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

Should I hug my daughter in public?

Filed under: General — OMG! you're f%^^&*($@#! @ 1:59 pm Sat 3rd November 2012
This is just sick. Wtf has our society come to?
This is anti-male bias at it’s best – or worst, which ever way you look at it. Welcome top New Zealand 2012.
I was out in public last week. With my daughter. She was clinging to me as little miss’s are prone to do.
The local community constable saw us. I remember him. He looked at me kinda funny once or twice.
Why? Well my daughter was holding my hand. Occasionally threw her arm around me. Enven pronounced to me at least twice ‘I love you daddy’.
Should I be worried? When are the boys in blue coming to lock me up?


  1. I can so relate to this. I still put my daughter on my shoulders out in public. Most people are good about it. Even say my daughter is well behaved. But yes I have others who look at me strange as if wheres her mom. I have even been asked while out where her mom is. Whats up with that? There is nothing wrong with holding hands and yes my daughter hugs me and says ‘I love you Daddy’ sometimes real loud.

    I often wonder how soon will it be before being Dad is nothing more than a cash cow. DPB shouldnt be the life style these moms take on so easily. In fact if shared care is in place, no one should be able to claim DPB. Thats not in the best interest of the child is it.

    Comment by 2c worth — Sat 3rd November 2012 @ 3:00 pm

  2. I’m just glad my kids are grown up. This is just sick. Next thing they be arresting grandfathers and probably Father Christmas too for sitting kids on their knee.

    Comment by Down Under — Sat 3rd November 2012 @ 3:53 pm

  3. What a massive amount of damage has been done to that family and those children! Someone needs to be held to account. At the very least there needs to be recognition that these false allegation do a lot of harm to children.

    Comment by V_man — Sat 3rd November 2012 @ 3:53 pm

  4. omg!
    down under #3 – father christmas hasn’t been allowed to have kids sit on his knees for years already now. Must keep his hands in white gloves in front of him for all the world (i.e. paranoid femi-mums) to see. Look not a spec of kiddie dust on him.
    Back to the article. This is New Zealand? I’m lost for words. For so long this crap has been in America and beyond. But on our doorstep???? I’m lost for words.

    Comment by Rock Paper & Scissors — Sat 3rd November 2012 @ 4:33 pm

  5. Sick, just sick.

    Comment by Scott B — Sat 3rd November 2012 @ 4:33 pm

  6. Dam Thing like this happens because there are too many women politician in Parliament?

    Ya this shows clearly New Zealand is Anti male society.

    Next thing you will see is Man walking out from family or No wanting daughter.

    No wonder Man do not want to be married it’s curse rather then blessing.

    Only be only blessing for women.

    Comment by Shinhee Yi — Sat 3rd November 2012 @ 4:52 pm

  7. You would think Sue Bradford would be in here like a robber’s dog protesting about women’s reproductive rights. Here is the mother happily living her life with the father of her choice, she said there was nothing wrong, she was a happy camper.

    You can see how the State and the money bitch have everything in common.

    Comment by Down Under — Sat 3rd November 2012 @ 5:19 pm

  8. An interesting fact to know would be….
    When did this couple seperate? Was it before the police visit in march?

    Even though she says she supports her ex now, there could be a little behind the scenes winding up of the original issue that was dropped at the time?

    Comment by Screwed — Sat 3rd November 2012 @ 8:15 pm

  9. Given his ex supports him, it’s unlikely she wanted him out, or pushed the ‘oh my god you fiddled our daughter’ line.
    Given the usual dv protection order crap, he probably had to move out to ‘stop’ contact with his ‘victim’; that’d kill any marriage.
    I blame the pc-gone-mad femi-justice system and the femi-leckie-police for supporting it against all evidence to the contrary.
    I think I’ll just stop being seen with my daughter out in public. Imagine a man seen alone with a girl in public, in a mall, or whereever. Clear evidence he’s up to no good!
    Fuck the world. I want to get off.

    Comment by Rock Paper & Scissors — Sat 3rd November 2012 @ 8:32 pm

  10. Incredible. The journalist Laura Basham deserves commendation for exposing this appalling state abuse. The saga raises several issues. Firstly, definitions of ‘sexual assault’ and other sexual crimes have been expanded to be able to be applied to almost any contact. A sexual offence previously had to involve touching of genitals or a few other erogenous zones, but now touching any part of the body can be construed as sexual. Similarly, almost any interaction a man has with a child can be categorized as ‘sexual grooming’ or a raft of other recently-invented ‘sexual intention’ crimes. Secondly, the police have been heavily indoctrinated by misandrist feminist groups and carry that ideology into their work. Thirdly, offences more likely to be committed by men have been steadily elevated to demon status with ever-increasing sentences that exceed penalties for murder and seriously physically disabling crimes (our government is right now giving the state the power to detain men in jail for ten years more than the sentence already determined by a Court). Fourth, the public have been so indoctrinated by ‘peds under the beds’ McCarthy-type ideas and ‘all men are rapists’ feminist mythology that affectionate behaviour by a man runs the risk of being seen as ‘inappropriate’ by normal people.

    Of course sexual exploitation should be punished, but the current witch-hunt, moral panic around this issue may only make the problem worse by creating a mystique around the behaviour, putting the idea into the minds of people who otherwise would not think about such offending, and for some turning it into another cops-and-robbers, ‘can I get away with this’ game.

    Comment by Luther Blissett — Sat 3rd November 2012 @ 10:17 pm

  11. um, my daughter is 10. How old is too old to still be holding my hand in public?

    Comment by concerned dad — Sun 4th November 2012 @ 6:56 am

  12. Shocking article.

    Comment by Divorced Man — Sun 4th November 2012 @ 7:56 am

  13. Grandfather charged with sexual assault.

    And can you tell us what you observed constable.

    Well the grandfather was carrying the child and his head was close to hers. In my opinion she would have felt his hot breath on her cheek.

    Prosecutor’s submission to the new domestic violence court.

    Your Honour. As you see can see there is clear evidence of the predatory nature of the sexual offending against a defenseless child and we would be seeking an appropriate jail term along with an order preventing future contact.

    Judge. Very well. Five years imprisonment but I will allow supervised contact on release, should it be the wish of the child, and provided of course that the offender does not breathe while in the presence of the child.

    Defendant. I knew I should have got out of this place before there were any grandchildren.

    Comment by Down Under — Sun 4th November 2012 @ 8:35 am

  14. You forgot the lawyer of the children. The lawyer will interview them and get “the facts”

    Comment by Divorced Man — Sun 4th November 2012 @ 9:14 am

  15. The lawyer for child doesn’t feature is this case. The point is that the crime is no longer a matter of intent and evidence of actions. A conviction is by an opinion of circumstance.

    Comment by Down Under — Sun 4th November 2012 @ 9:35 am

  16. I was sarcastic, because same applies for facts… you know I heard of someone lifting a knife and cutting someone else. He was bleeding, so the police came to arrest him. They interviewed the people that evidented the incident and confirmed that that person was using a knife to cut the other guy. They brought them to court. At court they sentenced him for 5 years in prison – however they forgot that the job of a surgeon is to cut people!!

    This is of course a story, but what I’m trying to say that today’s system is manipulating the facts to a level of absurd especially then it comes to the job of fathers.

    Comment by Divorced Man — Sun 4th November 2012 @ 9:44 am

  17. We are not talking about the same thing here – it is not merely a manipulation or selective approach to the facts “The intent” is no longer created by the mind of the defendant but in the mind of accuser. It’s the legal equivalent of all men are rapists because the case is based on an established set of predetermined thoughts for men.

    If you put this in context of the original news article where it states that the incident is attended by police and witnesses are spoken to and a file is created but prosecution occurs some time after. Action was not taken at the time because the attending officers did not establish intent. The allegation is that the behaviour was of a sexual nature not a familial nature and therefore unacceptable between two individuals regardless of their biological relationship.

    If you concentrate solely on the manipulation of facts you reduce this situation to an intention to gain a conviction and a lowering of the threshold at which a prosecution should be taken which is your point in relation to the surgeon where a set of facts existed that would be put before the court regardless of the logic or stupidly of the process.

    Comment by Down Under — Sun 4th November 2012 @ 10:54 am

  18. That’s exactly how it is done in court: they used specific facts in a sensible way, but when they want to manipulate the facts for their own needs, they do it as well. Some things are “obvious” and then the court does not require “evidences” and then suddenly when they are not happy with another thing, they ask for “evidences”. I experienced it myself just last week in Family court, and nothing can convince me that it was a justified process. They do it also in regard to the law, it is called “interpretation of the law”. Lucky you it looks like you haven’t experienced it. The police just want some headlines, basically they are not as bad as the judicial system since the police required to be “the bad guy” i.e. to act even if there is a reasonable doubt. In that sense, they are doing their job. Court needs to be the balance for that. Court needs to be the one that looking for the truth and the sensible explanation of things beyond reasonable doubt (and most of all, beyond manipulations of lawyers).

    Comment by Divorced Man — Sun 4th November 2012 @ 11:45 am

  19. The family court is a civil jurisdiction; this father was prosecuted in our criminal jurisdiction.

    It is not up to the police to be the bad guy but be professional in their behaviour. However if our courts accept this approach to prosecution then the burden of proof is also being manipulated downwards from reasonable doubt to a balance of less than probable.

    That’s guilt by proclamation and that’s an untenable circumstance for any father to live with.

    I don’t here civil liberties shouting the house down over this one.

    Comment by Down Under — Sun 4th November 2012 @ 12:39 pm

  20. Here’s another interesting case. Historical charges are pressed by this woman at a time when she just happens to be trying to fleece her ex of a good proportion of his hard earned assets. Truth is that if a man complained to the police about a similar incident that had JUST HAPPENED involving a female accused, police would be likely to get the woman’s story and quickly refuse to take the matter further. But when a woman makes a complaint years later at a time that she is a litigant against the accused male, police take it all the way and the Court treats the man as if he’s guilty already.

    Comment by Luther Blissett — Sun 4th November 2012 @ 1:09 pm

  21. Reminds me of the stupid misandric twit of a senior teacher supervising me, then a teacher trainee. On day one arriving in class I witness her sitting all the kids down and telling them about a bright red plastic post box she’d placed on her desks – “If any of you have concerns you can drop me a note.” My gut turned hearing that. It was obvious that in her vacuous way she saw me a a potential threat to the children simply for being male. To my shame I kept quiet about that at the time. These days I’d report her for blatant sexism demonizing men. And they wonder why there are diminishing numbers of men working as Primary School Teachers.
    BTW I’m a teacher in a culture overseas where IT IS EXPECTED THAT TEACHERS SHOW PHYSICAL (non sexual) AFFECTION towards the children they teach. It makes New Zealand look insanely hysterical by contrast.

    Comment by Skeptic — Sun 4th November 2012 @ 1:24 pm

  22. FYI, our letter to Laura Basham, journalist:


    PO Box 13130, Tauranga 3141
    [email protected]

    4 November 2012

    Ms Laura Basham
    Chief Reporter
    Nelson Mail Newspaper
    Sent via email to: [email protected]

    Dear Ms Basham

    The Ministry of Men’s Affairs (a community group to protect the welfare of men because successive governments have failed to do so) is grateful to you for bringing this appalling account of NZ state abuse to the public’s attention. It was a well-written piece of journalism that highlighted the anti-male nature of the events and attempted to investigate them by obtaining several sides of the story.

    We have a couple of questions that I wonder if you would be able/prepared to answer for us. First, did the wife break up the family BEFORE the charges were laid or AFTER, during the time that the accused was disallowed from participating in the family and children’s lives (or during the time after 8 months in which he was allowed 1 hour supervised contact (per fortnight presumably as normal) with two of his children)? Second, would the accused (now acquitted) be prepared to share with the Ministry of Men’s Affairs the summary of facts describing the actual behaviours that were construed by the police as amounting to sexual abuse?

    It seems to us that the only child abuse in this situation was done by the state. It’s sad that the state would sacrifice the welfare of these children in its zeal to convict a man. The ‘complainant’ child was disbelieved, interrogated (probably repeatedly) during which she will have been pressured and manipulated to provide the authorities with dirt on her father, her relationship with the only biological father she will ever have was seriously damaged and her family unit was probably stressed beyond breaking point.

    Well done for your great work. Following is a selection of comments made on the blog MENZ Issues concerning your story.

    Yours faithfully

    Hans Laven
    Chief Executive
    Ministry of Men’s Affairs

    Comment by Hans Laven — Sun 4th November 2012 @ 2:23 pm

  23. And another commendation was due for the story Luther Blisset (#20) brought to our attention:

    Dear Ms Johnson

    The Ministry of Men’s Affairs (a community group to protect the welfare of men because successive governments have failed to do so) applauds you for the manner in which you brought this sad news to the public’s attention. We congratulate you especially for making clear the context in which this complaint was made, and for raising through implication the possibility that the complaint was motivated by greed in a dispute regarding relationship property.

    We regret that any statute of limitations regarding time elapsed has been removed for this kind of complaint. Further, we believe that if a man made the same complaint against a woman in the same circumstances, police would give weight to her explanation and would soon close the case. That is, we believe that the police’s pursual of this case and indeed the legal mechanism enabling them to do so have arisen out of discriminatory attitudes against men.

    Thank you again for your work.

    Yours sincerely

    Hans Laven
    Chief Executive
    Ministry of Men’s Affairs

    Comment by Hans Laven — Sun 4th November 2012 @ 2:47 pm

  24. Reply to Skeptic #21

    I think this would a excellent topic for “Voice for men”

    Kind regards to all… John Dutchie… Free at long last from the Feminist hellhole called N.Z….

    Comment by johndutchie — Sun 4th November 2012 @ 6:03 pm

  25. Reply to Skeptic #21….whoops my mistake

    I think this would a excellent topic for ‘A voice for men’

    Kind regards to all”¦ John Dutchie”¦ Free at long last from the Feminist hellhole called N.Z”¦.

    Comment by johndutchie — Sun 4th November 2012 @ 6:04 pm

  26. Sick, sick, sick. I lost any respect for NZ Police years ago. One of my children (who I don’t have contact with) told me some years ago that he had been physically assaulted by 2 teachers at school. My ex wife refused to discuss the issue (she has refused to speak to me for 9 years) with me as did the school in keeping with its policy of not communicating wih non custodial parents. I made a formal complaint with the Police. After a very long period of hearing nothing I called and was pushed from pillar to post. Finally I was told that no further action was to be taken because my ex wife who the Police had consulted as custodial parent didn’t want the matter taken any further! When I objected I was roundly abused by the officer in charge who denigrated me as being a typically self centered dead beat.
    But also compare the treatment of this poor fellow with that meated out to the so called well known comedian who pled gulity to sexually assaulting his 4 year old daughter. Judge Phillipa Cunningham discharged him without conviction on the basis that “he made people laugh” (Daughter excepted of course) and was allowed to go back home to live under the same roof as the child he had interfered with! An obscenity or what? The legal system and the Police are a joke………But this case is only the tip of the iceberg I am sure.

    Comment by Non Custodial Dad — Sun 4th November 2012 @ 6:06 pm

  27. Oops, sorry. “Meated” should be “meted”! Finger too fast!!!

    Comment by Non Custodial Dad — Sun 4th November 2012 @ 6:10 pm

  28. Hi Divorced Man,
    I see you have experienced Peter Harrison at Review.
    If you wish to talk about appeal or complaint I am open to hear more.
    [email protected]

    Comment by Allan Harvey — Sun 4th November 2012 @ 7:59 pm

  29. Hi Allan –

    It was in 2010 but honestly I’m still in a trauma from him. I applied after it and just recently applied to family court and we are still in hearing. I got to a state that I didn’t have money to buy food (while working and earning much more than the average salary) so all that and what con-sequenced brought me here (and to my web site).

    So I don’t think I could appeal – it was long time ago, but I hope court will cancel some of the issues popped after.

    I will email you at some point. Thanks for letting me know his name…. it does not appear in the documents!!

    Comment by Divorced Man — Sun 4th November 2012 @ 10:10 pm

  30. the one thing i have never done is shown affection to my kids in public..especially when they were young kids..too many sticky beak trouble making know-alls in the world think they have all the answers..any contact of any kind can lead to a criminal conviction all depending on the mouth thats making the story and im not going to jail for any bitch

    Comment by Ford — Mon 5th November 2012 @ 7:08 am

  31. p.s..i stopped hugging my kids in public 18 yrs for the article people are a bit slow on it if they have only just thought about it
    another thing i avoid is having pictures of me hugging my kids..tired of bullshit unfounded allegations from manipulating losers

    Comment by Ford — Mon 5th November 2012 @ 7:17 am

  32. Reply to Ford#30

    Have emailed this despicable story with a link,to “Angry Harry” and “”

    And to all of you beloved vile Kiwi feminists employed at “The ministry of women’s affairs” in Wellington…Having a good gloat session are you..????.May the lot of you rot in your feminist hellhole….

    Kind regards…..John Dutchie….Free at long last from the feminist cesspit called N.Z

    Comment by johndutchie — Mon 5th November 2012 @ 7:19 am

  33. Hug and kiss them with wild abandon.

    We need to claim the space to love our children back and that means attacking these perverts the moment they do or say anything untoward. They are the ones with the problem which is hurting your family and our community.
    Just like attacking an intruder that comes into our homes in the middle of the night. Knock them for a six so they never ever come back.

    Comment by David Jade Young — Mon 5th November 2012 @ 7:20 am

  34. If I still had access to my children I would still hug and kiss them in public. No-one would tell me to stop.

    Comment by Scott B — Mon 5th November 2012 @ 9:00 am

  35. If it wouldn’t damage the children I would suggest if any woman or do gooder came up and accused you of something innappropriate to yell very loudly so others could hear… “Get away from my child you pervert! You are sick!”

    Comment by Scott B — Mon 5th November 2012 @ 9:04 am

  36. This father needs to find out who all the witnesses were – make official information act requests and then pursue each one with defamation proceedings – this is just crazy – especially when the mother of the child is very supportive of the father and how he shows affection with and from his kids.

    Hug and kiss your kids as much as you can and when ever you want to. My children show a lot of affection towards me – when the psychologist visited to perform a family court home inspection – when investigating concerns for my other child and the mothers BAD behaviour and unfounded allegations = she noted my children were all VERY WELL BONDED to both parents ( my wife and I ) and we and the kids were exhibiting NORMAL family affection behavior…… fact she went on to say, that most kids she sees are not at all bonded to the parents – especially separated mothers – more interested in themselves than the kid – who usually always show clear separation issues – as opposed to a good dad loving his kids.

    have we moved so far – that normal good relationships with our kids is NO LONGER the norm????

    these arseholes who make such unfounded allegations against a good father need to be exposed and prosecuted…….

    Im sorry but anyone making these allegations against me would have met with a very invasive discussion.

    Comment by hornet — Mon 5th November 2012 @ 4:51 pm

  37. Agreed Hornet. The real perverted ones were the ones making the complaint, not the father.

    Comment by Scott B — Mon 5th November 2012 @ 5:18 pm

  38. I had an discussion with an acquaintance recently, that touched on the false sexual abuse complaints and paedophile/rapist insinuations that were laid on really thick in the 80’s.

    She told me “It was necessary, for women to create space for themselves.”

    A disturbing piece of information. But thinking about that more an more, what is it that men can do to create space for themselves?

    Comment by David Jade Young — Mon 5th November 2012 @ 7:45 pm

  39. There is creating space and then there is creating paranoia and harm into peoples lives. Space is not what they were after.

    Comment by Scott B — Mon 5th November 2012 @ 8:02 pm

  40. #32..john D..when my first child was a baby my x stripped her off and was going to put her in the bath with me and she mentioned getting a camera to take a snapshot of a loving father and instant reaction was to say…’not f#@ken likely’ and got out of that situation as fast as possible

    Comment by Ford — Tue 6th November 2012 @ 7:39 am

  41. #39..i can certainly relate to living with an air of paranoia and fear of what could be falsely stated against me..what comes out of a womans mouth can be scary shit..women need to be penalised for their lies and trouble they cause men..most of them would have a conviction then

    Comment by Ford — Tue 6th November 2012 @ 7:43 am

  42. 41 yes it is all too easy for women to cry foul, even for just looking at them, or worse doing/saying nothing at all and for the men to punished in a number of ways. What can men do? Even when women’s lies are exposed there are no consequences.

    Comment by Scott B — Tue 6th November 2012 @ 8:29 am

  43. Ford, you did the right thing. Just as well you thought about it.

    Comment by Scott B — Tue 6th November 2012 @ 1:04 pm

  44. #42..i asked a woman out a few years ago at the local gym..polite and civil i was..she was 25 at the time and me 45..well the shit storm that caused..i had her father and brother threatening me.. after i talked to the gym owner about the adverse reaction i got he informed me he knew and had me under observation..that as i have learned seems to be the normal reaction from females who attract attention from an admirer..manipulating nutjobs..
    i also had a female call the cops on me for robbing her house..turns out is was kids that stole her boys play station and gameboy and i was innocent of all this day i have never received an apology

    Comment by Ford — Tue 6th November 2012 @ 1:37 pm

  45. 44. Tis a sad country we live in. I’ve had women yell at me when all I was trying to do was politely ask for directions!

    Comment by Scott B — Tue 6th November 2012 @ 1:59 pm

  46. #45..and they wonder why they get verbally abused

    Comment by Ford — Tue 6th November 2012 @ 2:01 pm

  47. They seemed to think “Can you please show me how to get to whatever st?” was code for “let’s go have sex, where I can degrade you and then treat you like dirt”

    Comment by Scott B — Tue 6th November 2012 @ 2:05 pm

  48. You lads need to travel = this place is full of self important stuck up ice bergs – go to norway – the young chicks love older guys…. its socially acceptable to date different age groups and they will have sex with you, and will enjoy it – now theres a thing…….they actually enjoy it…..and will not complain……..a mate of mine said years ago, why did he waste all those years in his prime – chasing pear shaped sad sacks in NZ, when he could have been travelling europe chasing glamours who enjoyed it…….

    Comment by hornet — Tue 6th November 2012 @ 3:07 pm

  49. #48..your mate was probably financially screwed by our illustrious govt he couldnt afford to go anywhere

    Comment by Ford — Tue 6th November 2012 @ 3:16 pm

  50. if this is what NZ has come to then i fully sympathise with the guy who literally pissed on NZ flag in the 90’s…

    Comment by kirannjiharr — Tue 6th November 2012 @ 4:47 pm

  51. 2005 Tame Iti shot the nz flag with a shotgun in protest..should have set fire to it

    Comment by Ford — Tue 6th November 2012 @ 5:58 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