NZ Human Rights
There’s plenty of posts on this site regarding the Human Rights Commission ignoring men’s issues.
There’s a very good post here on just how confused the Human Rights Commissioner is about human rights so when the PM leaves the Human Rights Commissioner waiting 100 days one has to ask the question, did the government ever listen to them anyway?
It often appeared the case that the HRC was no longer an advisory group but an arm of government implementing government policy. At the point that Opposition parties began suggesting that the HRC was a derelict entity that could be disposed of, along with the reality that Labour was not likely to be the next government, we saw some behaviour modification.
With the covid court cases piling up, increasing degrees of social dislocation, and piles of contrary incoming evidence from overseas jurisdictions, it must have been obvious to the dog’s self-interest that its only course of salvation was to bite the master.
The continuation of the Traffic Light system in this case, now accompanied by Hipkins’ rebirth of the discriminatory vaccine pass, which apparently has some vague and undisclosed necessity for some undisclosed entities to exclude some undisclosed groups of people from somewhere.
Recently I have been looking at rising issues and asking the question, how is that going to impact men in New Zealand? I now regret not posting on those individual issues because of where we’ve got to now.
We may have been paying attention but we certainly haven’t been writing enough about that.
When I see the current developments I also wonder whether the abuse of our human rights legislation by this government has superceded gender issues by being such a blatant disregard for the existing human rights legislation, that it affected a significant proportion of the population.
Has the tyrant done us a favour in that respect, helping the general population to experience the human rights abuses normally reserved for men only?
Human rights as such hasn’t done men in New Zealand any favours since the introduction of MMP but because of the increased disregard for our legislation by the government we have several groups calling for entrenched legislation.
Then I’m asking the question, why not changes to the legislation that allowed feminists to abuse men in the first case?
We’ve got a body count of some 20,000 men who died essentially because of the abuse of their human rights … is that still not recognised or is it rather conveniently disregarded?
Plenty to think about here.
[Link to the previous post of The HRC and gender issues. ]
Hindsight can expose errors well, at the time it’s different.
It is clear technically, they went to far with rules.
I have read the lottery system, had errors that did remove rights.
Essentially also the unvaccinated, did nothing to get discriminated.
You had to take it, to not be discriminated against.
Lockdowns to people limits and masks, there is so much to argue.
As some anti vax stuff is nonsense, do they have the alternative solution.
Any court case then, should help cause less errors in the future.
A breach may be exposed, but the government had no choice.
Forced to act, even wrong they still made the only workable solution.
If the commissioner, was made to wait 100 days.
The commission, can publish at any time a conclusion.
Then it’s seperate role, would be more like reality.
Who carries the burden, if there was 100 days of harm.
Comment by DJ Ward — Sun 15th May 2022 @ 8:41 am
It seems what feminism legislates for, is dishonesty.
Not in terms of accountability, but immunity.
Think of all the stuff admitted, by Amber Heard.
Think of what happened in court, with the Sun newspaper.
How many lies, but will a single person have accountability.
If Amber Heard was a man, she would be under arrest.
Not for the dishonesty, but the violence.
What then of all the enablers, or duped judges and report writers.
How many witnesses to her violence, did not act.
How many fell for the lies, and helped her try to ruin him.
Who tried to explain away her violence, as reactive.
Yet condemning Depp, for everything even imaginary things.
What then of men in NZ, experiencing the same.
Statistically thousands of women, have these flawed personalities.
So thousands of men, at some point have to end the relationship.
The system will help thousands, on there crusade of revenge.
The male will never have rights, when dishonesty is legalised.
Certainly I can make a list, of the Crowns legislation enabling dishonesty.
Like Johnny Depp, NZ will also fail the NZ man.
Even eventually, when the accuser is exposed.
Who has the millions needed, for the lawyers.
Eagerly the male is prosecuted, then becomes magically ignorant for women.
The man will have no rights, all the dishonesty ignored.
Comment by DJ Ward — Mon 16th May 2022 @ 6:01 pm
We must identify with Evidence the concerns we often raise here.
A case in point can be found in the link below, where a women abducted a child from Germany – so she was a fugitive who then travelled to NZ where she lied to NZ immigration, terrorised and harmed the child and gas lighted the father to many. The mother broke the LAW but there has been no criminal consequences for doing so. The LAW is NOT being applied equally to ALL in NZ.
Our family gave evidence in this case, told the truth and when caught out this women ran to the police and claimed we had lied about her – another example of DARVO – blame shifting, lying and playing the VICTIM.
https://www.reputationguardian.nz/news/24-02-2021/defend-yourself-against-darvo/
What’s even more disturbing as the Father progressed through the NZ justice system is that the court of appeal finally agreed the child should have been returned to Germany years earlier in accordance with The Hague Convention but was NOT. The mother should have been deported and the criminal concerns in Germany should have been followed up by our NZ Police.
The Father spent two years trying to find his abducted Daughter – a child he had legal custody of in GERMANY – and when the child was finally located in NZ – the father engaged professional Child finding detectives at his cost to uplift the child.
Blame shifting and Projection by the NZ Justice system that does not want to accept any responsibility for the harm caused to many – then places all the blame and distress and harm to the child onto the father because he took action to have the child uplifted and returned to him.
There is no mention of the harm to the child created by the mothers actions, nor is there discussion as to the lack of prosecution of the Mother for CRIMES she has committed – For lying to NZ Immigration, for harming many with her gas lighting and false accusations and behaviours and for breaking the LAW.
In effect this story and our own story exposes a broken system that is protecting the criminal abuser and is most certainly not protecting the CHILD from HARM. The fathers legal rights to see his own child were never upheld – never.
There is NO Excuse for this – the father has indicated he is pursuing damages and has not finished with complaints before the UN as to the actions of the NZ justice system in failing to protect the child from harm caused entirely by the mothers criminal actions..
https://www.courtsofnz.govt.nz/assets/cases/SC-141-2019-Simpson-v-Hamilton.pdf
Comment by HORNET — Thu 19th May 2022 @ 8:38 am
A summary of the HARM and CRIMES committed by the woman in this case which were blame shifted, ignored and covered up.
1. A Crime was committed – Abducting a child is a crime.
2. Lying to immigration is a crime.
3. Gas lighting and psychological abuse of the child and anyone who caught the woman out is domestic violence and severe harm.
4. Lying to the courts and police is a Crime.
5. Known personality traits that could identify harmful behaviour – Neuroticism and Disagreeableness were concerns but never investigated – even if the mother had not consented to a psychological examination there were witnesses and evidence to her mental state and harmful behaviours towards her child.
6. If past behaviour determines future behaviour and the mother had a past history of ignoring and breaking the law committing crimes, and harming the child, then why was this not identified to the courts. This is the very basis by which psychologists determine the likelihood of someone harming others.
7. So while ignoring all the warning signs and the harm caused by the mother – all of the harm to the child was blame shifted to the father to remove responsibility for the failures of the state in protecting the child – A single action by the father who engages lawful detectives to find his child and uplift the child and return the child to his care – something the NZ police should have done as they arrested the mother – but no – all the harm is blamed on the father.
This insanity can not continue in NZ. There are numerous examples now where our services have protected the abuser of our most vulnerable and incited conflict for profit – as I have said the lawyer for child in our case lied to the courts and covered up the harm the mother was causing. harm identified by the courts very own independent psychologist !!!!!
Comment by HORNET — Sat 21st May 2022 @ 12:35 pm
Psychological abuse and harm leads to suicide and self harm and is now epidemic on social media.
Gas Lighting is psychological abuse and severe harm and is Domestic Violence in NZ – these are FEMININE gendered REPUTATION attacks most often used by WOMEN to harm and bully their targets. This is epidemic with Women bullying other women and is now a serious concern on social media where psychological abuse and mind crimes are the only way to harm others.
I lost a good mate to this on the back of similar attacks.
My own career was destroyed and my confidence and self esteem were wrecked by this until I educated myself on what Gas lighting was – then I was able to recover and fight back.
Finally we see women being prosecuted and Convicted for inciting SUICIDE – which is psychological abuse and harm by way of gas lighting and spreading rumours and lies about good people.
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/they-argued-up-to-wedding-family-speak-out-after-case-of-wife-guilty-of-inciting-suicide/BL2RYLESMNQCC7GHYAEK4JUT44/
If you want to learn more visit my web site – education and knowledge is power. Rebuild your confidence and self esteem and never back down to bullies and abusers. Demand those who engage in reputation attacks be prosecuted for domestic violence.
https://www.reputationguardian.nz/news/04-12-2020/gaslighting-–-a-modern-technique-to-destroy-reputation/
Comment by HORNET — Sat 21st May 2022 @ 12:45 pm
There is an issue, about rights in the future.
Because as we get things, we start to believe we have rights.
The right, to own a motor vehicle.
Even the unlicensed, can own one.
So imagine, being the dictator.
And you decide, to ban car ownership.
Obviously you can’t do that now, the world would stop.
But actually, the technology exists now.
Imagine a fleet, of electric cars.
Self driving, and controlled by a supercomputer.
Simply dial up for a car, and one arrives at your door.
It may have been, going to a charging station.
It may have been charging, but had enough for the trip.
Or even decide, to just park up.
If you give a time and destination, the supercomputer can decide.
It could even optimise, controlling motorway flow.
So today, that’s not quite possible.
But soon, humans must face these decisions.
As when it’s possible, earth has dictators.
Comment by DJ Ward — Thu 9th June 2022 @ 6:02 pm
There is clearly problems, in the prison system.
Because prison staff quitting, is a symptom.
And various reasons exist, for them quitting.
At the top of the list, is prisoner behaviour.
Prison guards was used as an example, in pay equity claims.
This job, should get the same as this job due to skills.
Job with more females is paid less, vs guards being more men and paid more.
Maybe the danger pay for this male dominated job, is now to low.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/128981532/nearly-800-frontline-prison-jobs-unstaffed-as-guards-quit-in-droves
So try as you like, to improve conditions.
Prosecute, the prisoners more.
Give better armour, and cameras.
Create perks, or improve wages.
Train them better, or new safer facilities.
There remains a human, who’s the prisoner.
Has the new system, made them worse or better.
They assault more often, so it can’t be better.
So if the aim is, a longer carrier length.
It won’t be achieved, by giving guards more.
What is done to prisoners, is the problem.
Maybe, we don’t want hard questions.
Why does the prisoner, want to hurt the guard.
Is the punishment, causing sanity problems.
How did society, make the prisoner.
After treatment in the system, the prisoner is released.
For the money paid, is the taxpayer getting results.
Comment by DJ Ward — Sat 18th June 2022 @ 5:16 pm
I think prices falling, will have big ramifications.
And arguments exist, for housing to be a human right.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/opinion/129175203/councils-are-defying-the-need-for-housing-intensification
I listened to an economics wiz, about the rich getting richer.
And certainly, our housing market has helped the rich.
And by getting rich, the poor have to remain poor.
Essentially the poor, need to pay the rich income on investments.
Because the rich, don’t actually do anything.
Capitalism for housing, doesn’t then work for the poor.
However you need investment, to make houses.
Unless you have a stable population, so not needing more.
Even then you would still want, to modernise housing.
What then would you restrict, the rich from owning.
They unrestricted will simply buy up stock, forcing everyone to rent.
And if they were excluded from the market, the poor would own them.
Can the poor not finance the mortgage, of the rich man.
Logically they can afford, there own mortgages.
Yet we see politicians, trying to restrict progress.
Protecting prices, or what from change.
Protecting the rich, from supply for the poor.
Dare not break the shackles, of the gravy train.
Comment by DJ Ward — Tue 5th July 2022 @ 7:25 pm
This creates an argument, about competency.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/opinion/129385067/make-lowering-voting-age-an-issue-for-parliament
The left and right wing point of view, is about voting.
The assumption being, youth are less conservative.
So naturally the right wing, will want it 18.
Actually they may want it higher, like 21.
If nature was reversed, the left would appose it.
Is there a study, of competency by age.
Showing 16 year olds, understand enough.
Could you make a test, for every person.
Even ignorant of age, you can’t vote until you pass.
A clever 10 year old, may have competency.
While some adults, couldn’t actually pass.
When the age is 16, why not then 15.
Is the argument, not the same.
An informed 14 year old, vs the uninformed adult.
The 13 year old, who studied a qualification.
Even little children pay taxes, spending pocket money.
Why not go to the extreme, with everyone voting.
The parent, voting on behalf of the child.
Comment by DJ Ward — Wed 27th July 2022 @ 8:27 pm
An important thing, is judicial independence.
That politics of a case, doesn’t influence the courts.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/300654577/russian-judge-sentences-us-basketball-star-brittney-griner-to-nine-years-in-prison
It’s rare but I agree with Biden, as it’s unacceptable.
So if it can be done to a woman, why not to men.
Would the media pick up the story, for a male.
Or is that the driver, of Russian behaviour.
Knowing the west can’t accept, treating women badly.
Comment by DJ Ward — Fri 5th August 2022 @ 9:36 am
I have zero sympathy for Brittney Griner.
Comment by golfa — Fri 5th August 2022 @ 4:12 pm
She did break the law, so there is consequences.
It’s not like it’s imported to sell, so it’s not the worst case.
So the punishment, should have reflected that.
So nine years, looks political.
Nine years for weed, is another argument.
I guess the argument, becomes about us.
If they can do it to her, then you could be next.
If we allow it there, will they do it here.
Do trials become political, like impeachment in the US.
One side prosecuted for everything, the other seemingly immune.
If you don’t like a person, what if they don’t like you.
What happens if the courts on there side, and not yours.
You the other group, subject to harsher punishment.
The public may even demand, a harsh sentence.
It doesn’t even need to be politicians, influencing judges.
If the judge compared similar cases, vs her case.
How normal is this sentence, for it to be deserved.
Comment by DJ Ward — Sat 6th August 2022 @ 9:12 pm
This case is about sentences, being light.
And also shows the author, avoiding the subject.
You don’t get an argument, about the age of consent.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/bay-of-plenty/300680794/no-justice-disgusting-friend-of-teenage-girls-who-were-raped-leads-protest
So if you have an age of consent, is it strict.
If this was a one victim crime, is it different.
Was it forced or manipulated, lust or propositioned.
Is it age of consent arbitrary, or conditional.
The law breaker, gambling on a community sentence.
It is hard to argue, with prison for rape being mandatory.
Much harder, if there is many accusations.
So one must ask, the victims rights.
Is the age of consent real, or debatable.
Is it not a right, we give children.
Or is it a right, taken away.
A 15 year old, who propositions says so.
Where exactly is this arbitrary, age for imprisonment.
Comment by DJ Ward — Wed 7th September 2022 @ 6:55 pm
This is an interesting case, looking at rights.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/education/130354548/frustration-over-schools-sexist-uniform-rules-banning-earrings-for-boys
So the first question is, why the discrimination.
Nothing logical says girls should have them, or boys.
They serve no actual function, improving life.
Earrings could mean anything, to the wearer or viewers.
Certainly culture try’s to say, you are better with them.
But somehow what’s good for girls, is judged bad for boys.
The parents argument in the case, is actually feminism.
Since nothing logical is happening, there is discrimination.
The next question is the claim, of a human rights act breach.
No service exists in this available to girls, but not for boys.
So what can the breach be, as ones not actually there.
How far does the argument go, with boy and girl things.
Is the thing allowed necessary for girls, but not for boys.
Do boys have things, that girls don’t have.
The final question, is culture.
If I have this culture, but you have that culture.
Why’s should your culture, dictate over my culture.
Maybe I’m biased, having an old piercing myself.
Who then dictates, over culture.
Certainly that’s a hard question, when things aren’t logical.
It says this culture but not that culture, rather than a rights argument.
Comment by DJ Ward — Thu 3rd November 2022 @ 8:25 pm
For all of us, we were children.
Each with our own experience, with rights.
The parent saying no to the child, an extreme.
It’s a good read, as it’s not politically motivated.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/opinion/300743729/are-we-there-yet-in-providing-a-better-life-for-our-children-hardly
The argument is, rights is the foundation of good things.
As an extreme, somehow with guaranteed perfect childhoods.
Is the child’s rights, how we then judge parents.
If the rights were real, is a breach then crime.
The parent missing a meal, the rights to food breached.
Allowing the teen a girlfriend, no different than child marriage.
The random school day off, seen as breaching rights.
A normal parent argument, something the child can report.
So we do well, in trying to protect child’s rights.
A starving child is rare, and culture is against marriage.
School is free, and truancy is a policy,
People are trying, to prevent family violence.
Even if the child’s rights, look secondary to adults.
As the writer shows, we get a better society from them.
The chance of making bad adults, becomes less.
The chance of making good adults, becomes more.
Comment by DJ Ward — Sun 20th November 2022 @ 9:13 pm
This is a very good argument, about children’s rights.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/opinion/130568718/josie-pagani-supreme-court-breezily-strikes-a-blow-against-democracy
So this is about voting, and the voting age.
Arbitrarily any age, is discrimination.
Because competent or need, can be argued for any person.
A 16 year old individual, with better competency than you.
But an age for something, excludes competency tests.
“Voting is the right of all adults. The only issue to determine is ‘’are you an adult?’’”
Which is an important thing, the right to vote.
Nobody judging us, deciding if we’re good enough.
No chance, of right or left biases.
Why the term adult, causing discrimination to the 16 year old.
Certainly voting should not judge the human, at all.
If it’s a human right, why turn down anyone voting.
The argument changes from competency, to exploiting.
How easy is it for propaganda, to become believed.
Can another, make you vote for a party.
Certainly adults don’t even cope, with that problem.
Comment by DJ Ward — Fri 25th November 2022 @ 10:19 am
We can say we have rights, but they are not automatic.
The right to be believed, is certainly not automatic.
It’s humans fault, as dishonesty is prolific.
Imagine that world, that humans automatically told the truth.
We say we have the right to be believed, but nobody believes it.
Ask any judge about who is telling the truth, it’s an endless dilemma.
The right to know who you are, is not automatic.
You play in a lottery, about who is your father.
You can guess the culprit, humans are dishonest.
We don’t need to have imagination, to solve it.
The technology is here, the affordable solutions exist.
The right not to be arrested, is not automatic.
Many are arrested, with false allegations.
Yes the offending, is good old human dishonesty.
Not being a false witness, even the bible is just ignored.
Treated as unsolvable, yet the arrest happened.
Nobody is trying to stop, wrongful arrest in NZ.
What are your rights, that can be solved.
And what are your rights, that cannot be solved.
If you cannot solve them, is that then the excuse to ignore it.
Because of human dishonesty, nobody gets believed.
Fix as many rights as you wish, dishonesty is the problem.
Comment by DJ Ward — Mon 31st July 2023 @ 7:17 pm