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


Filed under: General,Law & Courts — mama @ 12:36 pm Thu 9th August 2018

One would wonder, if there is a war going on here, and children are being used, whom is the protection for ?,, the child or the mother.

For myself the question to ask is who is getting hurt the most???


  1. The concept of making every woman a winner is fairly obvious in Feminist thinking.

    Perhaps you’re right … an act of terrorism.

    Have we been too kind in our description of those females who lead this hostile cause?

    Comment by Downunder — Fri 10th August 2018 @ 9:46 am

  2. The law operates by electing a norm, stabilising that norm
    and then follows that norm until it decides that a new norm must be
    established. In the process, complexities and realities must be ignored in order
    for the law to be predictable. A genuine individualistic approach may be
    beyond the scope of the legal system’s operations. This is however the only
    approach that can come close to best serving children’s welfare and interests
    in custody and contact decisions.

    This above from a thesis kinda explains the dynamic causing it.

    The way it is – a protection order is the best and fastest way to win custody.

    Comment by JustCurious — Fri 10th August 2018 @ 12:01 pm

  3. #1 and #2, SOCIETY has been too kind so as to err on the side of caution.. this is where it goes all wrong for the so called risk factors,, in the case of the protection order , that risk factor is the man.

    Here in lies a big and ugly problem, in what way can we add something to help dull the so called risk because it seems government does not really take away what has already been installed, can something good be added???

    Comment by mama — Fri 10th August 2018 @ 1:55 pm

  4. The Protection Order is not for the child.

    It may be for the state, judges, police, lawyers, court coordinators in order to perpetuate their existence beyond the child’s youth.

    We know the statistics and outcomes for fatherless children, ;
    Abused by mummies new bang.
    Girls into drugs prostitution
    Boys into courts police custody

    If they get rid of the fathers these are likely outcomes.

    It may be that judges cops and lawyers have gone to prostitutes fro their services while on the way to preach virtues prior to heading home to the wife. Where will thew prostitutes come from with out fatherless children?

    How about their jobs? Who will they judge with out people breaking the law, get rid of the good father role model and this outcome will be more likely.

    Where will the police get informants without drugs criminal offences then leverage. Good role model fathers will stymie this outcome. Clearly fatherless children are important for this outcome to occur.

    The legal aid “gravy train” is it Lawyers we hear singing “May you Never Leave the Station”

    Lets unite, and roll them.

    Comment by Brad — Sat 11th August 2018 @ 7:20 am

  5. when you think about it, it is sad.

    The law basically becomes a prescription controlling our every expectation and action.

    They choose what is legal and illegal and they take our lawful rigths accordingly and unlawfully give themselves more powers.

    But essentially they can never reach a genuine individualistic approach. It is a program with a set of formulas which prescribe a certain form of action when the necessaries triggers are met. Thus they can maintain a predictability in outcome and reinforce the fraudulently created expectation of safety that the courts are empowered to provide.

    So their very involvement in human affairs is likely to cause harm to the parties. It appears the policy is on using minimal harm to others to protect any person. But the actual operation of the law is preemtive and must then deny someone a right without the required evidence necessary to do so in a fair and just system.

    Is it possible here also that the Police itself may be a driving factor and accomplice in this?

    Their way of lobbying for more police rights to discretion not to prosecute in areas of personal dispute enables them to liberally drag people before the courts and attach their names to a docket.

    The more arrest they make and the more allegations they solicit and the more litigation they create effectively raise the statistics for more funding applications and budget. So their now higher impact on society creates the necessary numbers that validate their further encroachment and interventions into our rights.

    It appears the Police has managed to recreate a version of itself – just like the system – by repeatedly and continuously reaffirming its own vision of the external world and its own situation within that constructed world and thus forever concealing the paradox of its own role and impact in the destruction of the NZ family.

    Formerly they were here to serve and protect. Now their oath is not to the people of NZ bu trather to the crown and its interests.

    Lawyers come next and the legal aid system turns this all into an arena where cops and lawyers turn human being into pawns in their game of chess.

    The police steals your rights and the lawyers find a way to restore them. But the only way out is through the system.

    Comment by JustCurious — Sat 11th August 2018 @ 9:48 am

  6. The difficulty that men have in rationalizing this is that they refer to what is known to them and what ‘is right’ or what ‘is wrong’.

    When there is a change in the law the outcry comes from those affected.

    For men, what isn’t well understood is that societies don’t just operate. There is a social model which must be backed by an economic model.

    Most of us are too busy trying to work in the economic model in some way, while tax funded (call them what you like) are busy plugging the next law change, social change, agency creation that fits into a social model we can’t see.

    This is a continuing process, the current example; as soon as Jan Logie’s DV Holiday Act is passed, we have a new bill for miscarriage grief leave.

    Comment by Downunder — Sat 11th August 2018 @ 12:15 pm

  7. #4,,,, yes ,, unite and petition…I think AT LEAST, regardless of orders, that men should above all have the right to be included in his childs life.

    The presumption of guilt when certain orders are put in place goes against the way the law is supposed to be carried out,, what men need is a protection order against the people aparantley needing the protection orders in the first instance.!!!!!!!!!!.

    This is purgatory!..for the innocent!

    #6,,,, Yes amazing how quickly these new issues are being looked into and looked after…maybe this is the track to take…name yourself a minority that deserves the pity of the state and throw in some more leave,,,not bad ,,, how many days on average and how much money spent on average does the man in NZs’ very own purgatory pay every year he is caught up in the family court system.

    Comment by mama — Sat 11th August 2018 @ 3:12 pm

  8. The second a Protection order is made, and especially in the case of Without Notice, the first move should be that a pyschologist is brought in to decipher whether or not this is a necessity.

    At the moment vultures in the form of lawyers and counsellers take charge and take hold of the situation, twisting and contorting any truth to be found.

    The way it is the now, Men and Children and some women are further maligned and persecuted’, can some one please tell me how this keeps the families and children safe from mental harm and persecution.

    Comment by mama — Sun 12th August 2018 @ 3:14 pm

  9. I am not sure that psychologists were ever on the side of reason.

    Having spoken to many men affected by the draconian extent of this legal framework I recall one in particular saying

    They’ve put us in prison.

    I think that is also worth considering.

    Comment by Downunder — Mon 13th August 2018 @ 5:23 pm

  10. Who then is on the side of reason.?

    Comment by mama — Mon 13th August 2018 @ 6:37 pm

  11. @ 10 – if reason is common sense; then humanity is bankrupt for lack of individual sense.

    Comment by JustCurious — Wed 22nd August 2018 @ 7:47 pm

  12. Logic or reason is not common sense.

    Common sense is what is generally known or accepted as being right.

    It doesn’t save the individual from themselves although sometimes the phrase is mistakenly used this way.

    Comment by Evan Myers — Wed 22nd August 2018 @ 8:03 pm

  13. Common sense and reason are surely more like brother and sister than cousins.

    Comment by mama — Wed 22nd August 2018 @ 8:36 pm

  14. without individual reasoning or logic there is no common sense.

    So common sense is common logic or accepted reason (1 + 1 = 2, stealing is bad and so is lying).

    Reason or logic can be educated, empirical or intuitive but it always implies a conclusion which incidentally is what we call sense (have you not any sense?)

    Comment by JustCurious — Thu 23rd August 2018 @ 8:33 am

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