millett’s Sexual Politics and Germaine Greer’s The Female Eunuch when I was about 20″³.
She would frequently close down discussion over political issues by referring publicly to male colleagues who disagreed with her as Ã¢â‚¬Ëœsexist’.
She married a university sociologist Peter Davis, her partner of five years at that time, shortly before an election (under pressure from some members of the New Zealand Labour Party to marry despite her own negative feelings about marriage – her biography reports that she cried throughout the ceremony, although she attributes that to “a headache”).
As Prime Minister, Helen Clark was a member of the Council of Women World Leaders, an International network of current and former women presidents and prime ministers whose mission is to mobilize the highest-level women leaders globally for collective action on issues of critical importance to women and equitable development.
I’m writing this so that you don’t think I’m ignoring your reply to me.
I have contemplated sourcing JTO’s disparaging comments by providing a link to his offensive article but can’t, in good conscience, bring myself to visit that website. I have been considering who I might ask to get those details for me.
I hope you don’t mind too much if I delay doing that because I’ll be offline for a few days to a week dealing with a family tragedy. The pilot (Lance) of the hot-air ballooning accident in Carterton this morning is a family member.
I’ll ponder my options when my priorities allow that.
So let’s see now.
You’re prepared to make unsubstantiated disparaging insults in an attempt to put people off visiting a site where they can get information about official United Nations plans to 28 MILLION brothers being sexually mutilated over the next 4 years.
Then to prioritize your family over the fate of those 28 MILLION MEN, before you can even be bothered contemplating backing up your empty insults about A Voice for Men website with actual facts.
I get you.
Gees Skeptic, my cousin (and good friend) just fell 150 meters to his death whilst being incinerated on the way down. He’s still lying in the paddock where he landed. I’m on my way out (in 45 minutes) to join a convoy of my family members to be with our extended family who are all devastated. I won’t be back on the internet until after the funeral. I have my priorities right.
I’ll take care of one dead man and his grieving family while you take care of 28 million foreskins. Deal?
I expect to be back before next weekend. If your patience is not developed enough to wait that long, search for that information yourself. Or wait! Those are your choices.
28 million foreskins and one dead balloonist may deter the faint and weak hearted, but the valiant amongst us shall march onward together.
It’s an absolute no brainer.
Concern over 28 Million men being sexually mutilated, many of whom will probably die vis a vis one man already dead.
I have my priorities straight.
For I’m not the one encouraging others to avoid A Voice for Men Website where folks can learn about about what’s happening to my 28 MILLION African brothers because of some uncorroborated argument about religiosity. Then sliding off to attend to family matters (however tragic) with a snarky “I’ll explain my disdain for a Voice for Men when I’M ready”.
Understand this – whilst your indulging in your grief having encouraged the blocking of the spread of information about your African brothers several thousand go under the knife in Swaziland alone – some of them will most likely die horrible deaths from infection too, but hey not in your back yard right?
Still, I guess with your loss you can be forgiven for not thinking so clearly.
For those prioritizing 28 MILLION African brothers here’s a video from Dr Dean Edel who explains very clearly and succinctly why the sexual mutilation of those brothers is a terrible idea
My condolences to you and your family AND 28 MILLION AFRICAN BROTHERS.
Sorry, here’s the link to the video from Dr Dean Edel –
You are a sick man Skeptic.
Wayne, who has had to fight against the family courts now needs to help his family through a major tragedy. Children may be involved here.
If 1 man doesn’t do what you ask when you want then you give shitty. Go take a look at yourself in the mirror. You may not find much humanity there. Yes; there may be reports of atrocities occurring. That doesn’t give you the right to be so sarcastic at his loss.
No. Not sick. I’m actual in good health unlike millions of my African brothers who are being mutilated for life, with some of them dying as well – whilst some folks are overlooking THAT GREATER tragedy.
We’ve then got Wayne actively attempting to block knowledge of it being spread with vindictive unsubstantiated accusations against the only Men’s Rights Activist site currently making people aware of the gendercide.
Apparently he doesn’t give a shit about his MILLIONS OF BROTHERS IN AFRICA.
If you got yourself informed you’d see there’s no maybe about atrocities occurring either.
Yes, it’s tragic what’s happened to Wayne, but don’t loose site of the much bigger picture to consider.
One more thing.
I’m not sure what I’m supposed to have said that you deem sarcastic as you don’t explain yourself that well.
However I’ll use sarcasm whenever I see fit, and won’t be shamed by small-minded comments about being ‘sick’ from doing so.
Water off a duck’s back as far as I’m concerned.
MILLIONS of men’s lives are more important to me than someone choosing to feel offended by my challenging them to see the bigger picture.
Like I said before my condolences to Wayne AND 28 MILLION AFRICAN BROTHERS.
Thanks Skeptic for referring us to this drive for male circumcision. The written article on this on the Voice for Men website seemed clear, thorough and reasonable.
I can understand your annoyance that someone would write off the whole Voice for Men initiative and label all their contributors and supporters as bigots on the basis of a claimed but unreferenced transgression by one of their contributors. Such intolerance seems typical of religious believers whose ideas may be so weakly based that no disagreement can be entertained. Nevertheless, I offer my condolences to Wayne for his tragic loss, I respect his need to prioritize his family crisis and I hope he will return to continue the debate.
The quest now to genitally mutilate millions of males was based on one heavily criticized study that claimed to find circumcized men had 60% fewer cases of HIV infection. The study’s data were highly suspect because they were based on self-report concerning sexual activity and included such weird findings as only 43.1% of one country’s HIV infections were the result of sexual activity, five men became infected although they claimed to have had no sexual activity in the relevant period, the rate of men who became infected was the same for the group that never used condoms as for the group that always used condoms, while in another country 23 men became infected although they claimed to have no sexual activity or always used condoms. None of these findings make sense unless one believed that a huge proportion of these Africans were also maintaining expensive drug habits through shared needle use. The study’s results conflicted with those of many other international studies that found circumcision provided NO benefit in reducing HIV transmission. Condom use on the other hand has been reliably shown to provide very high levels of protection against HIV transmission.
Even if circumcision reduced HIV transmission, there is no evidence that mass circumcision would have benefits. In the African countries targeted it is likely that any such a medical programme will lead to unwarranted confidence and reduction of known safety measures, e.g. “I have been circumcised so now I won’t get AIDS, don’t need to wear a condom and can have intercourse with as many people as I like”.
Even if circumcision reduced HIV transmission, the risk of the circumcision procedure may well harm or kill many more victims that would the AIDS virus the circumcision claimed to protect against. There is a significant risk of complications such as surgery infections. Even according to this almost certainly spurious study, it would take 60 male circumcisions to avoid one case of HIV.
The programme for mass circumcision of male adults, adolescents and infants was initiated and driven by several feminists. I would guess that their motivation is misandrist, wanting to blame men for heterosexual HIV transmission as for all other problems, wanting to harm males and take out feminist anger on them. The situation is looking more and more like the Nazi blame, hatred and violence towards Jews prior to WWII.
I have previously criticized the UN’s World Health Organisation for misandrist research , so I’m not surprised this organisation is complicit in this programme of medical violence towards males.
Finally, even if male circumcision significantly reduced HIV infection and even if a programme of mass circumcision were likely to reduce HIV in a population (neither of which propositions has been established as true), and even if male circumcision were a very safe procedure physically, mentally and emotionally (which we know it not to be, and which is even less likely to be in African countries), this would not necessarily justify mass male circumcision. Ethical and practical questions would still be important. For example, is it a good choice to invest resources in mass circumcision rather than towards increasing condom use, abstinence and/or monogamy? What if some study showed that giving young girls electrical shocks to their genitals significantly reduced their subsequent sexual participation and therefore their risk of HIV infection; would that mean that it’s ok to embark upon a population programme to cause female genital pain?
First off, thank-you to those who offered condolences. I do appreciate it. I’m back at home until the funeral on Monday.
The article written by JTO which contained content I found to be offensive was published on January 2nd and titled “Feminists: demented, stunned or cultists”. My little helper did not record the link to that article for me. However, it should be relatively easy to find JTO’s article that contains the following …
“Here, of course, I am likely offending individuals who follow any of the primitive mythologies of the desert dwelling goat herders of the iron age mid-east. Taken as an example, Christianity is a death cult which worships the murdered human scapegoat of the rest of humanity’s transgressions. It’s mostly treated as normal by conformists in the continental United States. However, this relatively old cult is based on a scripture which makes as much objective sense as the Norse creation myth from the bones of the ice giant Ymir, the ancient greek, or the creation myths of native North American stone age humans.”
JTO is not merely another contributor but AVFM’s 2IC, and admits his likelihood of offending Christian MRA’s prior to even submitting his offensive content. JTO has submitted previous content that has offended some Christians on at least two previous occasions that I am aware of.
Any article submitted at AVFM where a religious perspective is used to explain feminism, or criticise evolutionist theory, is prohibited, as can be evidenced by their comment and article policies.
AVFM – where some MRA’s are more equal than other MRA’s.
AVFEM – A Voice For Evolutionist Males is more apt.
I see you got your panties in a wad because someone thinks your religion amounts to ancient superstition.
Welcome to the real world! – where millions of atheist and agnostic folks think that way these days.
And that’s your excuse for trying to close down the spreading of the knowledge that 28 MILLION men are to be pressured into getting their genitals mutilated based on hokum pseudoscience.
Wow! that’s some wonderfully compassionate religion you’ve got there.
I think you’ve missed the point entirely Skeptic.
It is unfortunate that you’re unable to acknowledge the divisive and unnecessary attack against one group of MRA’s by an AVFEM leader, despite their site policies prohibiting attacks from those, who belong to his targeted group, from similarly attacking those groups that the author belongs to.
Contrary to your incorrect assumptions, I don’t belong to any religion, nor am I a Christian, although I have many very good friends who are Christians or otherwise involved in religions. I have just as many very good friends who are evolutionists. Your assumptions about my motives are just as incorrect. I wish AVFEM was inclusive of all MRA’s. But unfortunately it isn’t.
OK, I get that you’re not Christian and apologize for the assumption.
However, I rather think it is you who has missed the most important point I’ve been trying to get through to you.
Unlike you, several other guys actually did engage with JTO in the a Voice for men website thread you walked away from.
They challenged him about his comments on Christianity and a respectful disagreement took place.
They didn’t react by going online at MENZ to disparage the spreading of alarming news from a Voice for Men website that the United Nations plan to coerce 28 million African brothers into being genitally mutilated.
Personally I think JTO is entitled to his opinions about religion, but was too hasty to share them. However to slag off the whole website as some kind of toxic no go zone and encourage others to do likewise is to engage in suppressing news about those MILLIONS of African brothers.
I’d prefer to see you go back to a Voice for Men, challenge JTO if you are still so inclined and get behind the effort to spread word to the world about the despicably misguided plans that Helen clarke’s United Nations Development Program have for 28 MILLION AFRICAN BROTHERS –
Wayne (#3, #6,#19, #21): The piece from ‘John the Other’ is an exploration of possible explanations for the extent to which feminism maintains beliefs, such as those about patriarchy and the Duluth model, that are clearly fabrications to a large extent and inconsistent with known facts and scientific findings. One of the explanations, that feminists like religious believers maintain certain beliefs regardless of objective evidence, seemed a reasonable analogy. His few comments about religions including Christianity seemed unnecessary but I guess he felt the need to emphasize that religions’ poor foundations and lack of inclusion of contradictory knowledge did not stop huge numbers of people believing them. I didn’t see that the piece quoted could be particularly objectionable or that it qualified as an ‘attack’. Nothing was mentioned about evolution.
The ‘Editorial and Comment Policy’ on Voice for Men includes only the following policy regarding religion:
There is no mention anywhere in the Editorial and Comment Policy of rules you describe such as prohibiting religious perspectives used to explain feminism, or prohibiting criticism of evolutionary theory, or indeed attacking the group that the author belongs to or other groups.
It’s important also to note that the site’s policies on ‘comments’ allow almost anything except ‘redundancy’ and derailing discussions with individuals’ own agendae.
But even if there were some hypocrisy, that doesn’t justify implying that it’s only a ‘site for bigots’ and that everything on it suddenly becomes worthless. Nobody is perfect. One of the reasons the men’s movement is so ineffective is that men are too ready to write off their colleagues and activities simply because some imperfection is discovered.
Thank-you for the apology. I’m not sure that me being religious, or not, should have made any difference to the validity of my offense to JTO’s content but I suppose I’m happy that it did seem to make a difference. Your apology wasn’t necessary, but is accepted anyway. It’s water under the bridge. I would have been just as offended if unnecessary divisions were made by an MRA site leader, who was religious, and had thoughtlessly compared feminists with evolutionists, knowing that many MRA’s believe in evolution.
I agree with you that JTO is entitled to his opinions. Maybe he was hasty sharing those opinions. I think you’re being kind.
Thank-you for expressing your preference of seeing me contributing again at AVFM. I will seriously consider doing that while I take time out to reduce the length of my “procrastination list”.
NB: I did watch the video that you linked to your last post. I’m vehemently opposed to genital mutilation regardless of gender. I can’t help but wonder at the fortune$ that will be made by the cosmetics industry, selling face creams infused with components of 28 million foreskins. I make it a habit these days of saying to every female acquaintance of mine who is wearing make-up; “ugh! Another dick face”. I’m happy to oblige when they demand an explanation. 100% of them have been horrified so far. 1% have stopped wearing cosmetics. I’ll continue chipping away where I can, until I’m in a position to become more active.
I think your calling a Voice for Men Website ‘a site for bigots’ is terribly offensive.
Just because one guy (John the Other) writes something you think is objectionable there’s no need to label the whole site as a place for bigots. That’s ridiculous.
A shame that your daft comment may be taken to heart by some too and so sadly may deter some folks from entering and learning about the fate of 28 million African brothers who are in line to be sexually mutilated by United Nations pseudoscience.
What a load of dribble. A six year old child has been subjected to such accusation is disgusting. The focus should be on how the law has been allowed to interpret such standing for grounds to sue, THE LAW – of course if there is a gap some greedy person will seek to exploit such a opportunity. As for the circumcision article, what a load of tripe! lol Is it coincidence that Helen Clarke – a strong political leader during her time as Prime Minister – be involved in a third world oppressive regime which also emasculates men? It has all the ingredients of the New World order, and the Illuminati – you should consider adding those in next time. Also I wonder who would own the pharmaceutical company which would drive the market for such a practice? Or who will receive the benefits/profits from the outcome? Poor males having to suffer at the hands of a misandristic world. AS IF. Capitalism is the key actor to your little dilemma or circumcision scenario, and the main actors within capitalism can be recognised by their large bellies, grey hair, and an appendage between their legs.
(1) Thank you for telling us what “the focus should be on”. It’s so reassuring to know there is someone with your superior intellect and godly wisdom who can tell us what to think.
(2) Helen Clark has pursued and largely achieved a set of goals she published many decades ago to destroy the family unit and other institutions of what she saw as patriarchy. There is no need for any conspiracy theory here; her war against men has always been as plain as day. Her government brought about numerous laws and policies deliberately adding to the denigration, exploitation and abuse of men.
(3) Will you also describe writing that criticizes female genital mutilation as “a load of tripe” and sarcastically imply it’s a paranoid conspiracy theory, or are you happy to be duplicitous?
(4) Women loudly and constantly demand that they be at least equally represented on company boards and in business executive roles (although they show little interest in climbing a ladder to such positions or indeed undertaking the lower-paid jobs most men do that often maim or kill them). Women’s profiteering motivation and capitalist greed on average is probably more self-serving and exploitative than men’s. The men who undertake the most stressful senior roles in capitalist enterprises usually do so to provide better for their wives and children. When their wives separate from those men they seem very keen to take as much of men’s capitalist gains as they possibly can, the law of course allowing them to plunder men extensively then to expect their existence to be funded ongoing by those men either directly or through the state. Many of the actors on the public stage of capitalism may have appendages between their legs, but the real forces behind capitalist greed have ovaries, high-pitched voices, high self-entitlement, an absence of honour and self-responsibility, manipulative personalities and endless avarice.
Reply to blamemenforall #27
Brilliant post you have written blamemenforall …You mention ex prime minister ‘Helen Clark’ … You are very correct on what you have posted about Helen Clark Feminist agenda…
A investigative journalist called ‘Ian Wishart’ pick up on what Helen Clark agenda was and wrote a book called ‘ Eve’s Bite’…
But don’t forget another serious player concerning the ‘Feminist agenda’ for N.Z
That was ex woman prime minister ‘Jenny Shipley’ …She was the one that really started the ball rolling with reshaping N.Z into a Gestapo Feminist state…..
Kind regards John Dutchie Free at Last