Letter to Judge Boshier, White Ribbon Campaign
FYI, our recent letter. Note also that the White Ribbon Campaign maintains a block on correspondence from people it doesn’t like to hear from. It soon blocks anyone who expresses criticism or concern about the campaign.
MINISTRY OF MEN’S AFFAIRS
MINITATANGA MO NGA TANE
A Community Group because successive governments have failed to respect the voice and welfare of New Zealand men
PO Box 13130
Judge Peter Boshier
Chairperson, White Ribbon Committee
NZ White Ribbon Campaign
07 June 2013
Dear Mr Boshier
Re: NZ Herald article: Boy, 15, dies after school rugby attack http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10888941
The Ministry of Men’s Affairs, a community group, holds the White Ribbon Campaign in part responsible for this act of violence towards a teenage male, and for other violence against NZ males.
That schoolboys continue to see violence towards males as acceptable is in part a consequence of the messages implied by your campaign. Those messages are:
(i) that violence towards males is not important enough to oppose;
(ii) that violence towards males is more acceptable than violence towards females;
(iii) that male victims of violence are not worth being concerned about;
(iv) that only female victims of violence are worthy of consideration and protection;
(v) that males in general are bad and should atone for their sinful maleness by standing up against other males;
(vi) that in situations involving women and violence, only males will ever be the violent party and fully to blame for the incidents.
The White Ribbon Campaign is a campaign of anti-male hate speech through implication, with the result that attitudes towards males are becoming increasingly callous and hostile. Out of this attitude we see males being abused, harmed and killed at increasing rates.
Further, the White Ribbon Campaign uses scarce government money in a way that excludes efforts to address violence towards males, leaving this much more serious problem to continue unchallenged and unabated.
Contrary to the implied and sometimes expressed claims of the White Ribbon Campaign, men are much more often the victims of violence and the most serious violence in our society. To go on promoting a campaign that focuses only on violence towards women may be compared to promoting a campaign that encourages people to act against breast cancer in males and that uses the state anti-breast cancer budget to this end, without any attention to breast cancer in females.
Congratulations on the success of your campaign in achieving its goals of developing contempt and hatred towards males. As you can see from the violent homicide of this Kelston Boys Highschool lad, our youth are picking up your ideology nicely.
“A Community Group because successive governments have failed to respect the voice and welfare of New Zealand men”
And why have they failed to do so?
Answer = Because MRAs have not threatened their power.
Judges rule in courtrooms. If Boshier wants to parade around the country running this idiotic taxpayer-funded campaign he should be locked up for contempt of court. If he wants to play politics he should step asaide as a judge you can’t be both, then again perhaps this is acceptable because we have a woman running the justic system.
I’m surprised that you blocked my comment.
Harry (#3): It seems that your comment was awaiting approval, I assume through an automatic filter that probably reacted to the multiple links in your comment. Thanks for the comment.
Hello Harry, or should we call you “Angry”?
I am honoured by your attention to MENZ.org.nz.
As MoMA says, this site moderates comments from unregistered users that have more than two links.
If you register as a contibutor (link to application form on this page: http://menz.org.nz/rules/), you will be able to include as many links as you want – and post new articles if you wish.
To fight anger with anger is foolish. Women simply want to drag males down to their level.
Congratulations to the ministry of mens affairs, there is more support than you realise, especially among the fairer sex.
Hah, I see.
Sorry for being such an idiot.
Post retirement extra curricular activity for Bosh…to be on TV and for his two minutes for fame.
It is just sad that some people will believe in him, rather than themselves.
Sadly the system is designed to send you down a path towards – which only leads one way and that is ultimately to react to provocation and sadly to react violently.
Here are my view after ten years……. after doing all the system asked of me, I am no better off, so I have legitimate questions of the entire system – the sham that it is.
The current system refuses to intervene and help prevent conflict, a service it offers by never delivers on – rather it actively helps stimulate and encourage more conflict so lawyers benefit at the expense of children and good parents.
The system currently allows attacks on your integrity character and reputation to go on unabated and unpunished – this is acceptable to the family court shambles because it encourages conflict and ultimately retaliation.
NZ family court actively encourages horrendous behavior – especially my disgruntled, bitter and twisted, narcissistic mothers looking to cause as much suffering to a father who has moved on and found a good woman. they hate that.
The family court actively allows these woman to use the child, to leverage property, spy on you and your new family, to hold children to ransom – like some property item you can see if you pay or meet all their unrealistic demands, wants and needs into the future.
The system refuses to enforce court orders for access to your own child – especially when your a father who has spent a fortune just getting them in place.
The family court allows provocation, victimization – all NZ men are violent and threatening and abusive according to the system, and false accusations to flourish – towards good fathers even when there is no evidence to suggest the allegations are in any way true – this is all good for the business of conflict.
When a father does all that is right, attends all the counseling, mediations, gets court orders, does all that is right and then finds the system will not enforce orders in his favor, will not assist him to see his own kid, will not protect his child from harm – direct harm which the system allows to go unabated,
and then after you have been through that ,
they then send in the child support nazis to take what ever you have left, by demanding payments over and above what you earn, and then threatening to take your property and that of your family – breaking into your property to get it with warrants issued in secret and then sell it at a no reserve auction – if you cant meet their demands – which you they know you wont be able to, more distress on your new family and the kids.
and then also make sure the human rights commission is prohibited from investigating every breach of your most basic human rights – thats right folks they are not allowed to investigate the govt – sound familiar – fascism is alive and well in NZ…….
So if someone ( sadly the someone is the mother and the family court / justice system ) actively prevents you from seeing your own child and also allows harm to be caused to that child and will not in any way assist you in those most basic rights, what is left for a father to do?????
Sadly in NZ, the path most dads are led down is to react and to react violently towards whoever is harming your kids – and thats just where they want you to be, so the perpetual business of making money out of good parents and fking up good kids is an acceptable part of their business plan. The business of conflict – For lawyers and Govt – Conflict and excessive child support demands push up penalties and currently justifies massive loans against it all – Wankers.
Your family is being eaten by the State tapeworm. You can’t cure it by yourself, by “fighting”.
The only cure is to find a way to purge this filth from family life; and that can only be done on a society-wide basis.
Remember Mates if you wish to be truthful about the “White Ribbon” campaign there is a group “White Ribbon Day Debate” on Face book who will only remove posts if they contain profanity or commercials!
It is run by John Brett!
Ted, we have walked away ,as hard as it is – we have not seen the child for a year now, mother refused to drop kid off as per court orders, police refused to help enforce those orders, cyfs refused to help, family court demanded more affidavits and papers to get a warrant to enforce there own fking order at more cost to me, more time wasted …… family holiday in ruins, my other kids miss seeing their half sister…… on and on it goes…no other company, service or business is allowed to get away with this. Only the legal system.
its like a legalised cancer….designed to keep good parents away from your kids unless you pay – that parasite Boshier to which this post refers – was in charge the entire time I had the misfortune of going through this sham….
What I want everyone to also take notice of – as in my case above – see point 10.
The new law changes are only designed to expand the catchment net – to include BOTH parents and any other legal guardian or care giver or partner to the child – gay or straight – that they can attack and demand money from under the guise of child support and when neither of you can meet their demands – they want to be able to take property from BOTH PARENTS to pay off or help fund their debt leveraged loan system.
That is the current system, and its going to get worse as govt debt increases – demand more from BOTH PARENTS as of next year – more than you can pay, increase penalties, and then when you cant pay or wont pay because you rebel against such an injustice – they will then seek judgements in closed court that you cannot challenge – allowing them to seize your personal property. FACT – Ive had it done to me and my family.
Wake up NZers this is bigger than just keeping dads away from thier kids – watch in 2014 how mums and dads, good parents are going to be raped of their property interests in the name of child support = and meeting demands to pay excessive penaltys – this has become an INDUSTRY built on enforced separation from your child.
In our case – FACT under this regime, they broke into my property and stole property from my family – my wifes family car for fks sake – which they had to return because it was illegally seized – property worth 3 times the value of the debt claimed and they had no hesitation in trying to sell it all at a no reserve auction – to which I had no recourse – unless I met the demands.
This is not justice, its legalised theft. Its govt extortion – there is no other way to describe it.
Some how this has to be made public and PARENTS must unite ( divided we fall ) against a totally corrupt system. – Family court, Justice and Child Support services.
thanks Al, but I refuse to join facebook – call me old fashioned but I dont see much good coming from that…..
On another note, I recently purchased an apple laptop – and in the Iphoto service – where you store and download your personal photos – there is a new software item which performs facial recognition on ALL YOUR personal photos – family and kids – and it then asks you to name everyone it detects in those photos….
So the system can identify where you took the photo – that info is imbedded in the photo from the global roaming, GPS coordinates in your phone / camera / Ipad – anywhere in the world.
The date time place, the photo was taken and now software on your PC is demanding you name everyone it detects in your personal photos…….. and there is no way to turn this off……..its a stock item in the photo management software.
And they want you to then store this information on ICLOUD – a storage system you have no control over. Why would you do that???
SO facial recognition software – cctv and surveillance systems, Govt and anyone who wants to know, can look you up and know everyone you know – from your photo album – anyone you had contact with or took a photo of anywhere in the world.
Is this a good thing??????? Personally I think its a massive invasion of your privacy.
I find it quite disappointing that most of you seem to extrapolate your own personal experiences and come up with the conclusion that women have it better than men, women are out to get men, and women don’t experience violence from men more often than men experience violence from women. The White Ribbon campaign does not promote violence against men. Anyone who knows anything about the campaign can surely see this, and those that do reach this conclusion must surely be blinded by their own prejudices.
Most violence against women is perpetrated by men, and most violence against men is perpetrated by men. So we could have a campaign that targets violent men instead of just violent men who attack women. And then what would the MENZ think?
Please base your decisions on facts not your feelings, life experiences and unreferenced stories you hear (a real lack of references on this site).
When the feminist inspired white feather campaign stops supporting only female victims and turning a blind eye to amount of male victims by regurgitating bullshit feminist advocacy ‘research’ as you have, then I might give some support to it. Until then it’s business as usual building safe male communities.
Here are some facts and references about domestic violence on this site for you Tracka: http://menz.org.nz/Information/dvresearch.htm
People who base their decisions on facts and not feelings know that men are more likely than women to be victims of domestic violence – plenty more references for you here: http://domesticviolenceresearch.org/
The White Ribbon Campaign promotes the interests of the feminist abuse industry; research actually shows a woman’s initiation of partner violence is the leading cause of female domestic violence injury (not available online):
Stith S, Smith DB, Penn CE, et al. Intimate partner physical abuse perpetration and victimization risk factors: A meta-analytic review. Aggression and Violent Behavior Vol. 10, 2004. pp. 65-98.
16 should we ignore our own personal experiences?
No we shouldn’t ignore our personal experiences; they usually involve someone else’s behaviour that shouldn’t have been allowed to happen. It certainly helps identify bad judges like Von what’s his name (the Criminal of Napier) and revenue leaches like Mark Miller. And if choose to do it here instead of in the pub or in our own head anyone else who doesn’t approve can get stuffed. If having an opinion of your own life experience is crime in a feminist country when the same concept isn’t applied to women the validity of the statement speaks for itself.
20 I agree
Just caught a piece of news on the radio where a New Zealand woman was jailed for seven years in Cairns Australia for beating her 8 year old daughter to death – the daughter’s crime was not doing the dishes and wanting to live with her father in New Zealand. The step-father was jailed for three years for not stopping the beating.
Is Pet Bosh’s affiliation with refuge is a clear reflection of his bias towards men when he was in principal’s position? Should his decisions during his tenure be reviewed by independent authority?
24 they should be but they won’t be. Is my guess.
Er that was for 23
Lawyers can become judges or politicians but once they’ve made that choice then the option to swap should be outlawed.
This is a step beyond jumping the waka and I can’t believe that the media has sat back and accepted the insult to the separation of powers.
The White Ribbon campaign is about reducing violence against women. So why would they promote violence against men? Any of you are quite free to start your own organisation to attempt to reduce violence against men but why should an existing organisation with an existing agenda start promoting what you want them to? It would be like me asking you to start promoting women’s rights and to fight to ensure that women receive equal pay, etc. Would you be up for it?
I don’t have access to the journal but (at 18) by quoting “research actually shows a woman’s initiation of partner violence is the leading cause of female domestic violence injury”, are you saying that the women started it and so deserved it? With only that sentence to go on, it seems like you are saying the women initiate the violence but then they are the ones that are injured. So are they met with greater violence than what they initiated and this is how are they injured? Are the men also injured?
And to 19, I’m not suggesting that anyone should ignore their personal experiences but your own experiences are not everyone’s. For example, if I was raped by a man from NZ, should I then extrapolate that to believe that all men from NZ are rapists? Of course not.
And finally, I don’t know what to make of some of the comments on this site. At 6 we have “Women simply want to drag males down to their level” On the Pussy Pass thread we have “Feminism originally claimed to seek equality but it has long been clear that equality is of little real interest to feminists. We seldom hear a single feminist voice acknowledging inequality when it favours women, or even acknowledging the many ways in which men are exploited and discriminated against”. Is this for real? All feminists want is equality, not special treatment. If there are women who are after special treatment because they are women, then they are not feminists. I’m a feminist and so are many men that I know. We are quite capable of acknowledging when men are treated unfairly. But does this mean we should fight that fight? Can women only have equal rights when everything else is perfect? It’s like expecting the Indigenous population of Australia to point out incidences where whites are discriminated against. I doubt they’d have the inclination or the energy after all the crap they have to put up with.
Sorry for the rant but this site has really opened my eyes to just how much men hate women.
22 That’s a tragic story. But is it proof that women are treated more leniently by the courts?
What about the father who repeatedly raped his daughter from when she was 9, and was given a good behaviour bond?
What about the man who was released on bail in Vic Aust after raping numerous women over many years, and ended up killing Jill Meagher?
Just because I quote a few cases, does it mean that men are treated more leniently in the courts? Or am I just cherry picking cases where poor decisions were made to try and prove a point? It’s quite easy to do and is meaningless.
where to start with your tedious feminist rant?
I think you entirely miss the point that The White Feather Campaign had a glorious opportunity to set themselves up from the start as inclusive of both sexes but chose instead to pander to women only. From the get go and ever since though, that feminist organization has deliberately turned a blind eye and a deaf ear to men’s pain.
I think you exemplify this with your white knight ‘statistics’, gynocentric leading questions and reasoning that reeks of 1980s style revenge feminism cult-speak. Disingenuously conflating advocacy for men as hatred for women adds misandric icing on the cake and only serves to prove the point further.
It is a tired dumb bullshit attempt to guilt trip which doesn’t work on the men and women I mix with these days.
When you can get off the high horse and really listen to men instead of coming here and trying to preach that somehow one of the most socially corrosive and toxic political forces in the modern world is somehow good, then I think you’ll garner a lot more respect.
Tracka (#28): You are correct that a few cherry-picked examples don’t amount to evidence of a general trend. And yes, you have cherry-picked a couple of examples of apparent lenience towards men but you had to go outside NZ for those. You might find more examples to suit your purpose in media from sharia-law countries. However, the general trend of the pussy pass, more lenient treatment of women than men for the same offending and at all stages of the NZ ‘justice’ system, is so consistent that it’s undeniable to any honest observer, even though men occasionally do receive lenient treatment too. Also, gender bias in sentencing has been established by objective research (e.g.
Jeffries, Garth, Fletcher and Newbold (2003). Pathways to sex-based differentiation in criminal court sentencing. Criminology; 41,2; 329-354.)
Yet into an internet group that focuses on men’s issues you stomp with your head firmly stuck in the ground (or perhaps somewhere darker and smellier) and assume that the content of our discussions must be invalid simply because it conflicts with your misinformed beliefs about gender matters based on widespread feminist propaganda.
At MENZ Issues we continue to draw attention to gender bias in sentencing, known affectionately as the pussy pass, that persists in its unfairness and injustice even though the authorities have long been made aware of it. Rather than cherry-picking occasional examples of pro-woman bias in the Courts, such cases confront us frequently and it is extremely rare to find any example against the trend. For example, two days ago this story appeared: “Casino scammer to be deported after avoiding jail”. Here we have a woman and her boyfriend who participate equally in a crime of dishonesty in a casino. In fact, the article makes it clear that the woman, not her male partner, was the one who initially approached the casino employee to set up the crime. But guess what? The male fully paid his share of reparation yet was sentenced to 5 months home detention (i.e. imprisonment). The female paid only a fraction of her share of reparation yet was sentenced to 350 hours community work, the judge deciding to treat her as ‘naive’! So the male’s punishment amounts to 3,650 hours of detention or more than ten times that for the woman for exactly the same offending that the woman was more responsible for setting up. Incredible but typical.
And what about this one? “Dog owner in court over attack on toddler” Here a dog is owned by a couple. The woman gets name suppression but the man is named. Well, serves him right for having a penis.
Here are a few other recent cases of blatant pussy passes:
1. 6-year-old dumped by bus driver. This female child abuser actually kept her job!
2. Man sentenced for false allegations. In a rare case of a male making what is decided were false sexual and other allegations, he is sentenced to prison for 2 years, 2 months. In the numerous cases where women make false sexual allegations, they are rarely prosecuted and we have never heard of a case in which a woman was imprisoned.
3. Man gets 3 years jail for punching baby. Actually, 3 years and 3 months imprisonment. Fair enough for this violent low-life. But consider this: his sentence for punching a baby is more than the MAXIMUM punishment available to women (and only to women) who KILL babies under the sexist law of Infanticide. And even when this woman was convicted of manslaughter of her baby rather than infanticide, she was given 2 years 6 months. Perhaps someone might argue that punching a baby is worse than killing it, but we believe the disparity relates to gender and to the much greater sympathy and compassion shown in our justice system towards female than male offenders.
4. “Woman drives from Hamilton to the Mount – asleep” This woman drove her car after taking sleeping medication and engaged in text messaging while she drove, but because she claimed not to remember any of it she wasn’t prosecuted. Police would simply have disbelieved any man who offered this excuse and they would have prosecuted any man in this situation, allowing him the opportunity to present medical experts to try to convince the Court that he was not culpable. But the pussy pass operates at every stage of our law-enforcement system.
5. “Bid to save dog angers parents of bitten boy” This woman owner of a fighting breed dog who mauled a young boy in a public place was discharged without conviction! Compare with this man who was convicted and made to pay $5000 even though his dog was chained up and attacked someone on his own property. Or with this man whose dogs attacked a neighbouring woman who had had “enticed them into their yard and closed the gate, returning a short time later with water”, thereby allowing them to escape and to attack her. This male dog owner was convicted and sentenced to 200 hours community service, 4 months community detention (i.e. a form of imprisonment) and ordered to pay $3400. Gender equality, NZ justice style.
6. “Mum-of-four burgled neighbour’s home”
This story oozes with pussy-pass sympathy for the female who broke into and stole from her neighbour’s house. She was sentenced to 100 hours community work and given “a stern telling off for her actions”! This lenient treatment was on the basis that she had no previous convictions FOR BURGLARY (suggesting she does have a criminal history). And when do we ever see a male offender referred to affectionately according to his parental status, e.g. ‘dad-of-four’?
Enough is enough?
Ministry, of course I agree that cases where people receive more lenient sentences or treatment just because they are female, are totally unfair and such treatment should not occur (eg, the casino scammers). That baby story is horrible and sad and, of course, if a woman did the same thing, she should be equally punished. In the dog attack case, the article says the woman’s name was suppressed for hardship reasons so without knowing the full story, it’s hard to comment.
In regards to the false accusations, there was a woman in the UK (not NZ I know) sentenced to 8 months when she pleaded guilty to falsely retracting true accusations of rape. Maybe the man in the article you linked was treated harshly because it was three police officers he was accusing?
And to Skeptic – “revenge feminism”, “guilt trip”, “one of the most socially corrosive and toxic political forces in the modern world” – wow!
And I’m not sure that I wish to garner the respect of anyone who uses the term “pussy pass” and claims it is affectionate. I notice that Ministry used the term “penis” when referring to the male genitalia but the female genitalia apparently does not deserve the same respect.
I don’t think I have mistaken “advocacy for men as hatred for women” at all. Some of the things I have read on this site indicate a clear hatred of women. Just a few posters, but they’re there.
I will not come back to this site as some things have just upset me too much. I am not closing my eyes to any unfairness where women are treated more leniently than men, I am aware that it happens, and I wish you guys good luck.
No, of course Tracka (#31) you won’t come back to this site because the truth is to upsetting to the ideology you have come with. So just stomp in, call us liars and women-haters (something we totally reject) then leave without participating in real debate concerning your attacks. Hey, thanks a lot.
Everything MoMA says plus good riddance.
I know it is always a bad idea to “feed the troll”, but since Tracka says she isn’t going to come back (yeah right) I’m going to respond to a few of her points.
The White Ribbon Campaign is not about reducing violence against women; it is about attracting funding, political power and personal prestige by promoting the perception that women are victims who need protection. They promote violence against both men and women by downplaying women’s greater initiation of domestic violence because their agenda is advanced when violence against women increases.
The White Ribbon Campaign is not run by community-minded volunteers, it attracts huge amounts of public funding from taxpayers and community organisations. Domestic violence should not be a gender issue; it is never OK no matter whether you are male or female.
No of course I don’t think that if women start violence they therefore “deserve’ the consequences; I think that if the White Ribbon Campaign was genuinely interested in reducing violence they would work to reduce all precipitating factors.
It is true that women get injured from domestic violence at greater rates than men, because on average, men are stronger. But yes, between 25% and 33% of domestic violence injuries are suffered by men. Data on this is not collected effectively, and there are many reasons why men under-report their victimisation.
There are no jobs in NZ where similarly qualified women get paid less than men; this would be against the law. If women overall chose to do the Dirty, Dangerous and Disgusting jobs at the same rate that men do, average pay would be equal. However, this is off-topic for this particular discussion.
“All feminists want is equality” – yeah right. If this were the case then I’d happily call myself a feminist.
I can only speak for myself, but I don’t hate women; in fact many of my best friends are of the feminine persuasion. Anyone who reads this site regularly will know that there are many women that I admire and whos work I promote. That was cheap shot that simply reveals Tracka’s trollish intentions.
‘Some of the things I have read on this site indicate a clear hatred of women…..”….Is that so Tracka…Well then, you as a Feminist maybe can explain to the so called women haters on here,all of these public quotes that where made by your world wide famous and revered Feminists….
For example, here are some quotes from famous feminists.
“I feel that Ã¢â‚¬Ëœman-hating’ is an honourable and viable political act, that the oppressed have a right to class-hatred against the class that is oppressing them.” – Robin Morgan, Ms. Magazine Editor
“To call a man an animal is to flatter him; he’s a machine, a walking dildo.” — Valerie Solanas
“I want to see a man beaten to a bloody pulp with a high-heel shoved in his mouth, like an apple in the mouth of a pig.” – Andrea Dworkin
“Rape is nothing more or less than a conscious process of intimidation by which all men keep all women in a state of fear” – Susan Brownmiller
“The more famous and powerful I get the more power I have to hurt men.” – Sharon Stone
“In a patriarchal society, all heterosexual intercourse is rape because women, as a group, are not strong enough to give meaningful consent.” – Catherine MacKinnon
“The proportion of men must be reduced to and maintained at approximately 10% of the human race.” – Sally Miller Gearhart
“Men who are unjustly accused of rape can sometimes gain from the experience.” – Catherine Comins
“All men are rapists and that’s all they are” – Marilyn French
“Probably the only place where a man can feel really secure is in a maximum security prison, except for the imminent threat of release.” – Germaine Greer.
So please come back to all us so called ‘women hater’s and have the gall to tell us that Feminism stands for true Equality….
Astute comments John Potter (#34), and it’s good to see your renewed energy for promoting ethical gender policies. And thanks John Dutchie (#35) for reminding us of those great quotes and testaments to equality, responsibility, fairness and peacefulness, FEMINIST STYLE.
Oh and by the way,as you are true feminist Tracka….please watch this video….And once again, please come back to all us so called vile and evil “women haters” and tell us feminism stands and represents true Equality……
“Feminism’s true colors”
Hans, of Ministry of Men’s Affairs,please have a look at this video too …I am sure you can use it when you deemed to be appropriate………
Well then Tracka whats the problem…..????…I still waiting for your feminist response to my posts..???…
White Ribbon appear to have claimed 20th September as ‘White Ribbon Day New Zealand’
White Ribbon is going to Manawatu College in Foxton this Friday and will be rolling out their new campaign.
Interesting that ‘their new campaign’ should be launced at a school and not to the general public. Is a school the only place that can find a captive audience?
Schools are meant to be where our kids learn, laugh and play – not have their formative minds filled with this political rubbish.
Good question Downunder. Maybe a complaint from the Ministry of Mens affairs to the Board of trusteeswould be inorder?
I suppose this would be linked to the health/lifeskills curriculum and participation is optional for schools.
Then it is probably done as a lunchtime optional event for students.
So, how many schools do they go to?
The question here is that the taxpayer is funding these people to go to taxpayer funded schools when teachers could teach a curriculum known to the parents, rather than other people teaching a political position to children outside of the curriculum.
Note the linking of their ‘New Zealand White Ribbon Day’ on September 20th which is the day after Women’s Suffrage Day.