Filed under: General — Ministry of Men's Affairs @ 3:37 pm
With all respects and empathy for the those close to Malachi, it’s important to consider this tragic case further.
The family, Dame Karen Poutasi who conducted a review, ‘independent victim advocate’ Ruth Money and others have called for mandatory reporting of suspected child abuse. Dame Poutasi made other recommendations too, including vetting those who look after children whose mothers are imprisoned and increasing cross-agency communication and cooperation. Some of these recommendations may well be helpful, but the most effective solutions were lacking due to faulty understanding of the causal factors in this case. (more…)
The above article is prompted by the recent appointment of a former police policy-wonk to Minister of Police.
Ginny Andersen replaces the disgraced Stuart Nash who swapped jerseys to take up the bottom position in cabinet as punishment for his mouth
… again. The boy was trying to talk tough and broke the rules.
This in itself is interesting as we haven’t seen a conflict of interest appointment, with former police staff as Minister, since Clem Simich in the middle of last century.
I’m not sure if that is a gender issue, lax left-wing arrangements or a very shallow talent pool in Labour.
There’s a podcaste interview by Mike Hoskings, which I won’t comment on in detail, other than to highlight these points.
Youth offending, which is really a euphemism for mother’s failing to raise young men, is out of control.
A notable period of history where this has happened before occurred in England where Lord Baden-Powell, ordered by the monarch of the day, to sort it out, started Boy Scouts.
The Minister’s problem is attributed to the recent discovery of the impacts of domestic violence, and the recent increase in reporting of domestic violence which was never reported before because it was a private matter.
Now this rubbish by Andersen needs to be called out as the private issue and non-reporting of domestic violence ended last century in the 1980s. It had to because the introduction of the Family Court by the mid 80s was responsible for conflicts that led to homicides.
These rhetoric crutches which support policy that creates “successful programmes” that somehow can’t explain the increase in youth offending aren’t propaganda, they’re bullshut dripping from this woman’s mouth, so we’d expect someone like Hoskings to dig for answers.
This is Australian based. There are a few abstracts for some of the links below.
Coercive control is the latest weapon aimed at destroying men. Be warned, It’s coming soon to a police station near you.
False allegations have long been used by women to obtain violence orders to get men thrown out of their homes. But they need breaches to get him imprisoned. What’s different about coercive control laws is they are criminal offences, which makes it much easier to send convicted men to jail.
Filed under: General — Ministry of Men's Affairs @ 1:57 pm
Fathers are treated as so unimportant that whoever wrote and authorized this article didn’t see any need to explain why the father(s) of these children were not caring for them when the mother was a meth addict and had already been found to neglect them. In fact, the article didn’t mention father at all. Perhaps the children were from virgin births.
Fatherless children are at higher risk of delinquency that undermines their own prospects and disrupts the communities in which they reside. Published by David C. Geary at Quillette 7th March 2023
Men’s investment in their children is one of the most remarkable features of the human family. Such investment might not seem unusual to readers with engaged fathers, and it might seem wanting in comparison to mothers’ investment, but it is an evolutionary riddle, nonetheless. This is because male parenting is uncommon in mammals, and doesn’t occur at all in our two closest relatives, chimpanzees and bonobos. Although the evolutionary history of men’s parenting lies beyond the scope of this essay, one aspect is relevant: men’s parenting is facultatively expressed. This means that men’s engagement with children is more sensitive than women’s engagement to the dynamics of the marital relationship and to broader social and economic conditions. The result is that social mores and broader conditions impact men’s engagement with children more than they impact women’s engagement, for better or worse.
Filed under: General — Ministry of Men's Affairs @ 10:43 pm
So, a male senior medical officer (i.e. highly trained, highly experienced and in short supply) communicates some suggestive texts and comments to a female junior doctor who has responded in kind on a number of occasions. The female then feels uncomfortable about the communications and complains to her supervisor. When then confronted by the hospital authorities, the senior doctor admits his communications, accepts in retrospect that they had been inappropriate and he expresses understanding about the discomfort of the female. The hospital authorities then conduct an ‘investigation’ including an interview with him, concluding that he had breached the employer’s rules and engaged in unprofessional conduct. He disagrees that his conduct had been ‘unprofessional’ and he is so traumatized that he is hospitalized for a stress-induced illness. The employer then uses that as an excuse to sack him.
The female acknowledged she had participated in the flirtatious communications. There is no indication that she ever told him she was becoming uncomfortable or that she asked for the flirtatious interactions to stop or for him to stop such communications to her. (more…)
This is a special message for mothers, bias feminist family court judges, and the legislators.
If you want gangs instead of families, carry on with your program.
If you want men and boys in prison rather than being productive citizens, carry on with destroying father’s rights.
If you want to destroy a families’ wealth by paying lawyers billions, the loss of dwelling and land rights and payout billions buying dwellings for your victims, carry on with your gender program to destroy father’s rights.
If you want poverty, our young committing crimes like ram raids, serious drug and theft to support that habit, pay the police, courts and legal aid, men who don’t earn and pay tax, carry on with your gender program to destroy father’s rights.
If you want to pay for medical staff, hospitals to house mental health victims that include both child and father. Carry on with giving men and their children mental health problems.
The destruction of family is the destruction of society. And when society collapses, revolution occurs.
Now we have had,
Black lives matter, Maori treaty rights, women’s rights, feminism, gay rights, save the planet matters.
When does father’s rights matter? When does a childs right to see dad matter? When does land rights matter? Or does that only apply to one race but not one gender?
It was the beginning of the end for Jacinda Ardern. Part way through the protest, Matt King’s defence and police mandate case in the high Court went against the government.
The clash between police and the public the following week was another stain on the country’s history.
Sunday 5th March.
It has been pointed out that the post is of little relevance to menz.
What we are seeing at the grassroots is a different attitude to men. Having reported on events at the protest there were multiple factions where men’s groups wouldn’t have been out of place.
The attitude of the crowd didn’t include the anti male attitude we are familiar with.
The “Community” in that respect is quite different to academia which lives with some determination to keep gender issues alive.
The crowd here, described by Labour MP Michael Wood as “Ferals in the River of Filth” included , Government workers, working from home, Health professionals of all sorts including doctors, trades of all descriptions, members of the combined services, first responders not to mention a large contingency of not your mainstream media.
The underbelly of New Zealand that supposedly slithered down to parliament were ordinary decent Kiwis that didn’t harbour the general resentment of men we still see peddled in politics.
Perhaps if this post represents anything it’s a wave of social change yet to reach universities and government departments but by the time this year’s election is over that may change
Last year, the then Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern was the guest speaker at a private gathering in New York hosted by Bill and Melinda Gates.
Ardern said “My Government is doing something not many other countries have tried. We have incorporated the principles of the 2030 Agenda into our domestic policy-making in a way that we hope will drive system-level actions… I believe that the change in approach that we have adopted in New Zealand is needed at a global scale.”
If empowerment means being old and childless by 2030. I’m not with that. What is life without children? Money, travel, food and belongings?
I don’t recall Ardern telling us those plans in her last election campaign. Is that where her alleged $25 millions came from?
I’ve always wondered why there are laws to lose your home, kids, house, belongings and future income after separation, and now I know. Population reduction.
Some cases of compassion towards female offenders might be supported if, and only if, male offenders would have the same chance of being shown compassion, but of course that’s not the case. However, it’s difficult under any circumstances to support this female offender receiving no punishment, not even a period of disqualification from driving. The offending was just too serious.
Note that the offender is referred to in the headline as ‘Young woman…’, but it turns out she was in her 20’s. Yes well we suppose that’s young for an adult but actually she was an adult and had been subject to adult legal consequences for several years. If exactly the same offences had been committed by a man in his 20’s the headline would almost certainly have simply referred to him as ‘Man…’. The infantilization of women when they do wrong is designed to elicit sympathy and caring towards them. In one breath women want to be taken seriously as adults then in the other breath they want to be treated as children who have little agency or responsibility for their behaviour. This whole article, written by a female, was oriented towards making this ridiculously lenient treatment seem justified.
Note also the woman’s self-centred focus and minimization of her behaviour. She was so embarrassed and nervous to be in Court. She couldn’t describe how it made her feel to think if she had hit someone. “It was so silly, but I was distressed.” “I’ve had this slip up and I’ve made this mistake”. Yeah, a bit of a slip up you silly billy, there, there.
Note also that she blames some unidentified man who she claimed assaulted her but this actually had amounted only to ‘unwanted attention’. Yeah, always blame some man.
The even younger man in this recent case was never referred to as a ‘young man’. Although he neither resisted nor assaulted police and his alcohol level was less the above woman’s, no way he was going to be discharged without conviction. Further, unlike the woman he didn’t deserve name suppression. Par for the course.
In a statement, Dilworth Trust Board chairman Aaron Snodgrass said: “While this is a step towards justice for Old Boy survivors, nothing we can do today can undo the past. The Trust Board is deeply saddened and disappointed this offending occurred.”
I did not agree with the swastika. But after viewing the clip I can draw a parallel between racism and the hate and persecution of the male gender. I took a closer look and realised it is a combination of the symbol for women with the swastika in it.
That was the moment I understood, “It’s easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.” – Mark Twain.
This very powerful video is an excellent review how the Duluth model transpired over time.
Built upon deception and deceit, the Duluth model is debunked as a one way scheme to defraud children of their right to have a relationship with their father. The father’s paternal and property rights.
Once in place, the feminists pursued an aggressive criminal court intervention process that included housing, child support and enhanced police protection. The closed court was then setup to hide the procedure of ignoring dads evidence by not including it. That court is called the family court.
There is a lot in this 16-minute clip. Towards the end there is advice on how men should protect themselves.
OK so you might recall I posted a video on an Australian senator inquiry into and review of the family law and courts in OZ. There were 29 submissions.
Filed under: General — Ministry of Men's Affairs @ 11:37 am
This Court of Appeal judgement quashed the life sentences of three teenage murderers and replaced them with finite sentences and shorter non-parole periods. (more…)
I’m cautious about memes, they can often have multiple meanings and liking them reflects your personal point of view, and sometimes not what the meme is trying to achieve.
Sometimes one that I think has a genuine well intentioned perspective will catch my eye, such as this one.
The spiraling insanity around the resignation of New Zealand’s prime minister has reached epic levels of exaggeration and misinformation.
It’s important to realise how damaged New Zealand’s media industry currently is and that this situation does represent an embarrassing circumstance for many people in the industry.
Before he took his life a man wrote 2 letters to his beloved children the family court said he could no longer be part of their lives.
Dear Cathy,
I hope that one day you’ll be able to understand.
Take care of your sister.
I’ll always love you.
Dad.
Princess,
I’m so sorry.
You’ll learn to live without me
like I had to live without you.
Please forgive me.
Love Dad
In 2014 posted on YouTube this above video and script…. Each year over one million Australian children have little to no contact with their fathers due to short comings of the current system and the abuses it allows to occur. Key stakeholders and bureaucrats continue to fail those they claim publicly to protect, while families suffer with alienation, financial hardships and death.
All of which is forced on them by a system that favours one parent’s custody over shared parenting outcomes. Our society as a whole suffers generational abuse in the name of business opportunities and profits that favour a select few. It’s time to stand together and take back our lives and families by replacing this system of shame and death along with those that allow it to operate.
Dear Prime Minister Chris Hipkins,
Do you want to know why they call themselves 21 fathers?
Every week 21 Australian fathers commit suicide as a result of child access issues, child support financial pressure and unfair family court rulings following separation.
We don’t have the NZ suicide statistics. They are hidden from the public. Why does the NZ government hide those statistics?
Jacinda Ardern is quitting as New Zealand prime minister ahead of this year’s election saying she no longer has “enough in the tank” to lead.
If you don’t have anything nice to say, best to say nothing at all – what your mother would say?
Frankly,
I can find very little to say about Ardern that wouldn’t be classed as misogynist bile by feminists. I’m not unhappy about earning that label. (more…)
Dealing with a relationship breakdown, custody dispute or other family or whanau crisis can be an overwhelming, emotional and stressful experience. The last thing you need is to be thrust into the unfamiliar territory of the family court system without a clue about how to navigate it. The New Zealand Family Court Survival Guide explains all your options when you need to make changes to your family situation and helps you to avoid unnecessary expense and upset. Drawing from her own experiences in the family court system, author Katrina Smithson offers easy-to-follow advice on how to navigate a separation that is fair and respectful to all parties, with a strong focus on children and how best to assist them in what can be a tough and confusing time. Heading into court proceedings with the right information is critical. The New Zealand Family Court Survival Guide is the only resource you need to manage this difficult time in the best way possible.
Bettina talks with lawyer Michael Jose about our shameful supervised contact services whereas the family law system conspires with a malicious mother to teach the children that their father is dangerous. That the children might be hurt if that supervisor is not there to protect them.
Michael Jose says
I think it’s one of the key issues of the family court jurisdiction is the fact that it is rife with false or exaggerated allegations, and they’re simply not addressing them. So it becomes a bit of a rort.
The entire jurisdiction is destroyed from its original intentions because of how frequently false allegations are used, what impact they have and how there’s simply no ramifications for using them.
So one of the most common flows from that of course is there’s many different mechanisms of triggered by false allegations, but one of them is of course, the application of supervised access. And as we talked about, if it’s applied in the context of a low level or false allegation, in relation to domestic violence that doesn’t even concern the kids.
You might have a fabulous committed, hands on father that went from 24/7 access and independent care of his kids, suddenly, having lost that, and that can be lost for years and may never really be re-established in the same way it was when the relationship was on foot. And in the interim, supervised access is going to be applied.
Now one of the agencies that I spoke to over the years said that they reckon up to 80% of fathers that are on their books, getting supervised access, simply don’t need supervised access. It is considered to be another one of the processes in transition for them getting back or trying to get back meaningful access.
Now, don’t underestimate the application of the system that’s designed to protect the victims and to address risk when it’s applied incorrectly. And more often than not by abuser against the good parent, more often than not the father. That is in itself abuse, that system abuse in advance, and it’s incredibly harmful. So if you’ve got a great father that’s doing supervised access, they are getting harmed by that just as much as the kids are.
So it all adds up to overnight, that profoundly deep paternal relationship can be gone in a blink of an eye. It can be a fight tooth and nail for sometimes years. And then of course when those years pass, and everything that has happened still can be used against the father. It never goes back to where it was and never re-establish a meaningful relationship again.
Filed under: General — Ministry of Men's Affairs @ 9:54 am
Radio NZ and other mainstream media are referring to ‘The Rugby World Cup’ final being held this weekend. Actually, it’s the Women’s Rugby World Cup, but that qualification is now deliberately avoided to try to elevate the significance of this tournament as equal to or greater than the established Rugby World Cup. (more…)
NZ's legislation and public policy is often influenced by advocacy research, which is designed to produce a pre-determined outcome. A classic example is the Hitting Home Report, winner of the 1995 NZ Skeptics Society ‘Bent Spoon Award'.
Nearly 30 years later, the committee declared the award was not justified, and appologised for “lack of critical thinking”.
NZ teacher Peter Joyce’s settled life was disrupted when a woman he had never met accused him of historic rape. With a unique brand of angry humour, his diary plots the stages of his despair and traces his attempts to find justice in the face of the current insistence that we must “believe the victim”.
Dry Ice is a compelling memoir, but much more. The accusation made the writer a reluctant expert on similar cases from all over the world. He throws light on everything that limits public knowledge of false sexual allegations, from dangerous counselling to flawed statistics, and he exposes police investigation methods as blinkered, inefficient and insensitive.
