Domestic Violence Workplace Policy
Haven’t they been working hard on this.
Jan Logie’s Bill is just the legal trimmings. Behind the scenes the Human Rights Commission has been busy producing a major media platform to launch with it.
The loop includes known Feminists groups such as Shine and Women’s Refuge.
There is also a link into a Government data base at the Ministry of Business.
Unless you’re part of that then you’re out in the cold but you already knew that.
Quoted from this comment.
It’s convenient to be able to give something a label, but it can be dangerous too.
Looking back here you see Jan Logie teaming up with Brenda Pilot and another old familiar name who can be traced on this site back as far 1994 Susan Snively.
If have a good look at this, you’ve got a couple of people that talked up a bit bullshit, talked some young girl through a dodgy PHD and now this is going through parliament as law.
In the background we have a bitter and twisted Human Rights Commissioner Jacqui Blue who wants to inflict her personal experience on the whole of NZ.
This is not Cultural Marxism or Feminism.
These people are like a virus giving the system a disease and watch this guy spreading it.
That’s reason enough to never shop at Countdown.
I’m watching Q and A and hello. These two, Jacqui Blue and Jan Logie are the same tag team making the presentation to the UN.
Evan #3: Yes, Ms Blue and Ms Logie appear to presented a distorted, unbalanced story to the UN. Amazing. Men and their relationships with their children have been shafted in the FC for decades and the UN hasn’t given a damn, but as soon as a few women raise complaints the UN’s coming to investigate.
The problem appears to be related to the last lot of changes in family law, removing a mandatory obligation for the Court to apply any Protection Order to the children as well as the mother even when the alleged violence did not involve the children in any way. Mothers now don’t find it quite so easy to misuse the Protection Order legislation to force men out of the children’s lives. In addition, those changes brought about more incentive to make allegations in order to get faster and free access to the Court. So a lot more applications for Protection Orders have magically appeared; who would have thought? This will have increased the potential number of disgruntled mothers who didn’t get the impact they hoped for, as well as causing the Courts to become more skeptical of the applications because so many of them involve ‘cry wolf’ with even more blatant lies than was previously the case. No doubt there will have been the odd case where a truly dangerous father has been allowed ongoing unsupervised child contact. There have been many more such cases involving dangerous mothers.
It will be important for men’s groups to contribute to the announced review of the Family Court as well as to the UN representative, if any opportunity arises. Writing direct to the UN Human Rights Periodic Review would also be good.
Should one assume then that since the protection order didn’t involve the children that lawyers rather than mothers saw this as an invitation to be somewhat more liberal with its use?
Mothers it seem find it quite easy to pull the strings of a pc puppet system and the lawyers always only to willing to help with the strings, you could call it making music, string music, sadistic music…
Jacqui Blue is out to wind the girls up …
I guess in some ways the recent wave of womens’ issues internationally and at home will at least go someway toward a serious eye on fairness in general.. and the recent kids needs dads conference was timely and well noted it seems… a gender battle afoot.. bring it on…
Jan Logie, Green MP and ‘Under-Secretary to the Minister of Justice (Domestic and Sexual Violence)’ (what a contrivance!), had her bill voted into law requiring employers to provide 10 days per year paid leave to self-proclaimed victims of domestic violence, or to those who claim their children had been subjected to domestic violence. It doesn’t matter when the alleged violence occurred, even if one claims to have been a victim 50 years ago the current employer still has to give the paid leave. Many concerns arise from the sloppy wording of this new Act but we await its final form.
It seems fair enough to provide some support for true victims of violence. However, consider that most people are entitled to only 5 days sick leave when they’re the victim of various serious afflictions. It’s unclear why domestic violence should be singled out as deserving a special law. What if you’re the victim of other violence such as burglary or arson that may also require you to spend time finding new accommodation aside from dealing with the trauma? Or the victim of false allegations that may require you to take time for legal proceedings?
A clue as to the true agenda behind this law was seen in Ms Logie’s interview during Radio NZ’s ‘Checkpoint’ last night. Among other things (mostly fake justificaitons, slogans and propaganda) she said:
Ms Logie just couldn’t bring herself to mention the word ‘men’ in any positive light so used “unions and businesses” instead.
By using the gender-specific word Ms Logie has discriminated against the many males who are victims of domestic violence. Indeed, the number of male victims of serious domestic violence including murder is close to that for women, even though men commit around 80% of the violence (i.e. a lot of domestic violence is by males against other males). If the broad definitions of domestic violence referred to in Ms Logie’s bill including emotional violence are honestly applied it’s likely that male victims would outstrip females while the female perpetrator rate would increase significantly.
Ms Logie’s true intent was laid bare in her comments. The new Act was intended as another tool to support false beliefs concerning exclusively female victimhood and to provide women with yet another special privilege. And you can be sure that is how the Act will be applied.
On the passing of the legislation there were a few MPs bouncing around the debating on their broomsticks applauding the public gallery, apparently in response to the presence of Jacqui Blue.
Obviously that was noted by the media.
Although it is left to us to make what we might of that.