Daily review 09/04/2025

Written By: - Date published: 5:30 pm, April 9th, 2025 - 27 comments
Categories: Daily review - Tags:

Daily review is also your post.

This provides Standardistas the opportunity to review events of the day.

The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).

Don’t forget to be kind to each other …

27 comments on “Daily review 09/04/2025 ”

  1. bwaghorn 1
    9 April 2025 at 6:45 pm

    Have to eat a little humble pie just saw Doyle on te news fronting the bussie story, good on him , stand strong, doesn't appear to be a drama queen ,sherman was perthetic , barely touched the fact that it was nzf that smeared shit all over the place.

    Reply
    • observer 1.1
      9 April 2025 at 7:14 pm

      Andrea Vance did the journalism. Maiki Sherman did not.

      The stark contrast between the two perfectly summed up what is and is not a reporter's job. Actively investigating, versus uncritically repeating (and thereby rewarding the vile troll).

      Reply
      • weka 1.1.1
        9 April 2025 at 8:27 pm

        Sherman asked important questions about MP use of social media, and noted that the Greens told BD to delete the account but he chose not to.

        Reply
        • bwaghorn 1.1.1.1
          10 April 2025 at 6:16 am

          I actually don't have a problem with him not deleting the account, it's a very bloke thing to have an offensive word turned into your nick name why not own it for a laugh,

          It’s not like they’re trying to cover up beating someone with a bed leg or something

          Reply
          • weka 1.1.1.1.1
            10 April 2025 at 8:59 am

            I also don't have a problem with them not deleting the account and good on him for standing up for his culture and community.

            I do have a problem with both the MP and the party not understanding the child safeguarding issues (and no, I don't mean he's a paedophile). I also have an issue with the naivety and don't trust the MP or the party fully understand the damage that can be done to the party from things like this. Imagine if it was in the week before a general election.

            Reply
            • AB 1.1.1.1.1.1
              10 April 2025 at 12:42 pm

              I have a problem with the Greens not knowing how to win elections and advance beyond being a niche party. To do that two things are required. First, have a credible and actionable plan for averting climate disaster that does not have average voters thinking it would make their quality of life go down the toilet in a week. Second, have an economic and social policy to improve the material well-being of the bottom 80-90% of the population – with the first point being a contributor to the solution of the second.

              The maddening thing is that they probably have the bones of this already, but it gets little attention. As for the liberation of the individual to be their true self, they'd do well to remember the maxim that the self-realisation of each one of us depends on the self-realisation of all of us. Instead we see some MPs who come across as self-obsessed, proud, self-justifying, with no sense of collegial obligation and a seeming disdain of what the public thinks. The cult of the self on display here is almost worthy of the neo-Randian loons in ACT.

              Swarbrick has my sympathy in trying to deal with all this. And I don't think it's a coincidence that attacks on the Greens have taken off since she became leader – because she is the real target of all of them. She scares the centres of economic power because she's capable of getting the public support to push the Greens into the 10-20% zone. But her MPS provide so much ammunition to the attackers that the media narrative will soon become that it is Swarbrick's 'poor leadership' that is to blame. And that's another issue for the Greens, not fully understanding how deeply and systematically malevolent their far-right enemies are.

              Reply
              • weka …
                10 April 2025 at 5:11 pm

                right on. My only difference is that I probably have less sympathy for CS than you do. Despite being very smart and a good politician, she's part of the problem and struggles to take feedback about it, it was the same with the comments she made about Jewish people needing to check their privilege. We really have to step out of this 'you have to agree with me or you're the enemy' shit.

                They've basically got this year to sort out the MPs and their selection process. But the way they handled the attacks on BD make me think they won't break out of the 10 – 12% rut they are in. I really hope I am wrong.

                Reply
            • Patricia Bremner 1.1.1.1.1.2
              10 April 2025 at 3:27 pm

              I think we should be questioning Winston Peters about his current relationship with the Ex NZ First person who is responsible for the disgusting suggestions posted, and his comments regarding "Woke"

              So when did being gender diverse make a person a predator?

              In my 34 years as a teacher on several occasions I had to move to protect children from so called "straight" men.

              All of the insulting comments against diversity arose in that quarter, and often out of context. .

              It is rich for Winston to say Brendon is "Playing victim" when plainly he is a victim of nasty loaded political inuendo, being used by someone in a very powerful position.

              Perhaps Brendon did make a mistake, Wow!! Winston do some reflection.

              Reply
              • weka …
                10 April 2025 at 5:08 pm

                Benjamin 👍

                I hope MSM do some digging into the connections.

                So when did being gender diverse make a person a predator?

                It doesn't. For the FR I think it's a mix of their disgust about anal sex (or at least talking about it out loud lol) and/or gay ment generally, and their hatred of the Greens as well as gender non-conformity.

                It's also true that the left is part of the failure of child safeguarding, and the insistence that queer people can never be paedophiles is part of it. In my original comment on site, I said that Doyle could be a paedophile, so could Peters, how would we know? We can't. So what we do is have societal norms that maintain child safeguarding. That means MPs don't put sexual memes with pics of children, even if it is part of a cultural in joke. There's a lot of bullshit coming from queer culture around transgression and No Debate means we don't get to talk about the issues. That doesn't make queer people child abusers, it means we've left some doors open for actual child abusers (whatever their identity or sexuality) to take advantage of.

                Reply
          • weka 1.1.1.1.2
            10 April 2025 at 9:21 am

            btw, good on you for the honesty about revising your opinion on BD. Not many people would do that.

            Reply
            • Bearded Git 1.1.1.1.2.1
              10 April 2025 at 10:22 am

              The gay community is roughly 10 per cent of the population (or so I heard many years ago).

              17.8 %of the community identified as Maori in the last census.

              The Greens and TPM have a wonderful base there for the next election.

              Reply
              • weka …
                10 April 2025 at 10:45 am

                Probably. The main issue with the election is whether the GP have sorted their shit out so that these things don't keep happening. Imagine if this far right attack had happened a few weeks out from the election. Maybe MSM would have been as evenhanded as they have been in the last fortnight, or maybe they'd go hard for the clicks.

                Reply
        • Belladonna 1.1.1.2
          10 April 2025 at 8:46 am

          Which indicates a hefty degree of arrogance from Doyle. He now admits that he was politically naive. But was clearly unwilling to be guided by those with a greater degree of political awareness in the GP. How much of this is due to candidates living in their own 'bubble' of small-group feedback?

          Do the GP need to exercise a greater degree of control over their MPs? [In this case, if you don't remove that IG account, you're not eligible to be a candidate] Because this kind of media storm sucks all of the oxygen out of their messaging. Is this something the the GP can actually do? Or is is anthethetical to the way they operate at the most basic level?

          Reply
          • weka 1.1.1.2.1
            10 April 2025 at 9:18 am

            I'm curious what degree of control they have as well. The MP's statement struck me as highly libertarian, it was about what they as an individual wanted and decided. In my comment above to b, the bit about not understanding child safeguarding imo comes from the bubble effect (and I'm sure that in turn impacts on understanding the political fall out). The only reason I understand the issues is because I've been following gender critical feminists in the UK who've been doing the long, hard work of addressing these issues as they come up, in policy, law and culture.

            I will also note that BD values transgression, this is a feature of queer ideology. It’s a problem not because queer people are paedophiles, but because it allows neglect of child safeguarding. I would guess that's why he doesn't think the post of the boy was a problem. It's ok to blur the lines of sex and sexuality. The bigger problem here is No Debate which means the left/progressives/liberals don’t know how to do both child safeguarding and making sure that gay and trans people are protected from discrimination and bigotry.

            It's why his assertion that the images aren't sexual is both right and wrong. They're not sexual to the MP and I have zero doubt that that is how BD sees them. Buy they don't seem to care about how the imagery comes across to the public, nor how that kind of imagery (or mistake) would be a societal problem if indeed society did allow widespread transgression of current boundaries. It's like they've not even thought about how child sex abusers use whatever structures they can to access children and push MAP acceptance further into society.

            Many people look at the images and have a gut reaction of them being wrong. Yes, the far right dickheads turned manipulated that and ran an incredibly fucked up social media campaign designed to destroy BD and the Greens. But that doesn't mean the images were ok for an MP.

            I also wonder if this libertarianism is inherent in GP process (as opposed to policy). I think it was an issue with Kerekere and Tana as well. The core value of supporting people to be their full selves or something like that, as well as inherent trust in relationship. As opposed to say Labour, who I can't imagine letting something like this run. But then Labour also are much more authoritarian than the Greens, hence them trying to force 3 Waters and co-governance on the electorate instead of engaging with the public and bringing them along (or listening to them).

            Reply
            • Belladonna 1.1.1.2.1.1
              10 April 2025 at 9:58 am

              But that doesn't mean the images were ok for an MP.

              They also seem to be ignoring that the combination of image + text was not OK for an educator (Doyle's pre-parliamentary career – both as a teacher and as an educational advisor).
              I can't imagine any Board of Trustees being happy with this imagery.

              When you are working with children – you have to be spot-on with any messaging in your private capacity as well as your in-school one.

              I agree that (while themselves not a sexual predator), they seem to be completely unaware of how legitimating their messaging could be weaponised by actual paedophiles.

              Which plays right back into the safeguarding issues.

              Reply
              • weka …
                10 April 2025 at 5:15 pm

                agree. I don't think they should hold that portfolio. I also don't think the Greens would know how to remove it from them even if they did see the problem. Which is a problem.

                I mean, if they want to remain a niche party that stands its ground on principle to support the transgressive side of the queer community, that's a valid position. I just don't think it will work if they want to progress on climate or grow their vote. NZ is tolerant and liberal, but I don't think to the extent of having someone hold children's portfolios when they don't get boundaries, or prioritise boundaries over transgressive pol.

                Reply
            • gsays 1.1.1.2.1.2
              10 April 2025 at 6:29 pm

              I've been mulling the BD/Kerekere/Tana/Davidson ('cis males cause violence' stance post a cis male punching a pensioner at the Let Woman Speak episode.)

              Yr comment "I also wonder if this libertarianism is inherent in GP process…" kinda rings true.

              I get that social justice has moved from the '90s/early 2000's from original pride and cannabis reform to what manifests now in The Greens. Where, for me, things go awry is the individual identity being paramount. And that identity seems to be based in sexuality. One of the most base aspects of our nature. Also, as we have been told, time and time again, those individual, sex based identities are vast in number and range amongst relatively few people.

              It's hard to make that fit into the House of Representatives game. Maybe it's my age, my social conservatism…

              Reply
              • weka …
                11 April 2025 at 11:36 am

                Not sure what you mean by sex based identities, but let's tease this out. We know that het, gay, and bi people exist, this is observable in behaviour and what people say about themselves. People can call themselves what they like (demi sexual whatever), but that's identity not sexual orientation. Biological sex is binary, and sexual attraction fits into that in pretty fundamental ways (you are sexually attracted to females, males, or both, or possibly not sexually attracted to anyone).

                Trans identity isn't based in sexuality, it's something else. The queer view is that humans have an inherent, inner 'gender' identity that relates to biological sex. Cis people's GI matches their biological sex. trans people's is the opposite of their bio sex, NB reject the binary nature of that. Gender fluid people are all over the place, but imo a large chunk of the queer community is bisexual and experimenting with gender roles. Which would be fine if it wasn't harming women and children.

                The liberal gender critical view is that transness is people with severe gender dysphoria and/or people with a natural or acquired social expression that is outside the cultural norms of gender roles. Gender roles or stereotypes are based on systems of categorising people based on biological sex, and are highly cultural eg in some cultures men don't wear skirts, in others they do.

                Of the people that have serious gender dysphoria, there appear to be some patterns. Males who as young boys like to do things associated stereotypically with girls eg wear dresses, grow their hair long. They usually grow up to be gay males, unless there are social pressures to be trans women instead.

                There are young teen girls with gender dysphoria, who around puberty suddenly develop a trans man GI. GCFs see this as a result of how horrible it is for girls going through puberty in a sexist society, as well as sexual abuse, probably autism, and social contagion (there tend to be groups of girls who are suddenly transmen). These girls can also be GNC, either naturally or from social pressures eg wearing 'boys' clothing from a desire to hide newly developing breasts. This group has increased hugely in the past decade or so and this tracks with the rise of unsupervised access to social media eg tmblr.

                Then there are older men with AGP, who transition to being trans women later in life. I've seen enough online about and from these men to believe that some TW are AGP, which is a sexual paraphilia – sexual desires outside the cultural norm, and centred in a fantasy of themselves as women. They are the ones that want access to women's spaces, and who get aggressive when denied that. They're also the ones wanking in public toilets and posting on social media about it. Some of those men escalate over time. They often have had wives and kids, and many are heterosexual. They cause problems for lesbians because their need to be seen as a woman means they think they are lesbian too, and want to have sex with lesbians even if they've had no surgery. Previously these men restricted their sexual fetish to private spaces, now they want to do it in public. Think transvestites and drag (#notall etc)

                This is a big part of why so many women have been radicalised away from the liberal left as the liberal left tries to insist AGP males are literally women and should have access to women's spaces. Liberals deny that AGP is a thing, despite AGM men talking about it.

                All of that IMO is a consequence of patriarchal neoliberalism. It's deeply misogynistic, and it's centred in the personal freedoms of individuals (apart from women natch) rather than class liberation from oppression. What started as support on the left for social progress for specific groups (eg gay rights) morphed into identitarianism because that's what the neoliberal system can make use of.

                Sorry if that's a bit long. I agree it's a relatively small number of people, but the trans umbrella covers a lot of people now (I fit under it), and the queer community has GNC het people who want somewhere to belong after rejecting the mainstream (often understandably).

                Reply
                • gsays …
                  11 April 2025 at 3:41 pm

                  Not too long but it reinforces my point.

                  It's a very small deimgraphic, a demographic that was supported unanimously by parliament and yet it has become The Greens identity, pun intended.

                  For all I know they are doing work in old school green spaces but with fustercluck after fustercluck that news isn't penetrating.

                  Ideas can earn votes but there must be competence too. Something this modern iteration (post Shaw) of The Greens is sorely lacking.

                  Reply
                  • weka …
                    11 April 2025 at 4:37 pm

                    I think they are doing good work but their energies have been tied up in crisis mode for a long time. Not all of their own doing eg the death of Efeso Collins was tragic and must have had a big impact. They also have an obvious cultural problem with MP selection.

                    Afaik Shaw leaving was necessary so the party could go more radical on climate. Maybe they haven’t been able to do that yet because of all the MP issues. We will see next month with their alternate budget, fingers crossed.

                    Reply
                    • gsays …
                      11 April 2025 at 6:50 pm

                      " go more radical on climate."

                      That age old tension. (Warning, it may sound like an argument for incrementalism). Radical proposals that go nowhere or the gains that Shaw could achieve with business and across party lines.

                      I cynically wonder if the radicalism wanted was limited to climate…

                    • weka []
                      11 April 2025 at 8:34 pm

                      nah, it was based in understanding we are out of time. Shaw knows this too. What’s the point of cross party gains that aren’t enough? Shaw was constantly being stymied by NZF and Labour. The only way to make up for his departure is for the Greens to change tack on climate. I’m not seeing it yet, but the budget will be the test.

              • weka …
                11 April 2025 at 11:42 am

                Davidson's refusal to condemn the attack on the elderly woman at Albert Park was a watershed moment. She could have condemned it while still supporting the rainbow community. Except she couldn't. Her own ideology would prevent her (terf = nazi), and the community would condemn her if she had. What that tells me is that she represents the queer community ahead of women (including many lesbian) and NZ citizens generally. The message is: women deserve to get the bash if we don't like them and what they say.

                A lot of women saw that, and won't forgive the Greens, including women who used to vote Green. Some of those women will vote Labour, some are going to the right.

                I think there is a place for a queer man like Doyle in parliament in the sense of someone GNC. But that particular GNC man doesn't have a good enough sense of boundaries and cultural norms, and appears to value transgression politics above societal child safeguarding. I will push back against the terrible attacks on him and his family, based largely in homophobia but also hatred of the left. But imo he's a liability for the GP, not because of his GNC, but his sense of the world. The Greens are increasingly like this too.

                Best thing lefties can do atm, is join the GP so they can vote on the party list next year.

                Reply
  3. Ad 3
    9 April 2025 at 8:51 pm

    Just really sad about David Parker leaving.

    A very good man.

    Reply

Leave a Comment