The Marlborough Express – A Paper with a Backbone
The Marlborough Express has today released an opinion piece that reveals just what’s at stake with regards to the Labour Party’s proposed changes to the our justice system. It’s refreshing to a see a newspaper refuse to be a dead fish in a populist tide.
If you have a Stuff account, be sure to leave a comment and let the Marlborough Express know we value their commitment to reporting things for what they are;
Oh my gosh. I have friends (lol) and we were going to get as many people to vote as possible, even drive them to the voting booths.
Sell the country or human rights?
Stand for single parents or human rights?
Stand for the working class or human rights?
Damn, I can’t believe I’ll will be voting National for Human Rights.
I wrote to Andrew Little and ask others to do the same (please). It doesn’t matter which side you are on, 1) a female saying she was raped when she wasn’t or 2) a male falsely accused…… there’s nothing to be ashamed of for this is not a certain type of family issue. It happens to the best of families and the worst.
I am from both sides and so far, through my own experiences (yes, more than one) and the experiences of friends, the reasons teen girls say they were raped when they weren’t are:
1. They break curfew and fear punishment – this can be with their own family or other caregivers, at home and at other places.
2. They don’t want to tell adults or other youth where they were, where they’ve been.
3. They met a guy and had sex then realised their boyfriend might find out, will get upset and probably dump them.
4. They get rejected.
5. They get dumped.
The latter two are driven by hormones and the extreme pain of first experiences. Gosh, I remember that pain. How many people say, “I’d love to be young but I don’t want to go through my teens again?”
The only positive I see with this change, is that people who were abused in other ways by caregivers while in CYF care can seek revenge or justice of their own understanding. What’s the difference if they go down for what they did or for rape? It’s all the same to people in pain, IMO.
This is happening everywhere. Everybody is processed and the system is a conveyor belt of process, process, process. Someone said to me that in the alcohol and drug court he counted something like 39 staff to process addicts through to rehabs. In America, they don’t have people, just TV screens processing people (technology can replace 39 jobs). The process is longer if you say, “not guilty” and you stay in prison while being processed which makes people say, “Guilty” (so they can go home).
Bloody Labour, Bloody National. They’re both the same. IMO
There’s only one comment on that link. What conclusions should we draw from that?
Normality in the next step of the fanatical feminism revolution I am afraid. It’s hard to even fathom the understanding behind the requirement of a group of feminists wanting to place penalties just for an accusation alone.
Hey Andrew Little, it just goes to show you don’t have be a woman to be a fanatical feminist.
The stain on all MP’s, wanabe MP’s and media is not one politician makes the slightest hint of what penalties could should apply to a woman who makes a false or misleading complaint is exposed.
With male suicide rates 4 times that of woman I would think a false complaint would rank in the most seriousness of crimes any woman could make against a man. And because of the effects on a man it should be in the region of 10 or 20 years. Because the effects on a man lasts well beyond any jail time.
Now I am not just talking about the complainant themselves. If police manipulates or change evidence they should do serious time in jail. If a councillor manipulates or misrepresents what happened they should face jail time that reflect what it costs the man.
There are many reason to make a false complaint.
1. Money. Either from the male victim or ACC
2. Blackmail. Pay me thousands or that love making session last night can be called rape.
3. Sole custody of children.
4. Second complaint from a friend who was allegedly raped in order to get the first complaint over the line.
5. Shame. Woman now embarrassed she slept with someone but now regrets it. Sometimes in the morning or weeks later. Other times years later.
6. Cry for help. Shared herself around lots of men and now thinks it’s the man’s fault.
7. Protect a marriage when caught out by husband for sleeping with boyfriend.
Hell we have even seen news articles on woman who say they were raped because they failed the bar exam.
Now what on earth does the media or MP’s expect men to do when faced with such a situation and the lifelong stigma it carries? What recourse should a man have and where is the law to protect families and men from such allegations when they are false.
In the UK and around the world we are seeing such high profile men making front page news reaching to the four corners of the globe before they are guilty or even charged of anything and later being found not guilty. Even the unknown males in the street are at risk. I suspect in some cases it has already resulted in males seeking justice by way of violence including murder and or murder suicide.
No society can exists without effective, open law and order. Fairness in a justice system that takes into account the wrongs committed by others against anyone and not just men.
PS. Interesting to note this article does not carry the name of the author. I am not complaining about this as it may well be a sensible move in such a one sided hell bent uncaring age against men and boys.
@Lukenz – Authors have no problem naming themselves in feminist leaning articles.
There is obviously huge fear or pressure for this article to go un-named.
News of the Fabour Party’s misandry is spreading far and wide.
Cunliffe’s pathetic sucking up for the female vote idiocy is going to put off some folks visiting and investing in NZ. Shame.
The injustice that was allowed to be applied in the Femily Court is now spreading like rot into the rest of our ‘justice’ system.
(It is certainly a dramatic idea. Rather breathtaking, in fact. In effect, Labour’s policy is that if you have sex, it was rape unless you can prove it wasn’t.
Except in rare circumstances where consent can be proven, perhaps through a secret videotape (though this is also illegal), conviction will be almost automatic on the word of the accuser.
All a woman (or man) needs to do is say that a sexual encounter was rape, and bang.)
Extract from article is in brackets. Sincere thanks to newspaper.
This is a great example of good reporting as it examines the subject without BIAS and attempts to analyse with facts.
Lets expand the good work to reveal how intellectually void Labours idealisms are.
This is a Political Party which is so void of ideas that it seeks peoples vote by implying fear onto a subject.
Rape is a crime, so is attempt to rape, so is intent to rape.
What is implied is that any emotional behaviour that even attempts to approach the subject of sex, and the possibility that it potentially could happen between two individuals who meet under any circumstance in the community, ‘it is a sex crime’.
Fear, Yes FEAR!
Clearly everything that men do is a sex crime!
Dating can now only take place were the originating conversation is made on a device were the conversation is arbitrarily recorded on a device. EG internet dating. Even then the intent to have sex would have to be clearly be stated from the beginning. Even a clear description of the dynamics of that sexual experience would have to be played out as well, so the female has informed and recorded consent. Including the planned moment the man will attempt the first physical touch, implying desires for sexual activity. EG the moment he plans the compassionate touch, eg holding hands in a manner that is not the business handshake.
But then again. Business vs Unions. Mr Little?
How long before that’s a crime to.
Do you live in FEAR.
I am a compassionate person. I love to love.
I do not love to hate.
Its not a Little problem (cackle, cackle).
Here’s another news site with attitude –
96% of women are liars according to The Scotsman news website.
The website talks of a survey which questioned 5,000 women, average age 38, across Scotland, England, Wales and Northern Ireland.
They paint a depressing picture of women’s levels of dishonesty there.
I wonder if similar research has ever been conducted in NZ?