Finally the message is getting through
IN all the bullsh*t of international womens day, I found a woman who identified the real issues.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/03/08/3158400.htm
MENZ Issues: news and discussion about New Zealand men, fathers, family law, divorce, courts, protests, gender politics, and male health.
66 Comments »
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.
Well yes, Ms Crabb may have identified some issues but she also misses some of the most important ones and misrepresents some of the issues she does discuss.
Her primary argument is that women can’t ‘have equality in the workplace’ because they don’t have wives. This is condescending and sexist towards males, similar to the ‘honorary male’ status given to women in the past when doing men’s jobs. Ms Crabb implies that men may be capable of filling the role (though will never be as good as a woman, ‘not a wife, exactly’, only ‘a spouse with benefits’), but argues that they don’t do so because workplaces don’t give men enough paid parental leave or flexibility.
Her statement may well be true that
but lack of paid parental leave and workplace flexibility probably don’t figure highly among these barriers. A bit more paid parental leave for husband is hardly going to enable wife to develop a career and get to the top of it. And if husband wants to do more in the home to allow wife to earn more he can probably find a part-time position in his field. In fact, there is little impediment (in NZ anyway) to women getting to the top of their chosen field if they want to, and indeed there are many female senior practitioners in health, legal and state service professions as well as plenty of women who run their own businesses.
Ms Crabb avoids mentioning the more important factors that see women occupying paid employment, and especially senior or ‘boardroom’ roles, less often than men. One such factor is their choice. They could choose to maintain stressful, competitive workplace roles year after year, doing others’ bidding and working towards others’ purposes while living under threat of losing their job for various possible reasons. But they have another option: to be financially catered for, allowing them to stay close to their children, to enjoy their children’s first steps and first words etc, and to spend their time tending their own homes, lives and purpose. They don’t even need a man to support them; the government will readily do so. We will never see a large proportion of women choosing the first option over the second. We don’t often see women offering to support men financially.
Another factor is dedication to career. From a young age boys are aware that successful employment brings respectability as a man, whereas girls see women being respected either in careers or as homemakers. Young women will tend to be less fully committed to a career pathway.
Another factor is that women mostly choose successful earning men, not men who want to stay home and be supported financially. Young men know very well that in choosing partners women place a lot of importance on men’s earning success, whereas a woman’s career and earning potential is not a major factor for men. Warren Farrell’s challenge to men is still just as relevant; he suggested men put an ad in a personal column like ‘good-looking man wants financially secure woman to support him while he looks after the home’, then see how many responses they get! The point here is that women themselves select men who are good at working and earning, not men who are good at being ‘wives’.
Ms Crabb also shows no recognition that for women to have ‘equality in the workplace’, they will need to line up for the most dangerous, body-damaging, dirty, uncomfortable jobs as men do, and they will need to contribute 50% of workplace deaths and serious injuries. That will happen when you see pigs with wings in full flight past your window. Instead, feminists seem to think that equality in work simply means equality in the most privileged and powerful roles.
Comment by Hans Laven — Wed 9th March 2011 @ 11:46 pm
Here’s a link to a women’s day story by Henry Makow’s
http://www.henrymakow.com/
Comment by Larry — Thu 10th March 2011 @ 7:17 am
Larry- your link is to a conspiracy theorist site. It has nothing to do with Women’s Day magazine
Comment by John Brett — Thu 10th March 2011 @ 3:38 pm
Some people think that a ‘conspiracy theory’ is any information outside of Fox News or the Woman’s Weekly. The term is so vague I don’t think it has any use, especially when you consider the huge errors and about-turns in maistream news. When mainstream media report that ‘men’ beat their wives if their team loses on a Saturday night, it is a conspiracy to doubt that. When the earth was known to be flat, any other ideas were a conspiracy theory too.
Comment by Larry — Thu 10th March 2011 @ 4:33 pm
australia soon to pass misandric law of having having a compulsory quota of women in a firm regardless of whether they are qualified for it or not. basically saying if she wears a skirt she should have a job over a male who is more qualified than her.
Comment by karan jiharr — Thu 10th March 2011 @ 6:12 pm
http://www.perthnow.com.au/business/news/companies-to-face-mandatory-reporting-in-bid-to-boost-gender-equality/story-e6frg2qu-1226018525788
Comment by karan jiharr — Thu 10th March 2011 @ 6:18 pm
I see they want to increase exports the silly Ozzie buggers.
They’re taking the fast track to ineficiency.
AND they increase they’re chances therefore of failure, bankrupcy and layoffs with the jobs ending up in another country.
The Chinese will be laughing their socks off!
Comment by Skeptik — Thu 10th March 2011 @ 7:05 pm
OK- your link to Henry whatsit is to a load of old nonsense then, just so not to be vague
Who gets their information from the mainstream news anyway? Worse than old Henry whatsit.
Comment by John Brett — Thu 10th March 2011 @ 7:43 pm
It honestly is a useless situation isnt it. My husband just received a child support letter stating that his payments are going up to $1419 per month due to his pay increase – which is the first we knew of an increase. What makes me laugh is our living allowance remains the same yet the money to the ex goes up – how is that fair! We are on one wage, we have an unsaleable house in christchurch due to the earthquake and we now live with family elsewhere because we cannot afford to pay a mortgage and child support at the same time. The least they could do is income spliting and take into account the custodial families wages, why cant they see that this is fair??? Makes me so mad!!!
Comment by Kathleen — Thu 10th March 2011 @ 8:06 pm
Regardless of whether or not I accept the socialist conspiracy theory, I thank you Larry for referring us to it. It’s interesting at least as an historical piece in this era of the gender war, and many of its points are valid even if the underlying “better dead than red” ideas are questionable.
Comment by Hans Laven — Thu 10th March 2011 @ 11:53 pm
Wonderful quote seen today –
“The more successful feminism is the more men will become awakened to their true position in society as wage slaves, cannon fodder, sperm banks and walking ATM’s”.
Comment by MGTOW — Fri 11th March 2011 @ 10:19 am
MENZ magazine Issue 5 can be read here
Comment by Skeptik — Sun 13th March 2011 @ 7:10 pm
On my mind today –
“Feminists never account that armed service is a virtual and often a literal synonym for VIOLENCE AGAINST MEN.
During the Vietnam War, over 50,000 MEN as GENDER REFUGEES escaped the Feminist States of America to Canada and elsewhere.
Their decision was to MOVE to avoid being used as cannon fodder.
As such, those, ‘Draft Dodgers’ were an undescribed/unlabeled ‘Men’s Rights Movement (literally).
Comment by Skeptik — Mon 14th March 2011 @ 11:09 am
On my mind today – a comment from The Spearhead
“Remember Schopenhauer: “All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.” FemLib and The Feminist Mistaque passed through the first in the Sixties, the second in the Seventies, reached the third in the Nineties – and what truth was in it, swept a huge bodyguard of lies into power.
Where is our truth? The first stage, passing into the second. And we have at least as much “vested interest” to push through as did the Suffragettes”.
Comment by Skeptik — Wed 16th March 2011 @ 11:05 am
http://www.smh.com.au/tv/show/young-mums-mansion/men-cant-be-parents/20110225-1b894.html
will guys be allowed to put something like this on media to brainwash public??..
Comment by karan jiharr — Thu 24th March 2011 @ 7:19 pm
Why would any decent person want to even try to brainwash the public with this misandric crap?
Unless of course they were feminists.
Comment by Skeptik — Thu 24th March 2011 @ 9:17 pm
If you want to see what feminists are up to, you have to go to one of it’s sources and a bastion – Sweden.
You’ve all heard of the vagina monologues, well in Sweden (The country Helen Clarke has often hailed as an ideal to emulate they’ve upped the ante.
Have a look at this latest SCUM monologues video trailer of a full length movie they’re making.
SCUM for those who didn’t know stands for Society for Cutting Up Men.
They are apparently making something of a comeback.
Their full manifesto is here.
I wish I could say this is a hoax, but apparently not.
WARNING ~ THE MANIFESTO AND VIDEO CLIP WILL BE DEEPLY DISTURBING AND OFFENSIVE VIEWING FOR MANY WHO SEE IT.
Comment by Skeptic — Wed 16th November 2011 @ 9:32 pm
Meanwhile over in the USA this is going on.
Again. This is NOT, repeat NOT a hoax.
Do I need to keep writing, or is that enough?
Comment by Skeptic — Wed 16th November 2011 @ 9:46 pm
@Larry – I and other scholars (Doug Casey, for instance) do not believe that our current circumstances are the result of a “conspiracy theory” (Socialist or otherwise) so much as sociopaths tend to be very simple-minded and are not very sophisticated in their thought and generally have the same goals and mechanisms of achieving those goals (addiction to power and control) happen to align sometimes. Child trafficking as child support and divorce and family breakup is just one means that sociopaths have latched onto for satisfying their addiction to power and control.
Comment by Darryl X — Thu 17th November 2011 @ 3:21 am
@Skeptik re #18 – Don’t know if you saw a link to an article at Fathers and Families I posted here a couple days ago about that very topic – suspension of due process in sexual assault accusations on college campuses in the US. Frightening developments as so many others are too. Basically, this suspension of due process (suspension of mens rea and habeus corpus) is already the law of the land in the US, especially when it comes to feminism and false allegations of any kind in family court or elsewhere. The US is the largest totalitarian post feminist dystopian fascist police state in the world.
Comment by Darryl X — Thu 17th November 2011 @ 3:25 am
Skeptic, the truly disturbing part of the SCUM manifesto is summed up I think in the first 2 sentences of the posting.
This document is extreme anti-male hate writing, and yet people actually WANTED to read it. The woman who wrote this should have been put up in front of a brick wall and executed by firing squad for the hate-monger she was (she died in 1988) or at least put in a mental institution where her obvious pathology would be kept away from the public. Why anyone would want to read the rantings of a lunatic is beyond me, but I suppose that’s a good indication of the mental stability of feminists.
Comment by Phoenix — Thu 17th November 2011 @ 9:26 am
Wow! Here’s a woman who really gets it.
Her intelligence and fairness are very attractive qualities.
Comment by The original SKEPTIC — Sun 27th November 2011 @ 3:35 am
Thanks for digging up that Youtube video Skeptic (#22).
‘Girlwriteswhat’ makes some interesting observations. For example, she emphasizes the unaffordability of our current feminist fantasy-land. Many of feminism’s new, imaginative ‘human rights’ and entitlements go well beyond, and indeed require the destruction of, Magna Carta rights on which our civilization is based. Many of those newly-invented feminist entitlements need to be paid for and they cost a lot. Yet, strangely enough, I have not seen analysis by economists of the extent to which feminist self-entitlement has contributed to the current near-collapse of western economies. After all, the lifestyle choices feminists have demanded as a ‘human right’ cost enormously as, for example, the majority of families separate to need two houses instead of one for raising children, additional unproductive travel is required for fathers to have any contact with their children, and the State has to come up with welfare to fund sole parents. The cost difference between raising children in a stable two-parent, one-household family and raising them in two separate households is essentially a cost falling upon men and taxes. Funding for feminist choices has been firstly extracted from wealth-producing industry mainly provided by men, both through general taxation and through extreme exploitation of those men unfortunate enough to have trusted their partners’ commitment vows, and secondly supplemented by government borrowing in the hope it can all be paid for sometime in the future.
Comment by Hans Laven — Sun 27th November 2011 @ 10:42 am
Hi Skeptic (#22); thanks for posting the reference to that video. I found her discussion around concerns for her sons’ futures particularly revealing. I wonder just how many other mums have the same fears? Without her saying so; I construed (in my own head) her articulating a blatant form of “baby boy farming” where their only future was to be servicing the needs of a feminist state. But that’s just me. I found her visual metaphor interesting (woman / kitchen); I wonder whether that was intentional?
Comment by Bruce S — Sun 27th November 2011 @ 11:35 am
#22..good video yet i on the other side of the coin have 2 daughters and have myself thought that in some ways im lucky to have 2 girls as society will look after them better than if id had sons
Comment by Ford — Sun 27th November 2011 @ 12:26 pm
Now having read this sombre and well researched commentary I understand more fully why former Labour Prime Minister Helen Clark loves Sweden.
I think NZers came awfully close to letting Clark replicate Swedish conditions in NZ even more fully than she did.
Comment by The original SKEPTIC — Sun 27th November 2011 @ 8:42 pm
Skeptic (#26); That commentary on feminism in Sweden must serve as a wake up call to all men everywhere that, left unchecked, Feminism will be the most deadly form of cancer confronting men of the 21st century. I think one of the comments from the article sums it up nicely;
Comment by Bruce S — Mon 28th November 2011 @ 6:19 am
Thanks, Skeptik, for posting this link about Sweden. I have always thought that countries which adopt very strong feminist policies generally do not succeed or persist for very long. Men are generally oppressed in Sweden (just look at the fate of Assange), so why has the economy of Sweden and other feminist Scandanaian countries not yet collapsed? Iceland collapsed. But these other countries like Nowrway, Sweden, Finland and Denmark are quite strong. Of course everyone thought the economy of Iceland was stable but then it collapsed one morning in about half an hour. So, maybe the economies of other Scandanavian countries are not as well off as everyone thinks they are. I always remember Iceland or the Beardstown Ladies in the US when I think of measuring economic success and feminists are always so clueless about numbers and finances that they don’t know how bad things are until crisis hits. Could that be the case in the Scandanavian countries? They remain a mystery to me.
Comment by Darryl X — Mon 28th November 2011 @ 6:31 am
Why don’t those Swedish men do something about their situation? Why didn’t the Jews stand up to the Nazis? Crushing a rampant ideology driven through the organized social structure of a country is not that easy. It took the free world to end the Nazi ideology, and only then did the German economy collapse. We are also asking Swedish men to attack their own territory and their own women; something I think is inherently difficult for men to do. It took a considerable effort to mount any resistance to feminism in New Zealand. We could draw some comparisons between the behaviour of our respective media and the effect that has. There are other factors to be taken into consideration. The main one I would suggest is the size of the population undergoing social engineering. Ten million in Sweden compared to four in New Zealand. I think this is a bigger battle, takes longer and more damage can be done – the regime will progress further before it is stopped. There are other interesting idiosyncrasies to take into account. It is an arctic country; they have 6 months of summer and 6 months of winter and the population suffer from a form of hibernation, winter malaise. The general population is relatively impoverished, lives a simple lifestyle, and its economy sluggish and dependant on a few key industries. I could see the Swedish situation getting comparatively worse than New Zealand’s before it gets better. The comments I found most interesting in the article were around the Justice system. Legalizing unlawful detention, removing the rules of evidence, and long term incarceration based on political ideology. The hallmarks of any tyrannical oppressive regime, but does the free world turn a blind eye simply because the aggressor is women. That raises some rather large questions around what is legitimate government, and at what point does legitimate government become an unlawful regime. The fear factor for Swedish men must be overwhelming and there a point where collective resistance becomes impossible without violence. On a more positive note at least English is widely understood and spoken in Sweden and with the amount of information on the internet Swedish men have the means to discuss the issue outside of their own fishbowl.
Comment by Down Under — Mon 28th November 2011 @ 9:23 am
re post #26 – “Men in Sweden are now victimized and systematically oppressed based on the policies of a handful of influential lunatics.” Hmmmm I can relate to that.
Comment by Darryl X — Mon 28th November 2011 @ 9:58 am
When it comes to Sweden (and other feminist countries) the questions must be asked. “Where is the United Nations in all this? Why are they not taking action?” The same questions must also be asked of the European Union. By not taking action they are in fact silently sanctioning Sweden, giving their approval by their silence. Then again, perhaps the World Leaders are in fact gutless, pussy whipped, spineless bureaucrats who haven’t learned that they have testicles yet.
.
I agree that the situation is truly disturbing, is Sweden an advanced model of were the West is headed? Feminist based fascism?
.
Sweden certainly seems to be headed in the direction of demonizing men to the point where their (female) population demands killing men simply because of their gender. How long will it be before we see concentration camps, after all there is already admision that current prisions are overwhelmed with male prisoners. Will it reach the point where the final solution to deal with the high number of male “criminals” is to “humanely” execute them in mass gas chambers, because there are so many that even individual executions are too expensive?
.
Doesn’t anyone remember what happened in Germany in the 1930s and 1940s with the Nazis and their “solution” for the Jews?
.
When you start to look at the rise of the Nazis and compare it to the rise of feminism the parallels are shocking, and blatant. Why can the world not wake up to what feminism really is: Modified Nazism, with t*ts?
Comment by Phoenix — Mon 28th November 2011 @ 11:28 am
Yes, Pheonix.
I agree entirely with your post #31.
Sweden is a disturbing example of where NZ might be by now (and could become) if it weren’t for the efforts of a few brave switched on folks.
I can’t quite shake the idea of whole countries being in effect ‘soft’ concentration camps – places with onerous laws which force men to pay taxes which then get dispensed to a privileged grouping (women), and where if you kick up too much of a fuss for the liking of the powers that be you’re then criminalized, passport revoked and effectively imprisoned within that country’s borders.
As I understand it that’s the situation in several western countries – most notably USA, but also including NZ where ‘arrears’ in ‘child support’ and domestic violence and other kinds of false accusations can result in a man’s passport being revoked.
Such things remind me of North Korea.
Here’s this straight from a Swedish guy who’s looking for answers too.
Comment by Skeptic — Mon 28th November 2011 @ 1:24 pm
There must be a place men can go for refuge. I mean lots of countries gave Jews refuge. What about us? Is there a country? I’ve already looked into refuge status in various countries for men oppressed by a feminist regime and no one is buying it? I really don’t want to be a fugitive and outlaw the rest of my life. I don’t mind being poor as long as I’m not going to jail and still have decent health care.
Comment by Darryl X — Mon 28th November 2011 @ 2:04 pm
Guess Sweden is off the list, huh?
Comment by Darryl X — Mon 28th November 2011 @ 2:05 pm
Daryl X,
Parts of Asia and South America seem good for men from what I can gather so far.
Best to do thorough research though.
Comment by Skeptic — Mon 28th November 2011 @ 4:36 pm
One of the South American countries even made parental alienation a criminal offence earlier this year.
Comment by Down Under — Mon 28th November 2011 @ 4:42 pm
Brazil outlawed Parental Alienation; Law No. 12318, FROM 26 AUGUST 2010. I have access to the Portuguese version that went through their parliament. If any one has any specific queries; I will translate it and post responses to your queries here. My reading of the law so far, suggests a sensible rather than a punitive approach to resolving the PA issue. Here’s a very brief summary of what the legal system in Brazil has been instructed to do if a PA case is bought before him / her:
Judges are instructed that custody is to be given to the parent that encourages / endorses the child’s relationship with the other parent. “Pretty neat ah?”
Judge(s) appoint mental health expert(s) to evaluate allegations. If PA exists, the Judge has the discretion to assess either criminal or civil penalties, which may involve the changing of custody and termination of parental rights of the alienating parent.
Makes the “western feminist regimes” look a bit silly really.
Comment by Bruce S — Mon 28th November 2011 @ 5:31 pm
#37..no offence but what good is brazillian law in NZ
Comment by Ford — Mon 28th November 2011 @ 7:54 pm
Thanks for that great info Bruce S!
I think it’s good to have a look at Brazilian law to see how humane it is and how it’s light years ahead of NZ’s dumb-assed feminist-chivalrist corruption – something that Australia has recently regressed to under a feminist Prime Minister.
It can also be tracked for the measurable results it produces – less criminialising of males, lower rates of juvenile crime, lower rates of prescription and illicit drug use, lower rates of suicide, homelessness, etc etc.
For men to be more empowered they need to get this kind of information not only to compare with their own lot in NZ but to consider taking refuge from NZ’s shithole misandry in countries such as Brazil – which incidentally is surging ahead economically too by all recent accounts I come across.
Comment by The original SKEPTIC — Mon 28th November 2011 @ 8:48 pm
Ford, some of us are watching other countries to find out where they stand, and the good countries, which treat men with dignity, respect and fairness, could well be out future home.
Comment by Phoenix — Mon 28th November 2011 @ 9:26 pm
a little island full of native chickies
Comment by Ford — Mon 28th November 2011 @ 9:40 pm
The knowledge that this is happening creates a future opportunity to invite Brazilian nationals who are well informed on the subject to speak in New Zealand. This sort of interaction might coincide with the repeal of one our most draconian pieces of legislation – the domestic violence act – which legalizes this behavior in New Zealand.
Comment by Down Under — Mon 28th November 2011 @ 9:43 pm
#39..Brazil it is then?
Comment by Ford — Mon 28th November 2011 @ 9:43 pm
Hi Ford #38
Absolutely no offense taken. In the global cause of justice; it is always useful to look at other legal precedents; just in case they have some relevance elsewhere. I like the Brazilian implementation of “parental alienation” laws; they are so simple and also just so sensible. I mean what is wrong with actually putting the kids needs first? It would seem it is too complex in it’s simplicity for the sandal and sock bureaucrats and law makers in NZ to get their tiny, myopic heads around. Just not enough fodder there to keep their snouts twitching!
Comment by Bruce S — Mon 28th November 2011 @ 9:51 pm
@Bruce S re #37 – What a concept.
Comment by Darryl X — Tue 29th November 2011 @ 12:15 am
@Skeptik – There are some good countries. But you’re lucky in NZ that they don’t take away your passports. So easier to live abroad. In many countries, a passport is needed to bank and get a driver license. Without a passport, you can’t get expat status but must live as an illegal, which isn’t a problem as long as they don’t deport you.
Some countries that I’ve considered are Cuba and Nicaragua. I had considered Costa Rica, but it is a feminist regime now too (sigh – don’t know how happy the general population is about that though). Panama is another possibility but it is too closely tied to the US – even uses US currency. Equador is also closely tied to the US and uses US currency.
Legal arms of the US are very long. It will give an axe murderer (sorry Murray) a US passport and send him abroad and let him live there before it gives a passport to someone in arrears for child support and allows them abroad. The US will pursue someone in arrears relentlessly.
It’s the malignant narcissism thing. Lack of analytical skills to conclude that an axe murderer is a liability to a population and that a child support obligor is not as much of a liability and may actually be an asset.
Addiction to power and control as they are more interested in pursuing child support obligors for money with which to manipulate others instead of axe murderers (sorry Murray) from whom there really is no law or mechanism with which to extract money. We live in frightening times.
Comment by Darryl X — Tue 29th November 2011 @ 12:41 am
I’m not convinced Brazil is the place to go. Not that their laws aren’t better when it comes to family and fathers. But their laws concerning expats and criminal justice I understand leave something to be desired. They have an absolutely brutal prison system, for instance. And to the extent that drugs and other serious crimes may not be a problem of record, I tend to think their record-keeping may be a little creative. All that being written, I wouldn’t dismiss Brazil as an option. It’s a big country with some remote areas. Portuguese as a language may present a problem for many. It’s a tough language. Cost of living at one time was pretty reasonable but I understand that is going up considerably and they are experiencing a credit crunch right now in response to the global economic crisis. I think their economic problems are just beginning, whereas ours in the west have been building for forty years. I’m looking into other options right now. Please present any other suggestions. I’m open to anything.
Comment by Darryl X — Tue 29th November 2011 @ 12:52 am
Here’s another great article at Fathers and Families concerning roll back of laws concerning rights of children to their fathers.
http://www.fathersandfamilies.org/?p=21524
And sorry to keep reiterating my objection to suspension of passports over child support but that is a fundamental freedom that must be protected and not denied over financial issues. When that happens, it allows those in control to abuse their power. It is a fundamental expression of fascism, denying those who are oppressed the right to escape their oppressors.
And as I’ve said over and over, my primary responsibility on this site is to advise any new visitors here of the possibility that passports may be suspended in their countries too, like in the US, over child support. I am here to remind anyone who cares that this measure is unacceptable and should be fought at every turn. I think I’ve posted enough about it for the past couple years so that anyone who visits here will encounter something I’ve written about it, and I will continue posting just to remind everyone of the draconian measures our leaders are resorting to for oppressing us and using our children as excuses for doing it.
It’s completely irrational to give a passport to a convicted or alleged axe-murderer (sorry Murray) but deny one to a child support obligor in arrears for no fault of his own. Can a system of oppression be any more obvious? We must cooperate to stop these developments. Where are the men in Sweden? Who’s stopping Swedish feminists? Why haven’t any other countries imposed sanctions agains Sweden? Or against the US and Australia for that matter? What’s happening here? Has this whole world collectively lost its mind?
Comment by Darryl X — Tue 29th November 2011 @ 5:00 am
I don’t think NZ is far behind Sweden as far as misandry goes in our legal and educational systems. The NZ Domestic Violence Act requires the Court to damage children’s relationships with a parent on the basis of nothing but another parent’s allegations until the accused parent can prove he is ‘safe’ i.e. a presumption of guilt unless innocence can be proven. Although the law is not written in gender-specific terms, the Court’s right to use a ‘balance of probablities’ standard of proof means that men are usually treated as guilty until they can prove innocence (and even if they do prove innocence it can make no difference to how they are treated) but women are not, given the judges’ ongoing chivalry as well as exposure to feminist propaganda that makes them believe men are responsible for most domestic violence under the unscientific patriarchal power and control model.
NZ police now routinely order men out of their homes on to the street at any woman’s whim, almost regardless of who had behaved violently or the more violently.
Men’s ability to defend themselves in Court against false or exaggerated accusations has been steadily eroded at all stages, from special care shown towards female complainants initially, police policy of believing female complainants by default including referring to them as ‘victims’ even before any victimhood has been established as fact, facilitation of complaints by, for example, helping to shape a story in ways more likely to impact on a jury, the right for police to proceed with prosecutions even when complainants recant or seek to stop prosecution (and this policy applied in a gender-biased way), special restrictions on cross-examination of complainants but only for crimes that men are primarily accused of, relieving complainants of the need to face their accused thereby making it easier for them to maintain dishonest allegations, allowing convictions on the basis of nothing but an accuser’s claims (but only for crimes that men are most likely to be accused of), redefining and vastly expanding the range of offences that men are more likely to be accused of, while all the time maintaining historically sexist offence categories such as male assaults female and infanticide.
NZ schools have gradually disposed of male teachers by defining any bad behaviour on their part as much worse than female teachers’ bad behaviour. Schools have also systematically demonized male characteristics such as their sexuality, bravery, risk-taking, preparedness to confront wrong-doers physically, instead promoting female characteristics, interests and priorities as the only morally correct ones. Like Sweden, NZ’s education system has done almost nothing to address male under-achievement relative to females.
And that’s just scratching the surface. In the near future we are likely to see more blatant sexism such as VAWA equivalents and new laws written in gender-specific and gender-discriminatory language. The brave voices such as those who write here on MENZ, those who undertake honest research, those who write letters to the editor etc, who monitor and expose misandry as it unfolds, are all that is holding back the feminist machine from the small distance it needs to catch up with and exceed Sweden’s misandry.
Comment by Hans Laven — Tue 29th November 2011 @ 8:58 am
.
Yes it has.
.
One principle we see with only surface observation is that the people of the West, as a civilization, have become so disconected from reality that many of them cannot even recognize what is real and what is fantasy anymore.
.
The feminist “equality” fantasy is a classic example of this. The world laps it up, but it is nothing more than a delusional fantasy.
.
One thing I am firmly convinced of is that people (men and women) of Western Civilization are rapidly losing the ability to think. Leisure activities used to involve the engagement of the brain, reading for example may be an escapist activity, like TV for example, but reading involved the use of the mind and imagination where as TV does not. We see this same phenomenon right across the board as leisure activities turn into amusement, and despite the perception that leisure, entertainment and amusement are the same they are in fact very different activities.
.
The clues to the difference between amusement and leisure lay in the origins of the words and it is amusement that gives us the clearest clues, the word amuse is composed of the root word “muse,” which means to think and was the name of the 9 Greek goddesses responsible for the arts) and the prefix “a,” one of the meanings of which (among others including to move toward) is to “not.” This indicates that one possible meaning for the word amuse is to not think. Amusement as an industry seems to bear tribute to this meaning as the whole industry appears to be designed to cause the population to stop thinking (it is nothing more than mental anesthetic, designed to numb the brain). Compare this to leisure activities where the brain still remains engaged, even in a different mental or physical environment and you will immediately see the difference between the two.
.
But here is the real point, the mind is like a muscle, if you don’t use it it atrophies; this is precisely what we are seeing in society in general; an entire society of dedicated non-thinkers. Governments of course love this, they can take what they like from the people and few will even realize that they are doing it. It is certainly in a governments best interest to keep their population as mentally impaired as they can, while not going over the top and making them non-productive. The standards set by governments when it comes to the food industry are a classic example of this in action, the standards of food are set by our governments, who show no concern at all for good nutrition being a necessity in the production of food. Without good nutruition the body cannot function properly, hence the mental facalties of the individual become impaired. Again, look around you at what our governments are doing and there is a remarkable tendency toward impairing the mental faculties of citizens.
.
Individual choice of course plays a part as well, as we are not entirely at the mercy of government and business, but it is becoming progressively difficult to live a life without some kind of interference pushing you toward the entrenched collective fantasies that the Western World is living in. The number of fantasies is huge, and they seems to be growing in number as time passes, building one fantasy on another, but in time, all of this will come crashing down when reality becomes undeniable. A house of cards is ALWAYS a house of cards, even if you pretend it is made of bricks and mortar.
.
So yes, I would say that deffinately the world has collectively lost its mind, and I think it is fair to say that the results of what is going on in the world at this stage speak for themselves.
Comment by Phoenix — Tue 29th November 2011 @ 9:03 am
oops. We are so screwed.
Comment by Darryl X — Tue 29th November 2011 @ 11:33 am
Hans,
I agree NZ is frighteningly close to being another Sweden.
A fuller picture of that can be obtained by listening to this week’s “Voice for men” Radio show devoted to the topic of Sweden – to be aired on Thursday.
It is likely to include interviews with Swedish Men’s Rights Activists such as Joakim Ramstedt.
Go here for the show and many other radio shows with a focus on Men’s Issues – Men Going their Own Way, False rape accusations, female stalkers, the pussy pass,the longevity gap, paternal alienation etc etc.
Some Good News
Interestingly Norway’s government has just abolished Women’s Studies for being politicized and ideological. The government cut all their funding. It will close next month.
This is after the airing of the TV series there called “Brainwash”. It is seven episodes and they can all be seen with english subtitles on Vimeo
http://vimeo.com/19707588
If asked for a password write ‘hjernevask’.
Caution – This will be disturbing viewing for some folks.
Comment by Skeptic — Tue 29th November 2011 @ 12:02 pm
Sorry,
I previously forgot to add the link to the A Voice For Men Radio Show to air on Thursdays.
Comment by Skeptic — Tue 29th November 2011 @ 12:12 pm
Male privilege.
Comment by Skeptic — Thu 1st December 2011 @ 2:23 pm
@Skeptik et al – Please find below an article concerning trials in the US of the new male contraceptive drug. Thought you might be interested.
http://www.fathersandfamilies.org/?p=21770
Comment by Darryl X — Sat 3rd December 2011 @ 4:57 am
Thanks for that link Darryl X, very interesting stuff. Lack of government or university interest in progressing this is another example of official apathy about men’s welfare and protection.
Comment by Hans Laven — Sat 3rd December 2011 @ 9:33 am
It’s interesting to compare the development of the female pill to that of the male contraceptives in “development.”
.
The first ideas for the female pill were concieved (pun intended) by Margret Sanger (a 72 year old feminist) who pushed for women’s rights to reproductive choice, something that at that time was condemmend by the catholic church. The process of developing the pill began in 1951 and the first version of it was produced in 1957, with the production and approval of Enovid by the FDA. This pill was officially marketed to help with menstrual problems, due to laws in the US that prevented it being able to be marketed as a contraceptive, however it did have the “side effect” of preventing ovulation listed on the bottle. Within a short period of time (pun again intended) 500,000 women had unexpectedly developed menstual problems so that they could go on the pill. The dose of hormones in Enovid “conincendently” was set at a level that would prevent ovulation 100% of the time. The pill was born. It would be developed further over the years and fine tuned, but the contraceptive pill for women existed from 1957, and from that moment forward steadily grew in its number of users.
.
Compare this to RISUG a male contraceptive. 18 years of trials after development and it is still not available to the public. Female pill 6 years, male RISUG 18 years and still counting. And we are still being told that it is about 5 years away.
Comment by Phoenix — Sat 3rd December 2011 @ 11:44 am
Sorry, forgot the link. Here is a great website to give the timeline of the female contraceptive pill.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/pill/timeline/timeline2.html
Comment by Phoenix — Sat 3rd December 2011 @ 11:46 am
Wow, Phoenix and Skeptik, I did not know the history for female oral contraception. It does shed light on the extreme disparities of treatment by the government and the public concerning male and female contraception (and responsibility). Perhaps that can be an argument in court. Well, your Honor, she has access to easy contraception and I don’t, so she’s responsible for the children and not me. Hmmmmm Can’t see that working too well now that I think about it.
Comment by Darryl X — Sun 4th December 2011 @ 4:41 am
Yes Darylx, I agree with you that the fact that women have numerous types of contraception available, and are even able to kill a child in their womb with impunity if they don’t want to carry it to term, therefore making them far more accountable for having children then men would not stand up as a reasonable argument in a “modern” court.
.
As we all know, logic, reason, fairness and (in some cases) the need for evidence to prove a case are no longer attributes of the legal system of Western countries.
Comment by Phoenix — Sun 4th December 2011 @ 7:07 am
it all sounds like a controlling game
Comment by Ford — Sun 4th December 2011 @ 9:24 am
2 great books for men which can be downloaded for free.
I think every man, but most especially young men should read these to get clued up and learn how to protect themselves from female game.
Both books caused a great stir when released and have been heavily suppressed by feminists everywhere.
The latter book was written by a Brazilian woman giving guys her unvarnished truth about relationships between men and women.
http://www.revolucionantifeminista.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/sex-ploytation.pdf
https://dontmarry.files.wordpress.com/2008/08/the_manipulated_man.pdf
Warning for the uninitiated – you may find both books very hard hitting and close to the bone, so may want to have supportive friends nearby when reading.
Comment by Skeptic — Sun 4th December 2011 @ 2:36 pm
So why is it Helen Clarke and other feminists idolize Sweden so much?
Comment by Skeptic — Sun 4th December 2011 @ 2:46 pm
Thanks for those references, Skeptik. Two other books I strongly recommend any young man read is Save The Males by Richard Doyle and Taken Into Custody: America’s War Against Fathers, Children And The Family by Stephen Baskerville. Large excerpts, if not the whole book, have been available on line in the past. Two more that I have always found helpful are The Law And Economics Of Child Support Payments by William Comanor and When She Was Bad: Violent Women And The Myth Of Innocence by Patricia Pearson. Mr Annonymous et al have identified and shared on this web site other great examples of literature documenting the male experience that are worth reading too.
Comment by Darryl X — Mon 5th December 2011 @ 1:46 am
DarrylX, I recommend Taken Into Custody too. This is far from academic but here’s a link to a song that I heard a group of five and six year olds singing in the weekend. It was one of the most moving tributes to men I’ve ever heard, made much better by the voices of young children
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wuq7MH71Nbg&feature=related
Comment by Doug — Tue 6th December 2011 @ 2:15 pm
Couldn’t find a post on general conspiracy theory stuff, but is discussed here.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/123980348/why-an-82yearold-turned-tagger-is-in-a-oneman-war-over-renewable-electricity
One of my favourite subjects, but I rarely comment on it.
Renewable energy, power creation, free energy.
You can look to see if he is correct by looking at your power supply on an oscilloscope.
As I’m involved in many experiments, I’ve never seen or heard what he is talking about.
Resonate frequency, yes as it’s a problem with sound, vibration.
There is transmission losses, and that loss is incorporated in our unit price.
I also remember a conversation about phase shifting.
How induction from motors interferes with supply.
The network perpetually having to compensate, to make supply correct.
The asynchronous motor is directly connected to supply, so a problem.
Many newer designs like far more efficient stepper motors, don’t.
They have control circuits, creating its own network.
IE single phase in, and run using a created 3 phase system.
As for renewable energy, we have no choice, due to the environment.
Each type creates its own issues.
Solar doesn’t create AC for example.
And a windmill may have an AC output with a variable frequency.
Due to rotation speed.
Hydro and geothermal are consistent, so different.
But I have faith in the industry not to want losses, as it effects profit.
And having worked with the scientists, I have faith in them.
In the article the industry says there is issues, so I see a level of honesty.
The creation of supply is very good.
And inherently the consumer creates flaws.
But his figure of loss seems exaggerated.
It is however important not to ignore criticism.
Even if it’s a conspiracy theory.
Does he see the truth when our prejudice blinds us.
Think of Galileo.
Comment by DJ Ward — Thu 4th February 2021 @ 7:28 am