Response from Minister
As expected the reply from the Associate Minister of Health Peter Dunne was a fob off, in response to my clear expose of anti-male gender bias by the Ministry of Health in the way it reports and responds to suicide. I publish Mr Dunne’s letter here for all to see the extent to which it denies, whitewashes, fails to address and lies about the Ministry’s gender bias.
When you write clearly about concerns to government, this kind of fob-off is the norm. However, that doesn’t mean your letter has been ineffective. Ministers and executives may not wish openly to admit the wrongdoings of their organisations, but behind the scenes things can happen that are reflected in future changed behaviour. For example, I have previously complained to ministers and others about gender-specific language when discussing violence (as if only women are ever victims and only men are ever offenders). Although I received letters like this one from Mr Dunne, full of patronizing stuff that doesn’t address the issues, I found that those same people later stopped using the gender-specific language.
What a load of piffle – and he takes 2 pages to say it! Now that is skill. Love to know what he proposes>
What do you expect from the Government?
If the people concerned is not OLD, YOUNG (child), FEMALE, GAY, LESBIAN, REFUGEE, or NON-WHITE, the Government is not interested and all it want’s is the TAX that is generated from these people that is NOT in the above list.
Similarly, if you ask our ruling feminists and collaborators:
“Do you know that almost all murderers were raised by single moms?
And almost all prostitutes?”
They will give you a meaningless answer.
And if you continue “but, you had basic criminology in your law course, how come you don’t know that?” they will get real angry.
Try it, it’s fun to test them (judges, police, educators, child protectors, clerics, politicians, media etc).
This shows that a dialogue with our ruling class is impossible. The only effective way to confront our feminist dictatorship:
1)rifle, 2)rifle butt, 3)bayonet.
A rather interesting experience in a previous existence, I was working behind the 4 walls and as an aside asked my small group (About 15) “Who knew their fathers?” Blank stares ensued! Spontaneous comments included “Aunties”, “Foster Mums” And numerous others. I had to divert the discussion, there were no good male role models in anybodies life 🙁 Shocked me. I have never tried to repeat the exercise!
Interesting. I have someone to thank. but then again what did he give up.
For me it was what did I Gain? I was asked some years ago if when the time came to raise my children would I still do it. Without question or pause my answer was YES. To me it was the most valuable thing I have done and very possibly will ever do for society
The Minstry’s Strategy document states that males are 3 or 4 times more likely to kill themselves. Then it states that this is not a gender issue. From that point on they do everything to dodge dealing with the male causes of suicide.
I don’t even follow their logic as they try to trivilise the male deaths.
“The explanation for the higher rate of death by suicide for males may not lie with gender-related
differences in tendencies to suicidal behaviour but, rather, with gender-related differences in the
choice of method used, with females more likely to use overdosing and males more likely to use
firearms, carbon monoxide poisoning and hanging. Furthermore, there is evidence in New Zealand
that gender differences in suicide rates are reducing. The male to female sex ratio reached a peak in
1990-1992 (4.2 male deaths for every female death), then decreased to a ratio of 3.2 male deaths
for every female death in 2001-2003 (Ministry of Health in press). This decline was largely explained
by an increasing rate of hanging in younger women. These considerations suggest that it would be
misleading to represent suicide as a Ã¢â‚¬Ëœgender issue’. Rather, policies need to recognise that suicidal
behaviour is an important issue for both genders and is expressed in gender-specific ways, with
women making more suicide attempts and males more often dying by suicide.”
In the “Action Plan” there is not a single goal or action item targeted at men or males. Not one.
Read for yourself:
A rational person would expect that the priority would be to save lives.
A rational person would expect that actual suicides would get most of the attention and priority over attempted suicides.
Therfore a rational person would teget males specifically in order to understand and address the majority group of people who are actually dying.
NZ is so feminised that it has barbaric outcomes.
Well observed Vman (#7). The Ministry of Health in its strategy is so determined not to care about suicidal men that it may as well send noosed ropes and exhaust hoses to all NZ males.
Previous exposure here on MENZ Issues of exactly what you observed was attached to my original letter to the Ministry of Health: http://menz.org.nz/2010/men-devalued-in-suicide-strategy/
Imagine if a major health initiative concerning a problem that kills more people than road accidents do showed such sexism against women! The outcry would be deafening, and rightly so, and those responsible would be required to answer for their sexism. But when it’s men who are neglected in a taxpayer funded strategy the minister, managers and authors feel able to ignore, dodge and dismiss men’s concerns. Incredible.
What options are men left with to try to get some justice?