As I said, here is the update.
I just received the Protection Order and Parenting Order today – two young policemen did their duty by delivering and pseudo reading out what they deemed to be important – no contact, no firearms, lasting forever, etc, etc. I had to let him carry on I didn’t have the heart to tell him that I knew more about the law than he likely ever will and that anyway I have already been through this before.
(more…)

This newly named sexual orientation, ‘pornosexual’, is probably related to some extent to MGTOW. Under modern laws and administration, relationships and marriage have been made seriously dangerous for men. However, there’s no mention in the article about that aspect of the issue.

Previous posts have highlighted a mounting campaign by feminist forces against pornography. We can’t allow men to find ways out of being enslaved, now can we? (more…)

My ex partner took out a protection order and I challenged it as she accused me of several things but as it always goes I lost and it became final …. I breached the temporary protection order by communicating with her online and sending her texts as I wanted to assure her I meant no harm was convicted and fined for it.

From there on I decided I need to let it go as she is vicious and can just destroy my life so now it’s been 4.5 years I never ever contacted her or go in the area where I think I might bump into her. I applied to courts to lift the order as I have been in a steady relationship for last 2 years and have no desire to contact her anymore. I received a letter that she has engaged a lawyer and going to file a defence. What do you think are my chances of getting the order lifted as I just want to move on in my life. Is it worth contesting it or try again in 2-3 years time? I was advised by community lawyer that if 3 years have elapsed it is a good time in my case it’s been 4.5 years already… Any suggestions

This study should be fascinating, probably for its poor research design, invalid extrapolation, poor reasoning and misuse of words that mean one thing to imply they mean something else. From what we can make out, the researcher surveyed a group of parents and found that 79% said they wanted their children to be free of limiting gender stereotypes and 92% said they agreed it was important to treat girls and boys equally in their early years. Mmm, well most parents want the best for their children and if the wording of questions makes them sound like that’s what it’s about, most parents would tend to answer “yes”. Anyway, from this startling finding the researcher concluded that it’s ‘crucial’ we don’t treat baby girls differently from baby boys because that will cause the boys to be domestic violence perpetrators and will cause people generally to think men make better leaders. And so forth.

It is surprising that feminist academics continue to ignore the evidence that gender is largely genetic. We have known quite a few educated parents who were careful not to use blue or pink or gender-specific toys or activities. Guess what? As soon as they were old enough to actively show their interest in one thing or another, most of the boys just wanted such things as toy trucks, weapons and things to dismantle while most of the girls just wanted such things as dolls, flowery things and personal embellishments, and neither showed much interest in the other’s preferences.

Incidentally, it seems to be common practice by the feminist researchers to spread their claimed findings and extrapolations through news media before actually publishing their papers. This cleverly prevents readers from being able to check the actual research to see if the news release information was justified. It’s only possible of course because of journalists’ complicity.

Media have given publicity to a NZ Family Violence Clearinghouse paper recently prepared by Dr Melane Beres called “Preventing adolescent relationship abuse and promoting healthy relationships”. The paper is an opinion piece citing various research papers of varying quality in support. This may have been lost on journalists who attributed various statistics to the ‘report’s findings’ when in fact they had been findings in other studies merely repeated here.

The main theme of Dr Beres’ paper was that adolescent relationship violence (sexual, physical and emotional ) is a big problem in NZ that needs to be changed, and she made various suggestions about what exactly should be targeted for change and how best to achieve this. She may well be correct in some of what she says though it and the underlying assumptions deserve careful scrutiny and consideration. Although adolescent boys report being subject to significant levels of the same problems reported by girls, Dr Beres clearly lays the blame for such problems mainly on males, maleness and male socialization. There is also an interesting confusion in her paper between gender and racial political correctness, for example implying that if Maori youth were to be taught traditional Maori culture and values this would result in reduced violence.

However, the point of this post is to highlight the false propaganda involved in Dr Beres’ paper and keenly spread by our journalists. Surely it’s not unreasonable to expect that journalists will try to clarify what things mean and will try to convey accurate information about the world? No such luck when it comes to feminist assertions and other politically fashionable stuff. (more…)

News story here.

Where there’s a will, there’s a way to challenge it

So what happens when your new partner hawks off with your house, money and stuff and your kids are left with little or nothing?

I suppose a death is similar to a separation or divorce. Should it go to your kids or the new person in your life.

I take the view in separation or divorce it should go to who worked and earned it keeps it.

In death it should be for the person who eared it children first and not your step children unless it is in your will.

Harsh, unfair or problematic? While the answer is all three, I prefer to call it simple.

I favor trusts. You don’t own it, you’re just a trustee. If you want the trust to allocate limited living rights in a property to your new partner and step kids you can. But ultimately who earns the money their children get it.

Hi all

I am thinking of going down this route as a step parent.
Biological father lives on the other side of the world.
Mother (my wife) has health issues, I need to be able to make calls on the spot re: children in case she can’t
Biological father will oppose my application for no good reason, 100% guaranteed.
So I prefer to take this approach and let him argue about it afterwards rather than have him oppose the application with notice.

Any suggestions or thoughts? Always appreciated.

I have my case coming up – this is the 2nd PO order and custody in 10 years – it never gets any easier.
Here are my questions:
1) The Social worker report (s132) – she has just re-iterated much of what the ex has already said, but then says things like the childrens’ answers “did not–appear to be coached or rehearsed.? Has she any qualification to say this?
2) The lawyer for Child – again pretty much asks questions based on what he has heard in the court and states same sort of thing – same question as above really?
3) Am I able to cross-examine LFC?
4) Am I allowed to just ask pages of closed questions requiring yes / no answers?
5) Can I ask that my McKenzie friend puts the questions to my ex on my behalf?
6) I understand that I am only allowed to examine my own witness of info they have already submitted, is that correct?

Thanks in anticipation?

The International Conference on Men’s Issues (ICMI) is a series of annual conferences presented by AVfM Education, LLC dealing with social and legal issues that disproportionately affect men and boys.

This year’s conference (more…)

Just found this Ben Shipiro, where about 5 minutes in, he calls this guy dressed as a woman “Sir”, just listen to his response – threatening violence. Now tell me that if he wasn’t in drag, he would get away with such a threat. Enjoy

I was invited to have dinner at my friends place last night, a middle-aged couple with a young daughter. They both (him and her) know of the troubles I have had to endure lately with me ex taking my kids etc (just for your info, I haven’t seen my 15yo and 13yo boys in over 12 months and yet they live only 1 km away – all under a temporary custody order). What surprised me was the wife, whom i believe has watched the Red Pill etc, brought up that she subscribes to a feminist Facebook page which really took me aback. I don’t know why but it did. Presumably she does believe that women earn less than men, that women’s rights are trodden on my people like me. Two-faced comes to mind.

link

Can anyone explain to me why we are supposed to be liberal open minded people and yet we are anti-pedophile? Now I know you might call this semantics but pedophillia is a psychiatric disorder in which an adult or older adolescent experiences a primary or exclusive sexual attraction to prepubescent children.

This is not something I would chose to have, and I am sure the people who have this condition don’t chose to have it either. I am sure there isn’t a law against it yet?
So what is it that we as society don’t like – well I think that is child sex offenders, which is possibly committed by some people with pedophillia but I am sure it is also committed by others who we would not class as pedophiles.

So my point. I just wanted to put it out there, as it seems to me at least that the word is often used incorrectly, and I would like to think I would have sympathy for someone with a mental disorder rather than condemn them for something that they have little to no control over.

Last year, after my ex decided that she wanted another pound of flesh took my children from me under the guise of an interim custody order (I’m still fighting this in court). Prior to this (some 7 years ago and I’m sure no surprise to most) she obtained a protection order, which she then supported the removal off after 3 years. So remember “no current orders” other than the interim custody order. (more…)

The case of Auditor-General Martin Matthews appears to be another example of men being held responsible when women misbehave. Not much has fundamentally changed in attitudes since the era in which husbands were considered responsible for their wives’ behaviour and debts. (more…)

I’m sick of ‘White Middle-Class Male’ arogance. Rohan Lord got the wakeup call he deserved.

Was he that politicaly naive, that socially disconnected, that remotely hopeful, that he could make any change by joining the Labour Party.

He got chucked? (more…)

Okinoshima, an interesting idea. Perhaps NZ’s two main islands could do the same.

A kaleidoscope car appears at your door
Waiting to take you away
Climb in the back, with your head in the clouds
And (more…)

A previous post discussed the misuse of a publicly funded swimming pool by banning males and allowing only females at the complex for several prime hours each week. Now we read that a girls’ school netball tournament has been banning men from any presence or role, including the girls’ fathers. (more…)

I really don’t think people get this, and it pains me to watch the chaos building around both the discussion and the prospective fix, which as I see it, is encouraging the problem, not helping it.

As a young New Zealander (more…)

I need some reliable info. I have been crippled for the last year in custody hearings at the FC and my bet is I’m going to come second again! My predicament is that the is to be a final hearing next month and while I am entitled to legal aid I don’t use it as it is merely a loan. My question is this – is there a way for me to bail out before the hearing and avoid paying costs? You see it looks like my ex-wife will ask for costs through her lawyer, so to add insult to injury, I will have to pay for her lawyer, while not being able to afford one of my one – they call that justice! It seems pathetic to me that she has stolen my kids, my health and my job and now intends to cripple me financially. I have a cylinder of helium close by just in case the mood takes me to finish it for good. Wishing you all a very good evening. 🙂

This trend is quite something. Apparently it’s somehow related to being a feminist, or single, or something.

From a correspondent; we changed place names to respect privacy:

I picked up a hitch-hiker today even though he had no backpack. He told me his essential reason for needing to hitchhike and I encouraged him to share the rest of his story. I have changed the locations to respect privacy, but nothing else.

He had packed in his job in Auckland to move with his girlfriend to Tokoroa where her mother lived. His employer valued him and said he would keep the job open for him for a while in case he wanted to return. Within a short time he found the situation in Tokoroa wasn’t working out. He hadn’t found employment, his girlfriend’s mental health problems were aroused by the move and economic reality, and he found that he was valued mainly for his good car and being a chauffeur for his girlfriend’s and her mother’s frequent transport needs. His car was his only significant asset and his pride and joy.
(more…)

If either were my child, I’d definitely want a God to pray to for an explanation.

Apparently they’re both in the Auckland High Court exercising their Christian principals and suing each other for defamation. They deserve each other, they’re a couple of spoilt brats, and equally a waste of good skin.

Colin Craig the former Conservative Party Leader and Cameron Slater better known as Whale Oil the blogger were both warned by Justice Toogood about the judiciary not being an endless expanse of time and money, and to get on with it.

Of course, (more…)

At the age of 68 Wickliffe who has been paroled unsuccessfully in the past, has been released again for the 6th time.

He has twice escaped from Paremoremo, during his term of imprisonment for the murder, and has been responsible for significant offending while on parole.

I’m curious to know what is in this book and whether his late in life efforts assist in explaining an often uncanvassed dimension of the men’s experience in New Zealand.