2014 for men in New Zealand
New Zealand is not a country that has a great deal of respect for it’s men – well those it still has.
It shows in the country’s demographics with the ratio to women in some areas now as low as 87:100. Men are happy to leave, find more congenial environments, and not come back.
Many will not return, as they are now a criminal in their homeland, liable to arrest for not paying the state debt for their education or child tax.
Even amongst those that remain, physical presence is not necessarily accompanied by any spirit of patriotism.
But, it still houses a society that feminists will continue to love and glorify; they will, so long as it can afford their insatiable sense of entitlement and endless demands.
Has this year been any different?
Politicians continue to ingratiate themselves for the female vote; the leader of the opposition opening his party’s election campaign by apologising for being a man.
The harvesting of tall poppies continues, with the exit of Roger Sutton from the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority, tarred with the coat tail of sexual harassment (even though he didn’t come anywhere near close to the legal threshold of this crime).
Yes, the law of a woman said so, is alive and well.
The sympathy train is still running on time, with criminality amongst women trivialised at every opportunity. Yes, what did happen to that woman who … yes, that case did just disappear from the news, didn’t it.
Our obsessive feminist media continue to censor male opinion whilst religiously pursuing any news that vilifies men, and glorifies women – it’s reached the level of hate campaign.
Speaking of hate campaigns, the disgraced former Family Court principal judge who now leads New Zealand’s White Ribbon Campaign has been proposed as one of the nominees for New Zealander of the year.
The saints of feminism held high.
So, did men have any wins in New Zealand this year, or were we served up more of the same-old same-old feminist parc?
Will 2015 be any different?
Good points down under.
I’ve thought it time to recognize those people who have performed great deeds in the fight for men’s rights.
For 2014, my candidates would be:
Best male role model. Robin Williams, whose life as an entertainer and father gave joy to the public and to his children. And whose death showed the western world how much stress a man is placed under in divorce.
Best female defending men’s rights. Whoopi Goldberg, who ignores the femnazi call and instead sees and says things how they are. She recently defended 2 men who had been subjected to violence on a subway and who retaliated as a result of the constant harassment they were receiving from 2 women.
You may note I haven’t mentioned any New Zealanders. I’m about to…
@Downunder mentioned the former principal family court judge.
I would nominate him as one of many for..
Worst male role model. Ever.
A very good post, downunder.
What puzzles me, is why so few men are protesting, or agitating for change, or even talking about it. Or is this just a wrong perception, because of the overwhelming hostility towards men’s rights, and the almost total censorship by feminist gatekeepers ?
I wonder if men are in the same position as blacks where in the USA, before the civil rights movement?
I also wonder where it is going to end. Is going to be like India, where there is a well organised caste system, which keeps the powerful with power, assets and privilege, carefully harvested from the lower castes? Where the ideology of discrimination has been sanctioned by religion ?
Are men aware that more and more job niches are excluding them? ( I went to the city council recently, and every employee, including the building advisors, were female. Another job sector dominated by sexist practices)
Perhaps it is just too hard for the average man, just trying to find training courses where is not reviled; jobs where he is even gets an interview; hanging on to a relationship where, when the chips are down, all power lies with his female partner.
I wonder if there will ever come a time, when men collectively will revolt ?
I don’t see any signs of this.
You can close your eyes to the things you don’t want to see, but you can’t close your heart to the things you don’t want to feel.
A feminist world operates under the illusion that men are not human.
While the feminist imperative is the mainstream narrative, let’s not forget that 2014 was a terrible year for feminism, & in no small part thanks to the efforts of men & a small group of women who fact-checked the feminist claims of oppression & disadvantage, which have been proven emphatically to be non-existent. Feminism as a movement took a big hit this year, all because men continued to campaign citing the relevant data that disproves it’s cause. The narrative may never disappear, however by continuing to rebut the baseless arguments of feminists, reminding them that all they are doing is trying to pedestalize the experience of women over all other groups & backing this with evidence in public forums, the credibility of such arguments will slowly begin to fall away. This is the very least we can do as a group.
That’s a swinging pendulum argument, but that doesn’t help your average Joe who is dog tucker to the civil system.
Why would any reasonable person want to spend their life rebutting baseless arguments just because it suits a few feminists?
FFS is this what women expect?
Joseph (#2). Yes, it is puzzling why so few men are protesting. When we mount and advertise street campaigns or campaigns outside parliament, for example encouraging people to reject the sexist White Fibbin’ campaign or calling for gender equality in family law, very few men ever turn up to show support. Some have turned up and good on them. Why the poor turnouts, who knows? Fear of consequences perhaps? Failure by media to report on these campaigns plays a part. If the campaigns were to achieve some publicity they may well begin to snowball (as they started to back in the late 90’s and early 2000’s, but publicity dried up after that). The publicity back then was based mainly on airing criticism of the more violent and provocative behaviour of the protesters, for example, targeting the private residences of judges and lawyers or assailing individual Family Court personnel with rude names and accusations on their way in to Court buildings. Police threats and prosecutions then ensued while the Family Court adopted measures to protect itself even further from public scrutiny, feedback and accountability. Those protesting since then have not been willing to become martyrs especially when so few others have stepped up in support, and they have also tried to remain more reasonable in the hope that making sound points fairly and clearly might achieve something. Well, it seemed to be effective for the few hundred people who happened to pass by, most of whom gave very positive and supportive responses, and this probably contributed something to the tide change in gender politics that has undoubtedly started, but media withheld all publicity. While it’s true that poor turnouts usually discourage media from seeing the campaigns as newsworthy, the occasional campaign has had up to 20 people with media attending but still no coverage was published. Yet when three women protested a few months ago by handcuffing themselves to Auckland Police Station with only a handful of onlookers, this was reported generously including on prime time television news even though their cause was confused and ill-considered (being that somehow some accused males should have been prosecuted even though there wasn’t sufficient evidence for prosecution).
Well, all we can say is that a very few of us have gone to great effort, time and considerable expense to mount campaigns and we can be satisfied that we have done our bit. As for the rest of the men in NZ, they can only expect that men will continue to reap what they don’t sow, in generous proportion.
Michael (#5): Good points well made. The report ‘The Other Side of Partner Violence’ was an example of what you describe. Although it received almost zilch publicity it stands as a challenge to the unscientific claims and draconian calls from a number of femicentric reports on family and partner violence. In contrast, each of those femicentric reports received considerable publicity regardless of the worthless and indeed dangerous contribution most of them made to understanding or progressing the issue.
Although reasoned debate and going through the appropriate channels is slow, it can produce results eventually and such results may well be more resilient in the long run. At least we have some semblance of a right to free speech that enables us to express our views and disseminate sound evidence-supported findings.