Dear hysterical NZ Men – Women’s rights are no threat to our masculinity

42
2

Screen Shot 2014-07-12 at 7.44.19 am

How insecure in your masculinity must you feel to buy into believing Labour are declaring a war on men? This Facebook site, The Labour Party’s War on Men, is a real voyage through the psyche of angry men angry at not being allowed to be angry (I suspect at women?) who deserve some anger.

It’s all very very, very angry, and a tad neurotic. All we can hope for is that none of these men have access to gun licences.

Brothers – our collective masculinity is under no threat whatsoever from equal rights with women, our masculinity is enhanced by that equality not depleted by it. This ‘Male Rights’ misogynistic hate is being peddled as some sort of political legitimacy, the mere idea that Men are somehow having their rights to be male eroded by ball busting man haters has all sorts of wounded men interrupting Facebook discussions to declare ‘not all men are…’ and it’s tedious.

If you as a male feel threatened by equality with women, perhaps you need to review your values. I think using Cunliffe’s deeply held words about domestic violence against progressing women’s rights so that you can indulge in some personal offence taking exercise doesn’t make you much of a man in the first place, so being forced to include you into the debate is like agreeing to sit through a depressed teenagers poetry anthology reading.

Your feelings feeling better now blokes? Need a hug do we?

If we are all over being wounded and having our feelings hurt for the blindspot our invisible privilege creates, perhaps we could get back to that whole 84% of convicted domestic violence is male on female bit that all this sulking has managed to ignore again.

Bout that. Labour and National are pushing for changes to our rape laws that both breach fundamental points of civil liberty. This is serious and requires an adult discussion because both changes have the potential to create vast unintended consequences.

TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com

In a nutshell

The right to silence: National wants to explore allowing a judge or jury to take an adverse inference if a defendant refuses to give evidence

Presumption of innocence: Labour wants to shift the burden of proof of consent to the defendant

These ideas are a direct response to the appalling statistic that sees only 1% of rape and sexual assault cases found guilty. Appalling as that stat is, contravening long standing legal rights like the right to silence and the right to a presumption of innocence seem like they could generate a lot of guilty verdicts, but still very little justice.

I think that the complexity of the issues involved means this debate shouldn’t be forged in the heat of an election, because we have to get this right. I think a range of approaches have to be considered if we want to take this seriously.

-Explore investigative judges as opposed to the adversarial format.

-More restorative justice options so that victims feel the person who has hurt them will get actual help to change and be forced to confront their behaviour. When abuse occurs within family and close friends, this is an option that could offer more genuine resolution.

-Large scale education campaigns. We have made cultural changes in drunk driving and smoking, we can do the same with domestic violence and the resentment towards women. You can revoke as many rights as you like, but if the majority of jurors are poisoned by prejudice then no legal structure will ever produce justice.

42 COMMENTS

  1. OMG!!!

    That FB page is full of the worst kind of bollocks! Its so full of hate!

    If Cactus Kate needs any proof that rape culture and hatred towards women is alive and well in NZ she need only go there and look at the vile hate spilling out.

    They really do need to grow up. Making discussion about domestic and sexual violence all about perceived slights to them, moving the discussion from how we can fix these problems to how its “not all men” and how Labour is conducting a “war on men” is sad to see. Its so childish. Its just like a three year old whining “I want my toy!”. Actually no, I take that back, my three year old was smarter and better behaved than that.

    I do wonder Martyn if the proposals to remove the right to silence and to make the accused prove consent are purposefully done to be debunked as unworkable. Then they can state “oh well, we tried” and in the end nothing changes.

    The concept of an inquisitorial system for rape and sexual abuse cases if much better and could completely work. In fact I would think it would be a much better system for our entire justice system. It seems to work rather well in France.

    Why are they not seriously looking at that idea?

    • I knew a judge in Brazil who explained to me how the inquisitorial system worked there. In his civil court, it seemed to work very well, but at the higher levels the judges always decided along political lines. In criminal courts it was another matter altogether, because judges in criminal courts could be assigned anywhere in the state. If they convicted one of the 1%, for example, they were likely to find themselves appointed to a town beyond the black stump, where their life was in immediate danger.

      None of this should be a problem in Aotearoa, although we have been cursed with incompetent judges at times. Maybe we need special courts with specially trained judges, to concentrate on sexual offences.

      In the long run, we need men to change their attitudes. Mine have changed radically in the last 40 years, so it is possible.

      • From what I know of Brazil it would be a completely different situation in NZ.

        From what I know of NZ (and I have family members who are lawyers and judges, and I worked in a large law firm for several years) our judiciary are actually separate from our politicians.

        I see nothing to stop an inquisitorial system in NZ. I think it could work.

  2. Left them a few message of love…

    Bloody idiots.

    I wonder what Cactus Kate will think of it all? She mjight have to review her thoughts on the realities of those who enable rape culture in this country.

    • Cactus Kate appears very much like Cameron Slater in drag – lipstick on a whale-oil. Reminds me of Orwell’s Hate week.

      • Their thinking is very similar, but she’s skinny. They have both devoted their lives to pleasing powerful men, and both think they’re highly intelligent, even as they spout the most stupid illogical rubbish.

        WhaleSpew in drag – that would be Paula Benefat.

  3. My point is that Statistics are designed to present an issue, especially a political issue. For example, family violence rate is reported to be reduced when made to reflect police work, but reported to be increasing when made to reflect feminist arguments.

    The truth of oppression, psychological and emotional violence is out there for all to see. 1. Most unemployed are non-European men. 2. The prison population is over represented by non-European men. 3. The Homeless is increasing in the number of non-European men. 4. Suicide is topped by a number of non-European men.

    The proof is in the pudding. Non-European men are rejected by Employers, by MSD corporate culture, by HNZC corporate culture, Human Rights corporate culture, by ACC corporate culture, by neighbourhood vigilante culture, and Community agencies corporate culture. They are psychologically and emotionally abused by mostly women in authoritative positions of bureaucratic and corporate cultures.

    And to make a point, no resources are allocated anytime soon to research men’s health. At the same time, non-exhaustive millions continue to support women’s health.

  4. yeah I found this page last night and I and martyn where like WTF ha… it really is just another “not all men” argument and is effectively a site for MRA whether they call themselves this or not.

  5. I fell in love with this post & wanted to marry the author lol:
    http://terribleminds.com/ramble/2014/05/25/not-all-men-but-still-too-many-men/

    After reading this post:
    http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy/2014/05/27/not_all_men_how_discussing_women_s_issues_gets_derailed.html

    Men who know who they are and are not intimidated by women speaking up. Fantabulous.

    “Each time a woman stands up for herself,without knowing it possibly,wihtout claiming it,she stands up for all women.” Maya Angelou

    • actually to add …. after reading the #YesAllWomen tweets a month of so back … I was struck by how some men were getting upset after only two weeks of women speaking up. Supposedly “in their faces.” Yet women have been objectified in so many ways, the most obvious being sexual ojectification via advertising, movies, videos etc and this is a completely accepted and normalised experience. Go figure. Thanks to all the guys who stand up for women. Cheers

  6. Society creates its monsters and we are society . Dopy fucking cunliffe has yet to focus on where the monsters come from , and not all of societies monsters are men but he didn’t have the balls to broach that particularly unpleasant subject .
    For cunliffe to apologise for being a ‘man’ was just plain pathetic , and stupid . Just what we need heading into an election to potentially defeat the arch monster maker himself . The Mighty Jonky . Nice one Dave . Good job . Polarise men and women . Polarise class . Polarise the Media . Polarise race . Create confusion . Lose the fucking election . Three more years of jonky . Why didn’t cunliffe wait until after the election to callously court favour from the women as victims of violence vote ?
    Honestly ? I smell a huge fucking rat . cunliffes been given huge opportunities to soar above the heads of the Moron class and he consistently fucks them up .

    Mens feelings getting hurt ? Men feeling emasculated ? Men blaming women ? Bloke Hugs ? For Gods sake .
    It’s not just about men feeling threatened . It’s about addressing an economic / political environment that causes poverty , anxiety , alcoholism and yes , consequently domestic abuse . But for fucks sake cunliffe , deal with the cause , not the symptom . That’s just dumb . It’s like applying a cream for the rash when the rash is because you’re sitting in nettles . ( Not my best analogy )
    If cunliffe is genuine he should have waited until he was in power , then get misty eyed and lean alarmingly as he poured his heart out onto the carpet .
    Now that my masculinity has been so effectively affronted by cunliffe I’m off to eat raw liver and punch a girl-kitten . I might do a burn out in my car and say ‘sweet as ‘ a lot . I might dig a hole with a shovel . I’m going to buy a rugby ball and bounce it about . I’m going to put on women’s clothes and as I spank myself I’ll call myself Violet . I might then go to Books and More and buy a dainty get well card and send it to myself . Because as I’m a man , I’m deeply fucked .

    By the way Martyn . Patronising ; patronize |ˈpatrənʌɪz| (also patronise)
    verb [ with obj. ]
    1 (often as adj.patronizing) treat with an apparent kindness which betrays a feeling of superiority: ‘She’s a good-hearted girl,’ he said in a patronizing voice.

    • not everything is a consequence solely of our dysfunctional economic system

      maybe our cultural ideas of what a man should be like and what a man is entitled to could be part of the cause of sexual violence?

    • Hi Countryboy,

      I really don’t think Mr Cunliffe can be held responsible for the media’s bad faith representation of what he says.

      It is up to us not to be polarized by the very polarizing propaganda that is being conducted on us.

      All things being equal – if there is an issue with our culture – we all need to take responsibility – i.e. both men and women are involved in a sick culture and in that sense you (and others) are correct – the issue of ‘rape culture’ cannot be solely blamed on men.

      However when it comes to asking men to take responsibility for their part in the issue of poor attitudes and the ensuing violent treatment of women – who do you think is best to deliver that message to the men in our culture?

      Who do you think men will be most receptive to receiving such a message from – a man or a woman?

      I suspect that the message is best delivered to men by a man. This is what Mr Cunliffe did and good on him.

      I really don’t think the message that Mr Cunliffe relayed was one of ‘be ashamed to be a man’. (Please point to where he told men to respond in such a way?) I think the message was one of a man asking other men to take an active part in addressing the problem.

      It is not easy for us to change how Mr Cunliffe (or anyone else’s) message is delivered by our disingenuous media or by our disingenuous right wing who both appear to desperately want the right wing to be voted back into government – however we can choose how we respond to the mulched messages they propagate.

      It is your choice to take Mr Cunliffe’s message the wrong way. It is your choice to respond constructively to the matter he spoke out on. It is your choice to be polarized on the issue.

      The media can’t control us if we take charge of ourselves. This applies to all of us on all matters where we are being drawn into being polarized for political purposes. Let’s not be victims anymore – let’s take charge of what we can in our world. If a fair number of us do this – our world will change in a positive way.

  7. Let us not forget the harrassment both Helen Clark and Julia Gillard faced because of their gender. How many sexist ‘Helen Clark’ jokes have you heard, and still seem to be circulating out there. The shock of having a woman in a position of power is so overwhelming it seems that in Australia they would rather vote in the stereotypical ‘male’ aka Tony Abott even though he was a complete and utter idiot. It is personality politics in the extreme and a reflection of the ugliness in our society. Maybe we need to listen to Julia Gillard’s words on misogyny again.

    http://youtu.be/SOPsxpMzYw4

  8. #YesAllWomen because the odds of being attacked by a shark are 1 in 3,748067 while a womens odds of being raped is 1 in 6…. yet fear of sharks is seen as rational while being cautious of men is seen as misandry.

    • LOL

      I never thought to put it that way, but nice point.

      And I surf. I’m not afraid of sharks. But then a shark has never hurt me…

      • i surf too! … surfing on my own is when i start looking down more often lol … found this on the twitter YesAllWomen tweets.. not sure who the creator is but I resonated well with it! enjoy ur breaks, the answers are always in the waves…. 🙂 peace

  9. Agreed.

    And, I went to that page, and had a look. I posted a comment on one of their threads, the one about the so-called “man ban”. I was very careful to make sure my comment was very reasonable, and factual.

    Within seconds of posting my comment, it was deleted, and I was BANNED from commenting on the page. I note with interest that the person who seems to be in charge of that page, one Aishish A Naicker, lists his occupation as “Volunteering at the National Party”. I have PMed Mr Naicker, asking him why my message was deleted, and why was I blocked from the page? I will post his reply, if any, here, and all over Facebook.

    This is a copy of my comment, that was deleted….

    “Actually, this is a distortion of the truth. All that is happening is that the Labour Party is promoting a policy of asking the Law Commission to investigate and report on the thorny issue of the difficulty that many victims of sexual assault have in negotiating their way through the current legal process. That is NOT the same as what you are suggesting is happening. When I first saw the misleading sensationalist headlines in the lamestream media about this, I also was outraged, but now that I have taken the trouble to find out the truth, I think it is a good idea, as it is time for a review of this nature, conducted by sane minds, who have a high level of expertise, in a proper manner. Please explain to everyone who visits this page why you have such a big problem with that?”

  10. One of the reasons why hardly any rapist are convicted is because of the defendants lawyer.

    It is this lawyer who further abuses the victim – who is already very distressed.

    The police in conjunction with the police prosecutor, and sometimes the police doctor and the victims GP, then decide that the victim will not be able to withstand the court trial – because of their current state, and/or, because the victim is too frail.

    This is fact. So you really have to think twice about the defendants lawyer, and then this lawyers influence and relationship with the police.

    These defendants lawyers, should be prevented from being allowed to bully the victim, and it is the police, and our justice system who must ‘police’ this further bullying and re-traumatising of the victim.

    Why do NZ Police allow the rapists lawyer to bully the innocent victim?
    Part of this huge buck, stops right here! The rest of it stops at the feet of the rapist and his lawyer.

    So I am saying that there is a huge problem with the Justice system, lawyers for the defendants, and NZ Police. These entities are mammoth, and how is anyone who is now too vulnerable due to their recent rape experience supposed to deal with any of them, let alone when they come at you all at once.
    And then the other mammoth group apparently designed to assist you through a help recovery process, doesn’t front up either, other than to further harass and bully the victim – further deliberate victimising. This re-traumatising of victims is rife in government.

    There is something very wrong in the minister of ACC also being the minister of Justice. Sometimes I have the thought that the ACC don’t want to pay out on, or accept rape claims, and so the current system is designed this way on purpose. She is a very sick woman that Judith Collins.

    Opinion and belief.

    • “Why do NZ Police allow the rapists lawyer to bully the innocent victim? ”

      Your ignorance of the legal system is truly outstanding. Please gain some insight and then look at this comment again.

      • @Watcher:

        I have no ignorance in this matter.
        I speak of what I witness first-hand!

        You may be the one showing ignorance here.

        There are ways the law is written down and supposed to be followed and then hypothetically work, but the ‘reality’ is far far different where rape and domestic violence is concerned.

        Can you answer the question about why the police allow the rapists lawyer to re-traumatise the rape victim?

        Opinion and belief.

      • Your condescension is only surpassed by your insensitivity, Watcher. Mistreatment of rape victims is an historically proven, bog standard, a la carte gratuity; just go to some of the chat rooms and websites where people can express themselves and vent a little over their experiences for verification, if you can be bothered. Many rape victims are drugged out of their memories. I would personally like to thank Mr Cunliffe for displaying a sensitive face and also Countryboy for being funny haha (off colour but funny all the same).
        Both sexes are duplicitous in rape/rape allowance (for want of a better term) Anyone who plays one of those revolting video games which feature abuse of a woman, whether she is a hooker or not, is contributing to the universal consciousness in a sick and mean act of mind. Any lawyer who questions the state of mind of a traumatised assault victim is also feeding the human self hatred which is paying their wage. Violence is not fun. Games promoting violence are dumb, we do not know how they affect our inner psyche and that of those around us. Similarly, ‘music’ videos and mainstream pornography are affecting our cultural libido in an horrific, sneaky manner and we are addicted.

        • You comments mirror my thoughts and raise an important issue that is the damage to one’s psyche through violence and also the damage to the collective psyche – sometimes I feel the epidemic is at the level where we as a society can’t communicate the problem – we seem to just belittle each other, man and women, and feel vainly smug about it.

  11. A random thought I had last night ……………..

    Do you think the roastbusters would still be running around if Helen Clarke was prime minister ????

    Do you think that some of the police officers involved would still be sitting pretty in the police force if H C was still prime minister ???

    • Reason – I think we all know the answer to that one. There’d be some mighty sore bums and imprints of heeled shoes on the backsides of certain individuals “shown the door”…

      • Yes. Helen Clark made it clear to Christine Rankin from day one that she expected her resignation. From memory she got it within a week or two.

    • Yep, Helen Clarke was a real leader. Many of those who hated her political philosophies still had some respect for her as a leader. With the amount of vile crap that was directed against her by scumbags like Slater, she had to be strong to survive.

  12. Presumption of innocence: Labour wants to shift the burden of proof of consent to the defendant

    No it doesn’t:

    It’s important I think, to point out that the submission made during the Taskforce enquiry to reverse the burden of proof was not proposed, and was not further investigated by the following Law Commission enquiry.

    ” 94. This has not been proposed as an option because a review of the burden of proof would raise major Bill of Rights concerns, such as the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty.”

    And all Labour have done is said that they will continue the review.

  13. That’s just back tracking, Andrew Little’s comments show the approach he wants to take, which include disturbingly this comment;

    “Labour’s justice spokesman Andrew Little did not think the party’s proposal would lead to more innocent people being convicted.

    “I don’t see why. You’re assuming that there is a propensity to lay false complaints. There is no evidence pointing to that.””

    Which is a scary thing coming from the mouth of a justice spokesperson, given that anyone at all familiar with literature on the matter knows that there is between an 8% to 12% propensity for people to do just that. I guess the 1 out of ten innocent people convicted will just be acceptable collateral damage….

      • Whoa Frank! Does that mean it’s ok? Because we already have innocent people being convicted what does it matter if more are?

        If innocent people are already being convicted how does making it easier to convict more innocent people a good thing?

        Sorry I might have the completely wrong end of the stick here, but that does not sound like a good thing.

      • It’s a bit of strange assumption for someone using the name Tamihere. I’ve always been pretty dubious about David Tamihere’s convictions for the Coromandel murders. And quite a few others.

        John Tamihere, on the other hand, I’m just dubious about.

  14. Glossing over the crack doesn’t make it go away unfortunately. That feminism that derives from the humanist ideal of equality is indeed worthy of full support. The post-marxist discourse feminism is less worthy.

  15. @ Blue Leopard @ Martyn Bradbury . Perhaps you’re right . And on these sensitive matters I would love to be wrong . When I criticise the behaviour of those whom one would hope are on our side I’m trying to play the Devils advocate .

    After 30 years of neoliberalism , of which cunliffe played a part I have trust issues ok ?
    Of course men , of which I think I am one , are …..

    You know ? I can’t say it . I can’t say that I understand why cunliffe said what he said . I still don’t think cunliffe was genuine in his pathos of an apology . It riled me and still does . Why did he not instead blame the politics of our country for creating the monsters we are often victim of ? Of course I understand that there are frankly rare exceptions but trauma leads to abusive behaviour and if there are 265,000 Kiwi kids living in poverty then you can fucking bet there’s a lot of trauma flying around and in 15 to 17 years , you’ll have a lot of whackers , rapers and abusers . That’s a fact .

    I have women friends who’s lives are a bloody struggle thanks to being victims of abuse . Family abuse , spousal abuse . I even have a friend who used to get kicked around by her son . I also know men who get kicked around by their female partners , usually after a bout of drinking . It’s clear to me that when people are placed inside a pressure cooker economy of hardship and anxiety then booze is poured in they start whacking each other .

    It worries me deeply that my interpretation of what cunliffe said , and the way he delivered it , was divisive and polarising and worse still , disingenuous .

    I just hope to God I’m wrong .

  16. It’s so sad that so many men seem to feel personally assaulted by another man apologising for not doing enough. Why be offended? Even though we’ve had the usual slack reporting by the usual ‘news presenters posing as jornalists’ it has – certainly within our own social circle – actually lead to some really fulfilling discussions. My husband – for the first time – told how he and his best friends stopped a girl being raped at their high school, I told how I was – how can I say it – propositioned by a man at our neighbors house while his wife sat next to him, & I was under 10 years old. I’m not sorry to be a man but I am sorry I didn’t stand up and say something when my brother in law put my sister down, loudly , in front of us all and knocked down her craft work. We can all do better, not feel threated by it being pointed out.

Comments are closed.