“Remembering Those Killed on the Job?”
This article tells us that today is Workers Memorial Day to remember those killed and injured on the job. However, it seems that everyone involved takes great care to avoid mentioning that men make up the vast majority of such workers. Not once is the word ‘men’ even used. The 28 forestry ‘workers’ who have died since 2008 will all have been men. Why do people wish to deny and hide the contribution of men in our society? Avoiding mentioning they were men implies that gender equality applies to this issue. It doesn’t, but as is the case for all other matters in which men are disadvantaged, male disadvantage is denied and ignored. Rather than honouring the men who have sacrificed their lives or bodies in their jobs, for me this dishonest way of remembering them insults their memory.
Not forgetting the 29 killed in the Pike River mine?
Worse though are those though still alive, however maimed by machinary. They may as well be dead, faced with a life fighting ACC etc. simply to keep their families fed!
Comment by Gwahir — Sun 28th April 2013 @ 3:59 pm
How do we know all the forestry workers that died were male, and respectfully, what relevance does that have in respect of this story.
It’s about the danger of certain occupations, and steps being taken to remediate the risks employees are exposed to.
Comment by Nigel — Mon 29th April 2013 @ 8:54 am
The information is not hard to find.
You will find the 2012 statistics here. (8 unqualified cases)
http://www.osh.govt.nz/resources/stats/fatalities-2012.shtml
There were three female work place accidents.
One fell over.
One had a quad bike accident.
One was killed by an elephant.
The general percentage quoted by Statistics NZ is 94% plus for male work-related deaths.
The sterilisation of language to remove any gender qualifications means that these issues are only made clear if they are actually reported in the media.
Is this a language issue or an attitude issue?
Comment by Down Under — Mon 29th April 2013 @ 9:32 am
In the case mentioned above it is simply journalist Heather McCracken being patently lazy.
It is not a huge step to investigate whether the 28 forestry workers were men and the second paragraph could have stated, ‘the 28 men’.
This is fairly typical of our young female journalists. I saw another story recently which stated,
Arthur Allan Thomas killed his neighbour. That is absolute rubbish, fictitious news through lack of research, when the deceased and the accused lived 16 km’s apart on the opposite sides of the Pukekawa township, nobody killed anyone’s neighbour.
Comment by Down Under — Mon 29th April 2013 @ 10:00 am
Nigel (#2): The Ministry of Men’s Affairs post explains the relevance of failing to mention gender in discussing a problem in which men are the main victims. You can be sure that for any problem in which women were the majority of victims, gender would be emphasized or there would at least be some acknowledgement that it’s mainly women who are affected. You wouldn’t see a story about ‘unaccompanied walkers’ or ‘people’ in isolated parts of the city at night being more at risk of being rape victims without any mention that those victims are mainly women (even though the proportion of male rape victims is probably comparable to the proportion of female workplace fatalities). For problems mainly affecting men, such as suicide and men’s work in the most dangerous roles, commentators go to great lengths to choose language that avoids any hint it’s a problem mainly affecting males. That is a double standard. And no ‘Down Under’ (#4), I don’t accept that it’s simply a case of the journalist being lazy. Journalists are as deliberate in highlighting issues as women’s issues when that is mainly so as they are in avoiding any mention of issues as men’s issues when that is mainly so.
And Nigel I would be happy to dig up evidence that all of the 28 forestry workers referred to are men if you would enter into a substantial wager concerning this. We would both have to deposit the wager money into an adjudicator’s account and may the best man win (assuming we both are).
Comment by Luther Blissett — Mon 29th April 2013 @ 9:50 pm
I can’t wait for all the news articles about the change in Child Support next year, then you’ll see all the shaming language about how men are dead beat parents not willing to pay child support to the poor defenceless suffering women who have to toil hard long hours at wait for it………. looking after thier own children (gasp!!!) There will be a lot of male bashing, no people or paying parents blah blah just men bad! Women need money to useless to earn it unless lay down on thier backs. So oppressed.
No article will state how men are unfairly treated through the system so they can’t actually be the ones raising thier kids and or recieve CS from evil ex wifes because we all no they don’t exist.
Comment by Too Tired — Mon 29th April 2013 @ 10:07 pm
great article about how horrible women are today!
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10880402
it’s nz herald about dirnking while prganant, I guess they couldn’t avoid admitting that they are women in this article, suprised it found print.
Comment by Too Tired — Mon 29th April 2013 @ 10:13 pm
@ Luther Blisset. I hear what you are saying but they are two parts of the same equation. Notice how the rate of enquiry goes up when the situation is reversed. If you do the job, you get the results – if it is a men’s issue it is an excuse to be lazy.
Is it better to highlight the gender discrepancy or the professional fault?
Comment by Down Under — Tue 30th April 2013 @ 12:11 am
@ Too Tired. You should post that under pussy pass. Foetal alcohol syndrome is a result of DICOW – women drunk in charge of wombs, from which many children never recover.
It is definitely nothing to do with work related accidents.
Comment by Down Under — Tue 30th April 2013 @ 12:55 am
Not just Alcohol Down Under, try illicit drugs, and even tobacco. If Any female chooses to perpetuate the species, she should be in peak condition. Others tend to be irresponsible!
Comment by Gwahir — Tue 30th April 2013 @ 1:00 am
FYI, our letter to journalist Simon Collins regarding his article today about workplace deaths, injuries and safety.
Comment by Ministry of Men's Affairs — Sat 4th May 2013 @ 8:56 am
Lets have a push to get more women into mining and into fishong boats. Can’t keep these bastions of male privilege forever!
Comment by John Brett — Sat 4th May 2013 @ 9:59 am
Simon Collins feminist lacky. Get used to this – your pussy pandering nonsense doesn’t fool a growing number of folks who see past your hiding, thus ennobling male disposability. Time to get out of your oestrogen soaked ‘news’ office and get grounded in male reality mate.
Comment by Skeptic — Sat 4th May 2013 @ 11:42 am
Thanks John and Skeptic. Yes John, I understand there are long lines of women wanting to get into those plumb jobs such as mining, fishing, mechanics, sewage maintenance and rubbish collecting. But the old boys network just keeps shutting them out from such privilege and women don’t bother making much fuss about it because they know they don’t have a chance of breaking through that wall of patriarchal discrimination. So they are forced to limit their sights by seeking gender equality in executive management and company board positions instead.
Comment by Ministry of Men's Affairs — Sat 4th May 2013 @ 12:44 pm
The way to eliminate male death rates is through technology, especially in areas like forestry. The push for a legislative solution will achieve something different.
When it comes to court cases women will be treated as the exception and fines for damaging them will be higher.
What this will do is cause employers to protect women from risk when they are employed in male risk jobs.
All this will achieve is providing equivalent jobs where women get paid the same for doing less and lower the productivity of those company that hires women.
You can see that in the recent transport industry case that surfaced last week.
Comment by Down Under — Thu 9th May 2013 @ 4:45 pm
Not just Killed, seriously injured. This from today’s (9 May 2013) news:-
A man has been rushed to hospital after being pinned beneath a scaffolding truck when it rolled.
The man, understood to be a mechanic who had been working at the Wellington property, was removed from the scene on Cockayne Rd in Khandallah about 1.30pm, “conscious and breathing”.
Police and the OSH representatives were on site and investigating the incident.
Acting Sergeant Roslyn Whitley said the scaffolding truck was a large one.
“There has been an accident where a man’s been trapped under a truck.
“He was transported to hospital. He was conscious and breathing when he left the house.”
The scene of the accident was up a long driveway and not visible from the road.
Comment by Gwahir — Thu 9th May 2013 @ 11:48 pm
Gwahir (#16): Can you provide a link for this article? At least it made clear the male gender of the accident victim. News stories often refer simply to ‘worker’, ‘miners’, ‘crew member’ etc and go to great lengths to avoid mentioning the male gender of those killed or injured.
Comment by Luther Blissett — Fri 10th May 2013 @ 11:27 am
I would guess it is this one.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/8653181/Man-pinned-under-truck
Comment by Down Under — Fri 10th May 2013 @ 11:36 am
Down Under (#3): The statistics to which you refer do not include deaths in the maritime, aviation sectors or work-related road crashes. I don’t know what impact they would have on the gender percentages but I doubt it would reduce the male proportion.
Also, the sterilisation of language you refer to seems to occur only to hide the male gender of victims. Whenever a female is injured, killed or is the victim of a crime, her gender is emphasized.
Comment by Luther Blissett — Fri 10th May 2013 @ 11:40 am
#18 Yeah thats the one! When men get injured (As opposed to Kllrd, They make a job of it.
Comment by Gwahir — Mon 13th May 2013 @ 10:24 pm
Here is yet another article on workplace deaths that completely fails to mention or even hint that it’s overwhelmingly a men’s issue.
Comment by Luther Blissett — Tue 14th May 2013 @ 9:16 pm
Forestry deaths update
Charles Finlay, a father of three, is now a number on a grim list – the sixth forestry fatality of 2013, the 28th since 2008. His wife, the latest forestry widow.
A machine operator with 30 years experience and he died on $16.00 an hour!
Comment by Downunder — Mon 30th September 2013 @ 7:42 am
Different subject, but still a gender topic.
The workplace.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/300301361/a-lack-of-scientific-credibility-to-opposition-to-seabed-mining-in-new-zealand
There is a photo in the article.
Hard to tell if there is gender bias, by one photo.
So assumption.
I have looked at this subject before.
Of mining our iron sand deposits.
And support mining it as a resource.
The main problem is life forms, where they mine.
And dust plumes, going down current.
Essentially they suck up sand.
Use magnets etc to get the good stuff.
Ejecting the bad stuff.
Like gold rush, but huge amounts of money.
So if they do a reasonable amount of life form survey.
A reasonable relocation of life, and return of life.
So then the problem is the reject material.
And the argument is that in rough seas, nature experiences dust anyway.
How much dust, on an area, is natural.
Does the mining exceed this natural occurring level.
Highly likely close to the mining.
Surely low dust ideas are being designed into the plan?
A more adventurous plan.
Way more environment credentials.
Would be to pump it to shore.
Resulting in sea level fall.
Or make nature reserve/public park islands.
Also just resulting in sea level fall.
Or just exploit with no purpose.
Taking without giving.
………………
Think about the tax take.
Yes it’s dangerous out there, at sea.
Mostly a male trade.
For so little you could do amazing things.
Like…..
60,000 births.
$100 DNA test.
IE a paltry, $6 million.
Minister of Internal affairs, using its database.
Confirms paternity. (An inevitability of democracy, the DNA database, like Police, ancestry sites)
Or exposes a travesty.
Ending eternity, of men’s experience.
Of a female sex crime.
A tiny fraction of the money dished out for women lately.
That’s cheaper than a government, having a conversation, about women.
Comment by DJ Ward — Wed 12th May 2021 @ 8:44 pm