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

Hate Speech

Filed under: General — Downunder @ 8:20 am Sat 17th April 2021

I hate to say this but when we have modern left-wing governments in power there are always more detrimental consequences for men.

These changes often come dressed in disguise though, and we don’t see the ulterior motives intended by any proposed changes.

We don’t see much being written on menz these days either. It’s as if men have resigned themselves to civilized failure.

So, seeing the hate laws that are being proposed by the current government of New Zealand … how do you think they might affect us men?


  1. You can guarantee the opportunity to hate men will be written in there somewhere but it will be as invisible as the as the best interests of the child principle and how that worked to the detriment on men but rest assured, no other success will compensate for the failure of men or their removal from the home.

    Comment by Evan Myers — Sat 17th April 2021 @ 8:53 am

  2. There is a very big difference between hate speech and speech that you hate.

    It seems to me that people these days are offended by everything. I have no tolerance for the perpetually offended.

    Comment by golfa — Sat 17th April 2021 @ 8:46 pm


    Forget the emotive language.
    “Women and Children”
    It should have said.
    “And way, way more for female assaulting males”

    So let’s look a little deeper.
    A comment.
    “legislation that stops hate speech from going into hate crimes“
    That was quick, lawyers making laws for lawyers.

    Who then is the decider on that.
    Someone has to be very wise to predict the future.
    In the future something “could happen” so your guilty.
    The decision can so easily become political.

    A little more than ankle deep now, so more.
    “current low standard meant that it was impossible to prosecute”
    What, nobody charged with offensive language?
    What, nobody charged with, threatening to kill?

    Knee deep in the, new, swamp of litigation.
    “Those folks are subject to much more violence than the rest of us, so we should be protected.”
    Geez that has to be a grammar problem.
    Now I don’t have any idea who it’s protecting.

    Sorry that was an error.
    Persecuting, not protecting.

    Comment by DJ Ward — Mon 19th April 2021 @ 3:35 pm

  4. I choose to be offended.

    In politics we see it often. I will take that out of context because it suits me to do so.

    I’ll see that statement in isolation and be offended because it suits me.

    These become circumstances of persecution.

    We’ve learned many times in history already that it is essential to defend what we call free speech.

    Most certainly against the insecurities of those who become the illegitimate masters of power.

    Comment by Evan Myers — Wed 21st April 2021 @ 5:30 am

  5. I think the truth has become hate speech.
    Pretty much any research conclusions made in this article.
    Would be banned by Facebook as hate speech.

    Some interesting facts.
    Goes of track with some political stuff, but great source of research findings on DV.

    90% of relationships, are controlled by women.

    “So it is that women themselves report perpetrating significantly more ‘controlling’ behaviourthan do men [Bates, Graham-Kevan & Archer 2014], echoing findings that the woman typically is the ‘controlling’ partner [Vogel et al 2007], and that this is the case in 90% of couples [Coleman & Strauss 1986].”

    Research shows men can control violence, women cannot.

    “There was no research to investigate whether or not such male ‘holding back’ was a real phe-nomenon until, a decade ago, Felson, Ackerman & Yeon [2003] discovered that men are self-inhibited from being violent specifically to their partners – and that there was no such self-inhibition in women.”

    Physical violence is the first choice for women.

    “The significance of this not well-known study has emerged retrospectively when it was additionally found that women are not merely by contrast uninhibited, but actively choose physical violence as their preferred mode of aggression in an intimate-partner context.”

    Women are far more violent at home, than in public.

    “It was then further discovered that whereas men are far less violent to intimate partners than to other men, women are more violent to intimate-partners than to other women, with three times as many women as men perpetrating PV in the absence of showing violence to same-sex non-intimates [Bates Graham-Kevan & Archer 2014].”

    Females assault males 300% more than males assault females.

    “nevertheless there is three times as much inter-sexual violence by women [Morse 1995]. “

    Men have genetics to prevent male vs female violence.

    “The neural circuitry responsible for male-specific self-inhibition of violence to females has now been discovered by neuroscientists”

    Even when both are violent, females start the violence. And 300% more likely to be the violent only person.

    “The female is twice as likely to initiate in reciprocal PV, and three times as likely in non-reciprocal PV [Whitaker et al 2007]”

    Women have no issues with being violent, to male partners.

    “Women show a threefold greater propen-sity to strike a partner in a hypothetical provocation scenario, and almost every woman in the sample(96%) expected no disapproval should they do so (compared to just 24% of the men) [Bartholomewet al 2013]”

    Women are far more violent, but the police are bigots.

    “ Looking at all studies examining unidirectional PV, it is always more by women in all sampletypes bar police reports [Langhinrichsen-Rohling, Selwyn & Rohling 2012], which last are invariablyhighly biased against male reporting (as above-discussed) – and correspondingly biased in favourof female reporting: not least in facilitating false accusation ploys in custody and other disputes.”

    Men are injured as often as women.

    “intuitively, in the shadow of the ideological ‘gendered’ misrepresentation of PV, injury rates would be anticipated to be several-fold greater for women compared to men, yet theyare roughly equivalent:“

    Showing females, not males, are the domestically violent gender.

    “Not merely the only plausible but the only tenable way to account for the enormous disparitybetween the predicted and actual sex-differential in injury rates is that in reality PV overwhelminglyis perpetrated by women.”


    Explain 90% PSOs vs males.
    Explain why arrests for domestic violence, is overwhelming, the male arrested.

    The police cannot justify anything they do.
    They are corrupt.

    Was that hate speech?

    Comment by DJ Ward — Sun 23rd May 2021 @ 5:18 pm

  6. When free speech is prevented, that is only for the people and not intended for the elite. After that, the only opinions allowed are from the elite and they are heard through the mainstream news, no matter how false or incorrect they are. No challenge or debate is allowed.

    Comment by Jed — Mon 31st May 2021 @ 2:20 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