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


Filed under: General — triassic @ 2:44 pm Mon 9th April 2018

Tony Robins is another celebrity to be brave enough to come out against the #metoo movement. He joins feminist Germaine Greer And Catherine Deneuve to name a few. Article here

The celebrity life coach told the audience he wasn’t “knocking the #MeToo movement,” but was “knocking victimhood.” He addressed the crowd, asking them to consider the impact of it while saying “anger is not empowerment.”

Is this a sign of the tide turning or is the tsunami of post modernism ideology unstoppable?


  1. Friday 13th is wear black to work day to stand up to sexual harrassment.

    Guys could have a black ribbon day since we’re generally not included in anything feminists do.

    Comment by Evan Myers — Mon 9th April 2018 @ 3:00 pm

  2. Maybe the stale-pale-males could get out there and protest with nurses for their payrises.

    They’re the ones looking after us in hospital when we end up there more often than we like in our autumn of life.

    Comment by Evan Myers — Mon 9th April 2018 @ 3:12 pm

  3. It’s good that some people have raised obvious concerns about #metoo. Tony Robins didn’t really come out against it but disapproved of a victimhood mentality in those contributing. Since his statement he has expressed further support for the movement and those joining that bandwagon.

    Professor Janice Fiamengo has come out with very relevant criticism of #metoo, criticizing its disregard for basic principles of justice such as the right to have allegations investigated and tested and the right to be treated as innocent until proven guilty. An anonymous internet movement encouraging all manner of dirt raking is irresponsible, divisive and essentially a hate-speech movement against men.

    Comment by Ministry of Men's Affairs — Mon 9th April 2018 @ 9:31 pm

  4. The Movie Breakfast Club has come under attack.
    It portrays and normalised sexual harassment.
    It portrays and normalised sexual assualt.
    It portrays and normalised the assaulter as getting the girl in the end.

    A whole generation of humans were brainwashed.

    What’s next?

    Comment by DJ Ward — Mon 9th April 2018 @ 9:49 pm

  5. He said nothing wrong in my opinion, he was stating a fact and when they don’t get there own way or the promotion they deserve they can do great out of a sexual harassment scandal. The world is gone mad, the pendulum has swung too far

    Comment by KYLE ESLER — Fri 13th April 2018 @ 7:16 pm

  6. Thanks for your input Kyle

    Comment by Ministry of Men's Affairs — Sat 14th April 2018 @ 8:45 am

  7. There is a significant space given to a #metoo section on stuff.

    It reads like an

    Old white man bad section
    Beat the younger male generation into submission section
    This is the path to success and prosperity section
    Especially for lawyers section

    Did I miss anything?

    Comment by Evan Myers — Mon 16th April 2018 @ 7:14 am

  8. See this mass exodus of NIKE executives #MeeT00 :~

    Comment by Kiwi Kieth — Wed 2nd May 2018 @ 6:59 am

  9. The ground-breaking voice of a woman (Olivia Wensley) who put her hand up as a sexual misconduct victim will not be heard on a Law Society panel into the stain on the profession.

    Justice Minister Andrew Little encouraged Olivia Wensley to put her name forward for the panel – led by Dame Silvia Cartwright – and she did just that.

    The Law Society has strongly defended its response to the scandals but confirmed it never agreed to put Wensley on the panel.

    Comment by Evan Myers — Fri 4th May 2018 @ 7:11 pm

  10. I see on Stuff it is #metoonz that has its own front page section still.

    Comment by Evan Myers — Fri 4th May 2018 @ 7:14 pm

  11. Ali Mau is on a national #MeToo crusade looking for personal cases to turn men into media fodder.

    Comment by Evan Myers — Mon 4th June 2018 @ 12:48 pm

  12. NZ Herald – Law Society shocked at scale of sexual harrassment.

    Yeap. You can smell the campaign rising.

    But after years of persecution in the Family Court I don’t think many men will to concerned if the rip themselves to bits.

    Comment by Evan Myers — Mon 4th June 2018 @ 4:50 pm

  13. The #metoo movement is finally exposing it’s true intent.
    Led by feminists such as Jan Logie from within the Ministry of Justice.
    Anybody guess what these women really want?

    Men to have thier lives ruined?
    Nope men are only collateral damage to feminists. All that could possibly take place is all the top men get sacked so women get the top dollar jobs.
    Safety for women?
    Since when have they done anything to achieve that. Anybody can see the DVA has not increased safety for women. It’s created lots of jobs for women, even some (lawyers) have got rich out of it.
    Oops I think there’s a trend appearing.

    More money for women?
    Absolutely correct.

    The aim is to change ACC so anybody that cliams harm from sexual harassment can get an ACC payout.
    I doubt proof of the harassment will be required.

    Comment by DJ Ward — Mon 4th June 2018 @ 8:21 pm

  14. @13 I saw that. Here we go again.

    COHA – Causalties of Harrasment Alegations. (Pronounced Koha)

    Men may have to take matters into their own hands, women are getting too dangerous.

    Comment by Downunder — Tue 5th June 2018 @ 7:45 am

  15. You can see it coming.

    Anyone with half a public reputation will get the media treatment and maybe screwed for a private settlement – restorative justification.

    Jill Blogs can make an ACC claim.

    Job Interview with HR …

    “And tell me Joe, do you have an ACC record?”

    That should get the PSA up to 98% women 2% Gay men.

    And this is #NZ today for you.

    Comment by Evan Myers — Tue 5th June 2018 @ 7:56 am

  16. I found this on kiwi blog – a current analysis of the male disadvantages in society.

    Full credit as Fitzy would say for taking the time.

    Education – Secondary

    11% less likely to get NCEA Level 1
    7% less likely to get NCEA Level 2
    14% less likely to get NCEA Level 3
    25% more likely to leave school with no qualifications
    Twice as likely to be a high (special) needs student
    27% less likely to get UE
    Three times more likely to be stood down, suspended
    5 times more likely to be excluded or expelled

    Education – Tertiary

    42% less likely to be in tertiary education
    36% less likely to obtain a diploma
    37% less likely to obtain a bachelors degree
    25% less likely to get Honours
    37% less likely to get Masters
    26% less likely to get a PhD


    Twice as likely to be a victim of homicide
    43% more likely to be assaulted by a stranger
    Twelve times more likely to be in prison
    Five times more likely to be sentenced for a crime
    Eight times more likely to be sentenced to prison


    Seven times more likely to commit suicide
    Six times more likely to be subject to a mental health compulsory treatment order
    Seven times more likely to be a mental health special patient
    113% more likely to be a hazardous drinker
    67% more likely to drink drive
    Twice as likely to be a user of hard drugs
    10% more likely to get cancer
    74% more likely to have coronary heart disease
    31% more likely to have a stroke
    270% more likely to have gout
    11% more likely to have diabetes
    Ten times more likely to have HIV/AIDs
    Four years shorter life expectancy
    24% more likely to be a smoker
    11% more likely to be obese
    28% more likely to have high blood pressure
    33% more likely to have high cholesterol
    46% more likely to have an intellectual disability
    22% more likely to be hearing impaired


    Twice as likely to be injured at work
    Three times as likely to be seriously injured at work
    Twenty times as likely to be killed at work


    Three times more likely to be deported
    2.1 times more likely to have a fatal accident
    Four times less likely to gain primary custody of children
    Five times more likely to have to be paying child support
    10% more likely to be homeless
    28% more likely to be injured in a car crash
    130% more likely to be killed in a car crash
    Four times more likely to drown
    Seven times more likely to be autistic
    24% more likely to have Down syndrome
    Five times more likely to have ADHD as a child
    30% more likely to be an infant death

    Quite chilling when you read the whole list.

    Comment by Evan Myers — Tue 5th June 2018 @ 4:31 pm

  17. Interesting: The list actually recognises child support as a disadvantage.

    Five times more likely to be paying child support.

    When you look at the tertiary education stats we are not far off 2:1 in tertiary education.

    Comment by Downunder — Wed 6th June 2018 @ 6:28 am

  18. @17:

    Twice as likely to get a sexual harrassment complaint.

    What factor would you increase that by when there is a trial by media #MeToo campaign in full swing.

    Comment by Evan Myers — Wed 6th June 2018 @ 7:41 am

  19. Australia has gone total #Metoo

    National inquiry into sexual harrassment.

    Comment by Evan Myers — Wed 20th June 2018 @ 5:56 pm

  20. This is interesting.

    Asia Argento, the Hollywood actress and #MeToo activist accused of sexual assault on an underage boy, has privately admitted having sex with the teenage actor despite issuing a public denial.

    Argento, 42, became a figurehead for the campaign against sexual harassment after she was one of the first women to accuse Harvey Weinstein, the movie mogul, of abuse last October.

    Former child actor Jimmy Bennett has accused her of sexual assault by having sex with him in 2013, when he was under the age of consent in California, which is 18. The pair met in 2004 when Argento cast Bennett, then just seven, to play her son in The Heart Is Deceitful Above All Things.

    Comment by Downunder — Fri 24th August 2018 @ 11:14 am

  21. ” WELL AIN’T THAT A PEACH “…..

    Comment by mama — Fri 24th August 2018 @ 2:20 pm

  22. This is a disturbing twist in New Zealand politics

    Ross is contemplating releasing the audio where he alleges Bridges told him he would find 15 women to say he harassed them.

    Ross being Botany MP and Bridges National Party Leader.

    Comment by Evan Myers — Wed 17th October 2018 @ 4:16 pm

  23. Simon Says….”DOH!!,,why do I keep eating my own feet!”

    Comment by mama — Wed 17th October 2018 @ 5:11 pm

  24. This young lady has a refreshingly honest perspective.

    Comment by Voices back from the bush. — Sun 28th October 2018 @ 12:24 pm


    Comment by mama — Sun 28th October 2018 @ 12:41 pm

  26. Starts out with ‘Women are not monolithic.”

    We’ve saw variations of this when #metoo surfaced. I even saw recently Mrs Trump responding to a question with “We should not try and change men.”

    While not a lone voice this is a total contradiction to our current Feminist agenda.

    It’s not communicated by politicians as being right. And it’s not the easy money.

    Comment by Evan Myers — Sun 28th October 2018 @ 1:17 pm

  27. this from evan above,,, I even saw recently Mr Trump responding to a question with “We should not try and change men.” …I think he stole this line from Melania.

    Comment by mama — Sun 28th October 2018 @ 1:43 pm

  28. @24. Thanks Voices for sharing the Meghan Daum article.

    I have a couple of reflections on that article that I suggest we (men’s rights activists) should, well, reflect on.

    Firstly, we can probably agree with a lot of what she is saying and yet she maintains that she is a feminist. One theme I am picking up from this site is that feminists are the devil incarnate. A softening of that attitude might see us and feminists like Meghan working together for constructive change.

    Secondly is her take on the men’s rights movement, which she describes as, “a loosely knit and often self-defeating enterprise that overrides legitimate grievances about, say, the family court system, with ambient misogyny and conspiracy theories.”

    Men’s rights as a movement has an enormous Public Relations problem because that is how we are seen. It may seem attractive to be a self-styled Paul Elam making outrageously provocative statements to get publicity, but I suggest that not all publicity is good publicity.

    The Men’s Rights Movement needs to have a credible voice if we are to make progress in saving men from harm.

    On this site I have challenged what I see as being misogyny or conspiracy theories. For my troubles I am regarded as arrogantly knowing better. I’m not arrogant, and nor do I “know better”. But I do have opinions, and I’m not a shrinking violet. My opinion is that to make progress on men’s rights, we need to be as inclusive as possible and we need to speak with a credible voice. I really do want to make a difference for the better in men’s lives and would greatly appreciate any feedback that deals with the issues we are facing, but leaves the apparent defects in my personality and intelligence for discussion at another time.

    Comment by Audi Alteram Partem — Sun 28th October 2018 @ 9:32 pm

  29. Audi, you’d be more use nailed to a fucking perch, imitating a deceased parrot.

    Comment by Downunder — Mon 29th October 2018 @ 6:57 am

  30. aie aie aie like the french would say …
    mais ooh la la!

    Comment by JustCurious — Mon 29th October 2018 @ 8:04 am

  31. I’d like to thank Audi through this public forum.
    He sensed I had challenges and made the effort to contact me privately.
    I could tell when we spoke on the phone that he’d gone to quite some effort
    to understand my issues by researching relevant laws etc.
    we spoke for an hour and he since has kept helping with detailed follow up and genuine support.
    He is , in my view- a well spoken well reasoned gentleman with insight and genuine concern for men’s issues.
    I’ve also had help from other men and I appreciate them too.
    If it wasn’t for this kind of support I wouldn’t have the courage to stand up against injustices that I’ve experienced.

    Comment by Voices — Mon 29th October 2018 @ 9:33 am

  32. @24 voices, you saw in this article what you wanted to. That’s where your head went. You called it refreshingly honest.

    What about this;
    “I realize that the physical size difference between most women and most men means that the above comparison isn’t entirely fair; a woman who’s sexually aggressive with a man is probably not putting him in insurmountable physical danger. And I’m cognizant of the fact that for every bad behavior I mentioned in my opening list of questions there is an equal, opposite, and potentially more physically threatening form of bad behavior that men can, and do, visit upon women with just as much frequency.”

    Comment by Downunder — Mon 29th October 2018 @ 10:15 am

  33. #31,,,Voices,,, thank you for the insight.

    It is interesting that whilst there is help out their for Men caught in the system it is not enough,
    I guess many factors stop the help, such as the DURATION, the PERSONAL fight, the sense of HOPELESSNESS, etc, etc….

    It is so great, and I know it is hell, that you manage to keep your chin up enough to carry on and on.

    We need an active MANHUB to take in and give help when needed, just as you have pointed out Audis’ timely helping hand , we need an ARMY of helping hands.

    Comment by mama — Mon 29th October 2018 @ 10:24 am

  34. #,,32,, when reading that article I must admit I got impressed with hearing what I agreed with and did not finish the article

    QUOTE;And I’m cognizant of the fact that for every bad behavior I mentioned in my opening list of questions there is an equal, opposite, and potentially more physically threatening form of bad behavior that men can, and do, visit upon women with just as much frequency.” QUOTE;

    I strongly disagree with what she says here, much of the list belong to women by a landslide.

    Comment by mama — Mon 29th October 2018 @ 10:30 am

  35. Downunder,
    Yes the passage you referred to isn’t the way I’ve seen things especially the last sentence about frequency.
    But this woman’s had her experiences and I’ve had mine.
    I don’t see much point in chastising her for those expressions. Especially given the consessions made at the beginning of the article.
    I think Audi is right that we as advocates for men might gain more ground by
    With a less aggressive responce to those who oppose our rights.
    And for me to say this takes some doing.
    I’ve been baying for blood as much as any of us.
    Mama is right we need unity.
    How can we get anywhere in the fight if we can’t get out of the trench together ?

    Comment by Voices — Mon 29th October 2018 @ 10:37 am

  36. “if answered honestly, wouldn’t send hands into the air. Including my own. I know I’m guilty on the pest control front. I don’t want to think too hard about some of the others.”

    These are not experiences, they are her unacknowledged behaviour toward men.

    See what is actually written there? The author maintaining an unwarranted dignity as an author by not including herself in the issue.

    She’s got you onside.

    This allows you to have an unjustified emotional and sym-pathetic attachment to her work or to relate to it on an irrelevant basis.

    So, then she says what she really wants to.

    Yes, I’m not just a Feminist, I’m smart one, and you fell for it.

    Comment by Downunder — Mon 29th October 2018 @ 11:03 am

  37. “I’m certain there is not a single one of these questions that, if answered honestly, wouldn’t send hands into the air. Including my own.”
    I don’t see that as the author maintaining an unwarranted dignity.
    I see that a confession that her and a lot of women are guilty of some nasty behaviour.
    Maybe you see it differently but is it worth more wasted megabytes.
    What about my question to you @35 about unity.
    Let’s talk about that.
    One man standing up one at a time gets us nowhere.
    And please refer to the future and not the past as much as possible as the future is all we can contribute to now.

    Comment by Voices — Mon 29th October 2018 @ 11:27 am

  38. @37 is it worth more megabytes?

    Yes, it is.

    Feminism is slowly leaving more wormen behind, and it becomes more aggressive and more devious. Part of that is a war of words that will be seen on websites.

    That shouldn’t be related to as a lack of unity.

    There is room for a lot of things, bums on seats, feet on the ground, people in rooms, and perspective, that isn’t achieved by shutting down conversation because you don’t like the style of expression.

    Don’t confuse exposure and relevance to media as a whole.

    Comment by Downunder — Mon 29th October 2018 @ 12:07 pm

  39. I wasn’t shutting down conversation
    I just Asked if the fact that you and I interpreted the sentence
    differently was really what matters.
    I tried to engage with a ‘where to from here’ question.
    Your stuck on the railway tracks mate.
    And I’m not sure if it’s feminism leaving women behind or the other way round , but do we have any prominent nz women speaking out against feminist? Can you think of any Well known women in nz that do that?
    Or well know men for that matter. ?

    Comment by Voices — Mon 29th October 2018 @ 12:52 pm

  40. What is heard often in political discourse is Virtue Signaling.

    In the start of the Daum article discussed above this can be seen in the opening paragraphs.

    There is a varied audience reading this looking to take something from it.

    Ask yourself what a budding feminist would take from her sister?

    Would they see the article the same way as you?

    Would they place more importance to the analysis of women or the analysis of men that was glossed over because of a needy grab at what some want to hear.

    If I was to take a dispassionate approach to gender war then I’d be giving this piece points for a win to the girls.

    Comment by Evan Myers — Mon 29th October 2018 @ 12:59 pm

  41. 10 – 8 big buddies,,,, Muriel Newman surely is one.

    Comment by mama — Mon 29th October 2018 @ 1:30 pm

  42. 41, yes that’s true I’d forgotten about Murial.
    She did a great job of the speech on shared
    Parenting at a Wellington conference MoMa put on two years ago.

    Can you think of any others male or female ?

    Comment by Voices. — Mon 29th October 2018 @ 2:29 pm

  43. @39 we had a discussion recently about the relevance of a US Supreme Court election. I could say something similar about the relevance of a 48 year old US essayist. It’s relative to that country and needs some translation.

    The US is having a slightly broader discussion than us, and you’re right, you would struggle to find woman in NZ to genuinely speak up to that extent. Mama is a breath of fresh air.

    My take on this is that it is kickback to the body count from the MeToo movement – oops we may have over cooked this one.

    It’s caused more real life problems for the US than the discussion has here (Who gives a rat’s arse about a couple of solicitors getting cooked in a salacious pie) but they’re still men and they don’t deserve to die for what they did.

    I don’t see a lack of unity. We’ve developed a functional underground, where what we do revolves around our life’s.

    Yes, we have lacked our voice but of recent there has been a shift in the amount of content and the male perspective in New Zealand media. Perhaps their reaction to MeToo. Better start including the guys before the shit hits fan here too.

    Let’s hope that continues.

    Comment by Downunder — Mon 29th October 2018 @ 2:34 pm

  44. Hi Mama. I note that at 34 you say:

    “I strongly disagree with what she says here, much of the list belong to women by a landslide.”

    in reference to the quoted excerpt from Meghan Daum’s article where she says,

    “And I’m cognizant of the fact that for every bad behavior I mentioned in my opening list of questions there is an equal, opposite, and potentially more physically threatening form of bad behavior that men can, and do, visit upon women with just as much frequency.”

    In the ‘Evidence Based Practice – Gluckman’ thread you today cited Gluckman as saying:

    “But policy made in the absence of information and science-based evidence can only be made on the basis of dogma, and is less likely to serve the country well”

    Daum is suggesting equal perpetration of bad behaviour and you are suggesting women perpetrate more by a landslide.

    With all due respect to both you and Daum I don’t think opinions or anecdotes are worth as much as the science-based evidence that you seem to favour in the other thread.

    John Hamel has coordinated a meta analysis of hundreds of published research findings and published this under PASK – the Partner Abuse State of Knowledge project.

    Very much in short, this meta-analysis shows gender neutrality in acts of intimate partner abuse. (i.e. Men and women hit each other at roughly equal rates.) However men, in simple terms, hit harder and cause 70% of the physical injuries up to and including death.

    So, sorry Mama, but the bulk of the research shows that Ms Daum is closer to the truth than you are.

    Having said that though, in the Christchurch longitudinal study (of an obviously younger cohort) perpetration of intimate partner abuse was 60% female.

    Comment by Audi Alteram Partem — Mon 29th October 2018 @ 6:03 pm

  45. Strawman – when are you going to stop the bullshit.

    Comment by Evan Myers — Mon 29th October 2018 @ 6:12 pm

  46. One must remember the old adage saying: “Seek and you shall find.”
    The Dunedin study may be the only study frankly worth it’s findings.
    Someone conducting a “meta analysis of hundreds of published research findings” can not possibly have effectively checked any bias or flaw in any of the research and adequately addressed these flaws or bias. It effectively serves more as a compendium as opposed to an in depth scientific study

    And if you compare the finding between the two; they are diametrically opposite… almost.

    I wonder where the PASK funding came from.?

    Comment by JustCurious — Mon 29th October 2018 @ 6:16 pm

  47. @29: Hi Downunder. I guess you didn’t accept my apology for being too combative and nor agree to my offer of a truce on leaving personal slurs out of our comments.

    Mama commented today on the ‘Living with InJustice’ thread that you, “weave history, societal cause, change and effect into your every sentence.” I agree that you often bring all of those admirable insights to many of your comments. I do find it sad though when you attack people who disagree with your ideas. (Sad, that is for you. It’s water off a ducks back for me.)

    Comment by Audi Alteram Partem — Mon 29th October 2018 @ 6:25 pm

  48. #44,,,Hi Audi,,I did not count the numerous list content from Daums’ article, however I would say that I have never met a MAN with as many excuses. Maybe this is how guys do it, the simply everything naturally and that way they learn.

    There is no doubt that WOMEN! are Mens weakness,, and dont they know it.

    On this site there is indeed room to , to a degree, say what you feel at the time to make a point or get something off your chest.

    There are two sides here and they interplay at times, sometimes for humours sake, one side is emotional and the other , well, fact or discussion of other such truth, or non-truth.

    The list of more interest is Evan Above @ 16.

    Comment by mama — Mon 29th October 2018 @ 6:27 pm

  49. #46, Evan Above,, thanks for the list.

    Comment by mama — Mon 29th October 2018 @ 6:30 pm

  50. @47. Sorry JC, but you seem to be missing the point. The PASK results are an enormous win for men’s rights, are scathing about erroneous feminist research, and are universally hated by feminists. John Hamel is generally revered in international men’s rights circles. The study was undertaken by (from memory) 23 academics over an 18 month period and they considered over 200 of the most rigorous studies. In academia a properly conducted meta-analysis is given far more credence than a single piece of research. It may suit you to cherry-pick a piece of research that you like, but you need to remember that most research conducted into Intimate Partner Abuse (IPA) is conducted by Gender Studies faculties and those studies are often deeply flawed. Using cherry-picked research is a game the feminists will win every time. Better methinks to stick with rigorous academically honest studies that supports gender neutrality in IPA. Gender neutrality is the scientific slam-dunk in discrediting ‘Patriarchy’ as being the cause of IPA.

    Comment by Audi Alteram Partem — Mon 29th October 2018 @ 6:48 pm

  51. If this a stab in the dark, then it is the dark in which I live, NZ I am going to say, has a unique set of stats,, but shhh, I did nae say this.

    Comment by mama — Mon 29th October 2018 @ 6:57 pm

  52. @46. Hi Evan. I think I’m telling the truth, not talking bullshit. I’ll happily change my mind if you can provide cogent evidence to the contrary.

    Comment by Audi Alteram Partem — Mon 29th October 2018 @ 6:57 pm

  53. I am a bit lost here,,how can there be true stats for Men on the likes of IPA, traditionally, men dont ‘ # me too…so how do they get to be a stat???

    Comment by mama — Mon 29th October 2018 @ 8:06 pm

  54. # 48,,Audi,,one does not generally use anothers’ conversations to help one with an opinionated interpretation of anothers’ character or intent…just for the record..10-10.

    Comment by mama — Mon 29th October 2018 @ 8:24 pm

  55. @53 You’d better hope your Mrs never wants a protection order.

    One look here and you’d be totally screwed.

    Comment by Evan Myers — Mon 29th October 2018 @ 8:46 pm

  56. @54: As I understand it Mama the best research is carried out by random population sampling. Researchers will contact people chosen randomly and ask questions about intimate partner abuse that may have happened in their relationships (often just in the past 12 months – when memory is more accurate). They will be asked about IPA they perpetrated and/or were the recipients of. Often the questions will be based on the Conflicts Tactics Scale developed by Murray Strauss, as these questions don’t require the respondent to make a judgment about the legality of the acts. The answers given by men and women generally corroborate each others’ responses and that leads researchers to believe that neither gender is under or over reporting in these sorts of studies. It varies from country to country but mutual abuse occurs in 50% to 60% of abusive relationships. The balance are split almost evenly with only the man or only the woman violent. Women compensate for their stature by using weapons much more frequently than men. All violent acts, including extremely violent acts, are perpetrated almost equally by each gender. There is less violence in gay relationships than in heterosexual relationships and more in lesbian relationships. These randomised population studies show that IPA is 10 to 15 times more prevalent than court statistics reveal, but a lot of this is done by repeat offenders and about 85% of couples are completely violence free. These studies show that men considerably under report to the police.

    On the other hand feminist research will typically be conducted using a pre-selected sample such as by interviewing only women in a refuge, or when doing random studies only ask women about their experiences as victims and ask men only about how much they perpetrated abuse.

    Comment by Audi Alteram Partem — Mon 29th October 2018 @ 8:51 pm

  57. And you wouldn’t want to have an employment dispute and have to defend yourself against similar accusations when you’ve got this recorded online.

    I wouldn’t think what you’re doing would be regarded as a sensible thing to be doing.

    Comment by Evan Myers — Mon 29th October 2018 @ 8:55 pm

  58. @55. I can’t agree Mama.

    Downunder said of me:

    “Audi, you’d be more use nailed to a fucking perch, imitating a deceased parrot.”

    How would you respond if he said that about you?

    I responded by genuinely and honestly agreeing with what you said in praise of him.

    I made no interpretation of his character or intent let alone an opinionated one. I did go on to express my sadness about that attack on me as person. Without blowing my own trumpet I haven’t often seen on this site such a gracious response to such a gratuitous attack… just for the record 🙂

    Comment by Audi Alteram Partem — Mon 29th October 2018 @ 9:08 pm

  59. @58 Shrinking violet now, are we?

    It was no more than gratuitous advice in response to your request for feedback.

    Comment by Downunder — Mon 29th October 2018 @ 9:21 pm

  60. @56 and 58. Thanks for your concerns Evan. But no worries! I’ve been around the Courts for quite a bit now and I can look after myself just fine. Moreover, as with no doubt all the men on this site, I have a clear conscience and… eventually… the truth will out.

    Comment by Audi Alteram Partem — Mon 29th October 2018 @ 9:22 pm

  61. @57
    Yes there seem to be a few myths and falsehoods about DV an IPV.

    Especially the one about nz being the worst in the world for it

    Comment by Voices — Mon 29th October 2018 @ 9:25 pm

  62. @60. Dear nemesis. You are, at times, an almost worthy opponent. I quite like that about you 🙂

    Comment by Audi Alteram Partem — Mon 29th October 2018 @ 9:27 pm

  63. 59,, Audi I was not asking you to agree, I was stating my interpretation. It came initially as an emotional response to having my conservation used in a vein that lead on to you saying something you then wanted to say to another,,,sorry,,human response can be a bastard and can be used against one.

    Comment by mama — Mon 29th October 2018 @ 9:30 pm

  64. @62 I’ve written about it here before, and similar concerns have been expressed in other places about the reporting policies the police have been forced to use to create DV statistics.

    Statistics created by policy rather than research criteria are as Gluckman suggests based on dogma.

    Meaning also, that the statistics your link shows are in fact higher than the prevalence of violence.

    Comment by Downunder — Mon 29th October 2018 @ 9:33 pm

  65. #,,62,,Voices,, this from the article you put up…this is what I am eluding to above # 54.

    “Men generally do not report such assaults if asked general questions about violence or abuse; older studies frequently failed to ask about specific actions, thus falling afoul of quite different cultural gender norms for what constitutes abuse. Minor assaults perpetrated by women are also a major problem, even when they do not result in injury, because they put women in danger of much more severe retaliation by men.[citation needed]”

    There has indeed been hysteria surrounding DV in NZ, I know there are some incredible nasty happenings but I feel there is blurred vision when it comes to the worst assaults, and these worst assaults are in turn assaulting the very respect of Men in NZ.

    Comment by mama — Mon 29th October 2018 @ 9:42 pm

  66. The Omertà effect perhaps Mama?

    There is an sector of society that would not respond on principle along with greater number of males who for various reasons would deny the assault rather than report it.

    Comment by Downunder — Mon 29th October 2018 @ 9:49 pm

  67. @64. Thanks very much for the apology Mama. It is a rare and special treat to receive one on this site. I fully understand how the miscommunication occurred. I seemed sarcastic, when I was in fact being genuine in my praise of Downunder.

    Comment by Audi Alteram Partem — Mon 29th October 2018 @ 10:17 pm

  68. Various reasons indeed, but Male pride is of course to be upheld, especially when it has just been threatened, but here at what cost..bloody bureaucracy..and they talk about manspaining ,oh sorry, mansplaining.

    Comment by mama — Mon 29th October 2018 @ 10:33 pm

  69. audi, at 64, I was not apologising to you, I was apologising for my emotive response to my interpretation of your use of my words, it was slightly sarcastic, but you must see this, no?

    Comment by mama — Mon 29th October 2018 @ 10:43 pm

  70. @70: No Mama. No, no, no. A thousand times no! No sarcasm. None!

    Maybe most everybody on this site is so hurt, they are petrified of vulnerability?

    If so… that’s really tragic! Really, really… tragic!!

    Comment by Audi Alteram Partem — Mon 29th October 2018 @ 11:15 pm

  71. 10 – 7 Audi,, ha ha ,, you are funny, have a great snooze.

    Comment by mama — Mon 29th October 2018 @ 11:18 pm

  72. @ Audi

    We need your energy for 3rd of November meeting and beyond .Get it ?

    Comment by george simonovski — Tue 30th October 2018 @ 1:22 am

  73. Mama , Audi made a comment at 11:15 last night.
    Three minutes later you responded with a comment
    That confused me with your lack of understanding.
    Audi referenced the comment @70 but I suspect this was an error and he meant to refer to the comment @69.
    You know what no means, I’m sure so why did you assume it was a joke.

    Comment by Voices — Tue 30th October 2018 @ 10:42 am

  74. #73,,Voices, Hi,,, I was confused by his @70 No,no no!!!, as I had just said there may have been a slight sarcasim in my ‘sorry’ in a previous conversation.

    I said I thought him funny as he can be over zealous in manner. I was wanting to laugh with him. is confusing with incorrect thread numbers, sorry.

    Comment by mama — Tue 30th October 2018 @ 2:49 pm

  75. #74, No probs.
    thanks for explaining.

    Comment by Voices — Tue 30th October 2018 @ 3:29 pm

  76. #MeToo has happened. We have seen it via media even if that is not well recorded here. We’ve seen an attempted extension of this with the follow-on believe-her movement.

    There is some reaction here but no great understanding of the other side, and the basis of this.

    The concept we are seeing played out is not an independent fad, or a ‘random creation’ by radicals. It comes from a background philosophy in Feminism;

    Within the frame work of women’s rights it is expected that in the first instance a woman would be protected from that situation that makes her a victim.

    Anything that did happen shouldn’t have.

    The status of victim, and the length of time that this stage takes is not determined by the law in terms of a criminal court case, whether or not that happens.

    At some point of recovery and self determination the women rises from her victim hood and seeks a self determined remedy according to her ability to recover, within what ever time frame that is.

    Now we’re left in this quandary of civil and criminal remedies.

    A criminal case as in MeToo with all its complications or a civil remedy as I would suspect is what is being pushed for in the believe-her follow up movement.

    The dust might settle of this particular aspect of the concept but don’t expect the overall concept to change.

    When it comes to the consequences for men’s rights there always another question of wilful or woeful ignorance.

    Comment by Downunder — Tue 30th October 2018 @ 3:36 pm

  77. Downunder said “believe-her movement”, the point of the movement is to bring to light that there are some horrible men out there that do bad things to women and the same with women. The idea of the movement to shine a light on all the horrible things that happen to people. Both men and women have shared their ‘metoo’ stories.

    Another point that Downunder says “no great understanding of the other side, and the basis of this” sometimes the other side of the story is victim blaming and that’s why it’s not always brought to light. Humans have the most amazing power to look past there shitty actions and try and blame the victim.

    My own father would never admit the horrible things he did to us as children, he tells a very different version of what happened, I personally know I would hate to share my story than see him say horrible things about me. There should be a safe place to share stories and that’s what the ‘metoo’ movement does.

    Comment by BobHill — Tue 30th October 2018 @ 5:14 pm

  78. Victim Blaming?

    Looking back at comment #20 A woman wanting to be part of the MeToo movement denying there is a victim (virtuous creature).

    In itself MeToo may help some individuals that really could have been helped in other ways but is more likely to create another range of victims.

    Comment by Downunder — Wed 31st October 2018 @ 7:36 am

  79. If there is a percentage of ficticious malicious or otherwise false allegations when there is a complaints criteria why would there not be a greater number when there is no complaints criteria.

    I can understand individuals seeing some relevance in this but why would men in general support a movement that encourages a detrimental environment for them and the families and careers they are panticipating in?

    That would appear counterproductive to a functioning society.

    Comment by Evan Myers — Wed 31st October 2018 @ 8:34 am

  80. Is comment #61 what you are looking for Mama?

    Comment by Downunder — Thu 1st November 2018 @ 4:18 pm

  81. Hi Downunder, may be it was, but that had percentage of women having DV experience, I was after overall stats for where NZ stands internationally, but I was thinking that we had discussed it here before, n’r mind for now … I heard some scarey changes in the wind for assets after relationship breakup on radio today,,,,hopefully this was not brought about by the child poverty bill just passed????, not in the news headlines for tonight, but it is amazing what you hear on radio sometimes.

    Comment by mama — Thu 1st November 2018 @ 5:24 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