Check out this gender imbalance in Dept of Corrections
We came across this web page with a video clip for recruiting psychologists to the Dept of Corrections. It involves only female psychologists and shows them working with all male clients. It shows two females running a group, presumably in prison, with all males.
We don’t think this is ok.
Indeed this woucld NEVER happen if the gender was reversed. It is frightening that they do this without any fear of their bias undergoing scrutiny and exposure. After all, which Govt employee in ther right mind would raise concern.
Any comment or opinion that is remotely suggestive of being sexist against women or that might possibly offend any of the ‘delicate flowers’ that modern feminists have become, now results in instant sacking or other violence towards the person who made the comment. However, it’s fine to make any sexist, disparaging, stereotyping comments about men. Here’s an example by US Attorney-General candidate Ms Dana Nessel. We guess she will be lauded as a hero (don’t you dare say ‘heroine’ you patriarchal male scum).
Aren’t we all just waiting for the day when female politicians come straight out and say it …
“Vote for me, I don’t have a penis.”
…NZ in my experience is thee most feminized country I know of by far. How it transformed to this is simple, the way to address DV in NZ is by using ‘The Duluth Model’ adopted here from Minnesota. Whats worse is the men working alongside these women. They apologise on our behalf and for being part of the problem. Ive seen it first hand. Its rather shocking.
WHITE RIBBON CAMPAIGN AGAINST MEN’S VIOLENCE
fro some reasons I started getting messages from White Ribbon campaign on my Facebook pages . Twice I commented that is unfair and hurting that campaign targets only men . Surprise, surprise . My commnets were deleted and comments section was turned off for me only on their FB page.
George, you don’t need to feel personally victimised. Many of us have experienced that treatment. They are happy to raise issues but do not wish any debate aside from their one line.
Basically they believe female violence is acceptable.
They also believe that male victims of violence aren’t worth mentioning, or perhaps that they don’t exist.
Trashing people’s rational communications that were written genuinely and in good faith, is violent. It treats the voices of people who disagree with them as worthless.
The reason they do it is that they cannot answer intelligent concerns about their sexist, male-denigrating and socially damaging propaganda campaign. They are like irrational fundamentalist religious groups and similarly dangerous, blinkered against both argument and evidence in the certainty of their moral righteousness. They protect their brainwashed flock from outsiders’ views.
Thank you for the comments. I thought people working for White Ribbon are well meaning , democratic and decent and inteligent. By deleting the comments they show their bigotry and I believe greed. Greed because obviously such a anti men approach is highly saleable and financially rewarding
never give up @ 4: Yes, it is shocking. It’s incredible that the Duluth Model is still pedaled as some kind of general reason for family violence. There is still no good research backing for this claim, and it really doesn’t take much honesty to recognize that the causes of family violence are wide and varied and apply to both men and women if not equally. Causes include substance abuse and addiction, financial stress, mental illness, personality disorder, intellectual limitation, jealousy (sometimes as a response to infidelity), cultural differences, dysfunctional family systems and limitations in communication/conflict-resolution/problem-solving skills. All of these issues can affect men and women alike, and have little or nothing to do with ‘patriarchal power and control’. The proportion of family violence that could reasonably be said to result from men believing they should control the family is perhaps 5% or so.
9, GOOD POINTS, Imagine if a woman got a job on a construction site and the men (and women) all said to her “You don’t get a hard hat and if you get injured, woman up! , your sex is the least likely by far to be affected by workplace injury so we have no concern for you”.
NOBODY would EVER think that way, yet when it comes to males being subjected to domestic violence’ – its exactly the situation.
My guess is that wage levels can be lowered by encouraging more women to train in psychology. The same thing has already occurred in teaching and is actively progressing in the medical profession at the moment.
From a customer’s point of view, that can have benefits. It also makes it harder for men to earn enough to provide for families. In the end, we will have to round up all of the un-partnered women and assign them into rich men’s polygamous marriages. Un-partnered women are dangerous, when let loose in good society. (I would hate to be one of the rich men picked.)
Murray @ 11: That’s a reasonable conspiracy theory but other factors are also likely to be at play. The fact that Corrections would show a recruitment video of exclusively females running a group with male offenders reflects Corrections’ lack of awareness of gender issues from any male perspective. No way would they show a group of female offenders being ‘treated’ by two males, because they would recognize the problems with that and the likely outcry from feminists about those problems, e.g.
– that the male therapists may not appreciate the experiences of the women through women’s eyes;
– that the women may not feel confident expressing themselves and are more likely to feel misunderstood by the men if they do;
– that the women’s prior experience of gender issues and relationships with males in their lives may confuse and reduce treatment effectiveness;
– that sexual feelings or undertones may confuse and impair the treatment process.
All these issues are just as relevant if not more so for a group of male offenders being therapized by two females, but Corrections is apparently blind to that when the gender tables are turned. After all, females can do no wrong and one should never question their suitability for any role. Such blindness to men’s perspectives is now pervasive throughout our society.
The 2009 workforce survey shows 135 psychological staff at the Department of Corrections.
Nationally males psychologists numbered 352/1225
One assumes in 9 years that is a bigger gender gap.
Like teaching one might also assume that the largest group of males are older and not recently graduated.
Perhaps also a little like the shortage of physics teachers.
I do take your point. I see my suggestion as an addon, not any replacement of your point. Thanks Evan, for another similar example.
The main point is:
One of the greatest and most damaging examples lies in the tiny number of men within primary teaching. This is especially so, when we remember how many children come from mother “headed” families.
One or the other of these problems society-wide may be tolerable, but the intersection is damaging and unfair on our affected children.
I would suggest that with teaching that was an orchestrated effort by authority.
However with this situation it is an ongoing consequence.
A) where psychology has turned into a division of woman’s studies.
B) that there is a social gulf between educated males and the prison environment
C) That these positions have as a requirement a qualification of psychology
Consequently the position ends up being filled by women and possibly very cheaply because it is not a sought after job.
The issue then in terms of rehabilitation of male prisoners is that it is dealt with by way of default to the availability of ‘suitably qualified applicants’ employing university output rather than a suitable response to the situation which would be males suitably qualified to achieve an outcome.
This is a feminised Department of Corrections ticking employment boxes, not working for the best outcome.
Psychology needs to be viewed as a Feminist construct.
A) Achieving female authority
B) Facilitating social change
C) Financially advantageous to women
The situation we are talking about here is a result of these three drivers further up the food chain, and it’s of no consequence as to whether it works or not for males, because it’s not offending any of these three desired outcomes.
Psychology is following a similar pattern to education in the exclusion of males, but is being used in a different manner to progress Feminism.
You could have a deep and meaningful about the broader aspects of the entire subject and we’d be here for quite a while.
But for example: take a female graduate who (has/also has) a qualification in psychology moving into a government position which has the ability to create a desired social outcome. The employment package includes free study to achieve a Masters in Psychology, which in today’s money could add $160,000 to an annual salary.
Here you have these three drivers working in unison to achieve what the feminists upstairs are actively pushing.
The problem I’m seeing in this discussion is that it’s being viewed from the thin end of the wedge and from the point of view of ‘this is not right’.
Whereas from the thick end of the wedge, the big girls are getting what they want to see and who gives a fuck about male prisoners.
Judith Collins was very keen on building prisons rather than roads and putting a lot more of us behind bars.