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

ACC to fund feminist sex re-education programmes in schools

Filed under: Sex Abuse / CYF — JohnPotter @ 3:08 pm Mon 24th March 2014

ACC has decided to fund a pilot “healthy relationship” programme in secondary schools. In a Dominion Post report on Stuff, ACC to take lead in sex education, it is claimed that the corporation received 4800 sexual violence claims last year and spent about $44 million treating the victims.

Rape Prevention Education executive director Kim McGregor said there were “huge gaps” in high school sex education, with the focus leaning towards biology and health rather than relationships.

Many teenagers displayed a shocking ignorance about sexual violence, and even blamed the victims, she said.

“Most of them don’t know there is such a thing as consent. There is just an assumption that you have to take part in sex.”

McGregor has been prominent in the sex abuse industry since 1986, and has been Executive Director of Rape Prevention Education Whakatu Mauri (RPE) for most of the last decade. Despite the existence of numerous feminist-aligned groups in this field, there appears to be little evidence that their efforts are successful.

While most crime in NZ has decreased significantly in that time, reported sexual assaults rose 15% in 2011, when police recorded 3466 rapes and related offences. According to McGregor there has been a 45 per cent rise in sex offences since 2004.

Sexual violence seems to be a problem which expands to meet whatever funding is made available to prevent/promote it.

In the NZ Herald article, ACC programme teaches teens about building healthy relationships, the number of sensitive claims costing $44 million has more than tripled from the numbers reported by Stuff. According to ACC and Rape Prevention Education:

  • in 2012/13, ACC spent $44 million on services for about 15,000 sensitive claims;
  • about one-in-three to one-in-five girls is likely to be affected by sexual violence before their teen years;
  • about one-in-six to one-in-10 boys is likely to be affected by sexual violence before their teens.

The new sex education programme will be run by ACC Sexual Violence Injury Prevention Programme manager Sandra Dickson, who said it would be a success if there was an increase in young people knowing what healthy relationships were [ie: according to feminist ideology – JohnP] and what unhealthy relationships were.

“We need to see a change in attitudes from attitudes that are likely to allow sexual and dating violence to be happening both in their own relationships and the relationships around them.”

Dickson has been promoting anti-male ideology (anonymously) since 2008 via her blog LudditeJourno. She has written a series of articles promoting the idea of Rape Culture, which is presumably seen as an ideal qualification for this new job indoctrinating NZ school pupils.

According to Canadian journalist Barbara Kay: “Rape culture’ fanatics don’t know what a culture is. Kay writes:

Indeed, the more closely one follows the increasingly hysterical volleys of rhetorical fire back and forth on this issue, the more apparent it becomes that those who speak of a rape culture don’t understand what the word “culture” actually means. To result in a “culture,” a phenomenon must be widely accepted as the norm.

Moral panic fuelled by ideology and righteous indignation quickly corrodes the critical faculties and blinds even otherwise intelligent people to objective facts. The numbers on campus rape don’t even come close to the famous “one in four”.

In an interview in the Victoria University students magazine Sex and Ethics, Dickson promotes a hard-line feminist view of rape.

I think we’ve got real problems with our laws in NZ. At the moment when people report rape, they’re really, really, really unlikely to get a conviction. We have all these stereotypes about that being because people who report rape aren’t telling the truth, but actually research suggests that police only get to hear about 12% of the rapes in NZ.

Most people who are raped are women, so we’re talking about most women not reporting when they’re raped. The second thing is that our justice system at the moment has appalling successful prosecution rates. International research shows us that’s not usually because the complaint is false, it’s usually because there are problems with how rape is prosecuted, with the collection of evidence.

One of the things that we have in NZ, in order to prove that someone has raped you, you have to prove that you didn’t consent to what happened. In a lot of other countries, it’s the other way around. In order to prove that you haven’t raped someone, you have to prove that you actually cared what they wanted. You have to prove that you made sure you knew they had consented.

Dickson has been a repeated critic of and spreader of misinformation about my wife Felicity Goodyear-Smith.

In 2012 she wrote an article supporting the attempt by police and DSAC doctors to fit-up George Gwaze for the rape and murder of his 10-year-old niece Charlene, who actually died from AIDS that she aquired from her mother at birth. Felicity did not testify at either of the two trials, which both found Gwaze innocent.

Previous to that, Dickson was an enthusiastic promoter of the conspiracy to link changes to the ACC clinical pathway with me, my father Bert and Centrepoint:

Making like Arnie when it comes to ACC
Abuse deniers claim support they don’t have
Should COSA psych out abuse survivors?

For a more accurate view of this controversy, and insight into why sex-abuse industry workers hate Felicity so much, check out:
Felicity Goodyear-Smith – Setting the record straight

So next time you pay your ACC bill, remember that some of it will be used to teach young men that rape is a normal part of NZ culture and that rapists in NZ are “really, really” unlikely to be convicted.

Who wants to bet that next year’s ACC spend on sexual violence will be lower as a result?


  1. “The second thing is that our justice system at the moment has appalling successful prosecution rates…” or maybe we can turn that around to read our justice system at the moment has a very good succes rate at recognising false complaints? Just a thought. Always good to see things from both sides. Oops… feminists don’t like that.

    Comment by Scott B — Mon 24th March 2014 @ 5:26 pm

  2. Feminists don’t want a prosecution system, they want a persecution system – that is what makes them so dangerous.

    Comment by Downunder — Mon 24th March 2014 @ 6:23 pm

  3. Ah yes. 30 years of sex-ed in schools; 30 years of throwing more & more explicity at teen kids; and thus far, its essentially failed to hit the mark. So lets throw more at it!
    If we just keep throwing more and more sex-ed at teens, they’ll one-day wake up and work out how to stop getting pregnant. hmmmmmm
    The key’s not working; lets try the same key harder. [no bad sexual puns intended].

    Confucius say: If key in lock don’t work, try new key.

    Comment by OMG you're &*^(%$ — Mon 24th March 2014 @ 8:02 pm

  4. If you DELIBERATELY allow a society to become MORALLY CORRUPTED, then you gain control of that society – because that society NO LONGER has anything to unite the people – no COMMON VALUES, NO FAMILY UNITY, NO foundation stones upon which to fall back on and or to give guidance – the very touch stones we all need to help us decide what is right and what is wrong.

    Just because you CAN do something, does NOT make it right, in fact the true test of character is to know when NOT to do something, even though you could……and only having solid VALUES allow you to make that choice – for yourself and your family.

    We ALL KNOW that what is happening is WRONG – on multiple levels – so why is this being deliberately forced on our society?

    Why are our Values, and traditions and our very CULTURE being turned on its head? Why are our rights as parents being removed to make these things harder to deter, and harder to prevent?

    There has to be a reason – right? Someone obviously has an AGENDA here to ensure our society has NO MORAL COMPASS into the future…..ensure we are Racially divided, drugged, easily corrupted and permanently impoverished…….

    So the question you must start asking is WHY? Why would these people do this DELIBERATELY to our KIDS and our FAMILIES, and our SOCIETY as a whole???

    If you are still wondering – then look at history – the lessons are there – SOCIALISM, COMMUNISM and ultimately FASCISM all pursued these same tactics to force control over society – and will continue to do so unless you fight back and refuse to accept this cancer on any level. Identify these people that push this agenda for what they are – COMMUNISTS…….trying to take control of your life…….they need to be outed……..

    A great movie, that explains all that is being FORCED on you…….

    Comment by hornet — Tue 25th March 2014 @ 8:26 am

  5. And I forgot to mention – Feminism, is just another tool being used to push this agenda…..what started as a good cause asking for equal rights for woman ( and NO ONE should deny any person that right ) which has been hijacked and used to force another agenda on to all of us – Divide men and woman, divide mums and dads, and once divided we all suffer – that is what I have been saying for a long time on this web site, you can NEVER allow yourselves to be DIVIDED – stand as PARENTS against this. Fighting between men and woman, is EXACTLY what they want you to do, that is a desired outcome – and we all take the bait …….and fall willingly into the trap……divide and rule………..pit man against woman, and race against race – destroy values and take control………

    Did you notice the NATIONAL UNITY during the Rugby world cup – ALL NZers of all races – together – but as soon as that Celebration was OVER, we are back to the forced DIVISION – Racism is more powerful than a RIFLE in taking control of a society…..and that IS WHAT IS HAPPENING. Divide and Rule…… Divide and rule, divide and rule …….

    Comment by hornet — Tue 25th March 2014 @ 8:33 am

  6. John, I would wager the opposite, that ACC’s spend on sexual violence will be greater as a result of the ‘sex education’ program. Incredible stuff, the ACC is spending our levies (read ‘forced insurance premiums’ or ‘yet another tax’) to increase future claims on it by convincing people that an increasingly broad range of normal interpersonal behaviour amounts to sexual abuse.

    Note the irrational argument by Dickson. It goes: “The low rate of convictions resulting from rape allegations can’t be due to a lot of them being false, because police only get to hear about 12% of rapes in NZ”. Huh? Those two issues are separate ones with no logical connection. It may be that a low proportion of rapes is reported to police but that doesn’t have any bearing whatsoever on the validity of alleged rapes. (Note also that Dickson refers to those who allege rape as “people who report rape” thereby prejudging their allegations as valid.)

    Of course, the ‘research’ producing the 12% reporting figure will be problematic, probably pathetic. It will have used self-report surveys with no way of ascertaining whether the self-reports were true. Many women can be expected anonymously to answer “yes I was raped but I never reported it” simply because they see that as helping the feminist cause, promoting the belief that women are victims and men are bad, and as helping the many women they believe are raped but currently let down by the system. Aside from that, the definition of ‘rape’ will be vague or ridiculously broad; e.g. an answer “yes” to the question “Have you ever been convinced to have sex when you didn’t really feel like it?” will be added as a ‘rape’ statistic.

    The fact is that rape allegations are often more difficult to prove than many other crimes because there were no witnesses and no other evidence likely to help, only one person’s word against another’s. When there is evidence such as injury consistent with restraint and force, conviction rates are as high as for any other crime. Evidence simply showing that sex happened says nothing about whether both parties consented. Feminists who care nothing about fairness towards men want to increase conviction rates on the basis only of the same poor evidence, e.g. nothing more than a woman’s allegation. Imagine if you could get someone convicted of a crime (especially crimes sentenced comparably to murder and manslaughter) simply because you said so!
    You: “I saw my wife murder the neighbour but sorry there’s other witnesses, no blood or other evidence, no body and no record of any neighbour ever going missing.”
    Judge: “Guilty as charged!”

    Any change in law or trial procedure that increases the rate of conviction without better evidence will increase convictions similarly for both truly guilty and truly innocent defendants. That’s just how it is. Dickson applauds the ‘many countries’ (um, which ones?) she claims require rape accused to prove their innocence rather than the complainant’s accusations to be proved. Under her system, any accused is automatically guilty unless he can prove his innocence.
    You: “She’s a witch.”
    Judge” “Well, because she can’t prove she isn’t a witch, guilty as charged!”

    Dickson wants the same for New Zealand, well, only for a crime that applies exclusively to men. For men who are accused of rape she wants to dispose of this most fundamental principle of justice. And this sexist, misandrist woman is given a contract by a government organisation to enlighten the public?! Her preferred policy would certainly increase convictions but would do nothing to improve the Court’s accuracy in identifying true offenders from innocents. Feminists don’t care about innocent men, they are seen as collateral damage and men are worthless anyway.

    Comment by Ministry of Men's Affairs — Tue 25th March 2014 @ 10:45 pm

  7. 6 well said and I bet our media won’t mention a word about any of the issues raised.

    How do feminists know about the other 88% of rapes?

    Comment by Scott B — Wed 26th March 2014 @ 9:49 am

  8. There is an interesting piece about sex education written by Camille Paglia in the latest Time Magazine: Put the Sex Back in Sex Ed. She writes:

    Sex education has triggered recurrent controversy, partly because it is seen by religious conservatives as an instrument of secular cultural imperialism, undermining moral values. It’s time for liberals to admit that there is some truth to this and that public schools should not promulgate any ideology.

    Paglia’s comment about homosexuality makes me wonder what the new “healthy relationship” programme will teach about this.

    Similarly, public schools have no business listing the varieties of sexual gratification, from masturbation to oral and anal sex, although health educators should nonjudgmentally answer student questions about the health implications of such practices. The issue of homosexuality is a charged one. In my view, antibullying campaigns, however laudable, should not stray into political endorsement of homosexuality or gay rights causes.

    Comment by JohnPotter — Thu 27th March 2014 @ 2:15 pm

  9. Anyone who claims to know how we ‘should’ have sex and relationships is a fraud who believes (s)he has god-like knowledge.

    Comment by Man X Norton — Thu 27th March 2014 @ 5:59 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