Men’s Concerns are Gaining Traction
There is increasing evidence that men speaking up are gaining a little traction. The Labour Party leadership’s rapid retreat from the ‘man-ban’, sexist exclusion of men from electorates (that can only be described as a misandrist corruption of democracy) was one example. We believe that 2, or 5 or 10 years ago no male Labour person would have dared oppose such feminist privilege. But the population seems to be waking up to the unreliability and exaggeration of feminist propaganda. Most probably don’t look closely at it or think deeply about it, but their b.s. detectors are more active these days. The efforts are working, efforts of those who contribute analysis and comment here at MENZ Issues, who participate in democratic processes and who attempt to raise public awareness. Keep up the good work.
No man-ban, but something else: candidates
Laura McQuillan, NZ NewswireAugust 31, 2013, 4:54 pm
Labour leadership contender Grant Robertson has quickly shut down speculation he’s putting the controversial man-ban proposal on the table after promising a 50-50 gender split at next year’s election.
Mr Robertson made the promise at the first of 12 party meetings around the country, where he, David Cunliffe and Shane Jones are lobbying to take over the Labour leadership, after David Shearer announced his resignation earlier this month.
Mr Robertson gave no detail in his speech of how he planned to achieve a perfect gender split in caucus following the election, leading to speculation he would bring back the man-ban idea, which would see Labour have women-only electorates to boost equality.
The idea was scrapped by Labour’s national council after pushback by Mr Shearer and other caucus members, following ridicule over the proposal.
Mr Robertson says that’s not what he was intending in his speech.
“There’s lots of different ways of getting more women into politics,” he told media, dubbing the man-ban “a distraction”.
“We’ve got a range of mechanisms – we’ve got strategic selection criteria and we have fantastic people putting themselves up.”
Earlier in the week, Mr Robertson said it was up to party members to bring back the proposal at Labour’s November conference, if they desired it.
Mr Cunliffe says he’ll leave the mechanism for boosting female MP numbers up to the party, and doesn’t “hold a candle” for female-only selection.
“It can take a range of forms: it can be education, it can be gender equity checks as we’re constructing our lists, it can be guidance to [local electorate committees], it can be the development of candidates.”
Mr Jones agrees another mechanism is needed.
“I think we’ve got to attract a range of women candidates that up to date haven’t thought about Labour as their waka.
“The man-ban mechanism, I will not agree with. The outcome of bringing our wahine component up to 50 per cent and beyond, if it’s on merit, I’ll be your greatest supporter.”
The nz government has as much integrity as a piece of single ply toilet paper.
Every now and then there is a glimpse of hope in the media but I find those occasions short lived and the news soon returns to its usual anti-male, unbalanced reporting.
The issue Ã¢â‚¬Ëœportrayed’ as a man-ban might have not have gained traction but it would be naÃƒÂ¯ve to think it doesn’t still exist in another form; that is exactly what this article says – the intent is still there, we’ll find another way to achieve this. (It turns up as number hot potato in the leader’s debate. It has hardly gone away from within the party)
It is not hard to see that internal mechanisms such as funding cherry-picked women candidates but not men candidates could achieve the same thing. That in itself is a threat to the democratic process but it throws up another issue.
If Labour is intent on becoming an artificially contrived female party under our MMP system then post-election negotiations will include women-specific policy to Ã¢â‚¬Ëœadvance the status of women’ which is of course Ã¢â‚¬Ëœnecessary’ because they are so disadvantaged.
Having such a party as a coalition partner will not only change the gender percentages of parliament but also the nature of its debate and law-making. We’ve seen this too often already.
To me this is no cause for optimism but a big red flag – pun intended.
This article by Andrea Vance spells it out a little clearer. (One of the few journalists in New Zealand that still understand the meaning of the word.)
Labour – oh my god – what a bunch of two faced attention grabbers – one of their press articles recently quoted the father and child mission of “… fathers and mothers are supported equally and have access to the resources and help they need to work together for the welfare of their children.”
If in fact they were serious, they should abide by the UNROC wording and ensure that all funding of families is for the “parents” of the children, I would estimate that in NZ approximately 95% of govt money for parents is actually spent on, for or by mothers.
Meanwhile groups like father and child who have to try to provide information and support to all fathers struggle along on meagre funds from general charity funders and can never keep up with demand – 80-20 would be brilliant!
It is no surprise that David Cunliffe has been named leader of the Labour party. I would put money on his deputy being one of Labour’s women MP’s to try and mirror the Greens. Cunliffe is another Dunne when it comes to men so we shouldn’t expect anything from Labour.
He may have been chosen as the leader but not by the caucus, where he has minimal support. If his deputy is any good she (if I am right) will probably be the next leader of the Labour Party when Cunliffe gets toppled.