Daily Review 05/12/2018

Written By: - Date published: 5:30 pm, December 5th, 2018 - 127 comments
Categories: Daily review - Tags:

It was two years ago today …

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 …

127 comments on “Daily Review 05/12/2018 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Kat 1
    5 December 2018 at 5:50 pm

    Simon Bridges is toast. Big mistake today in the house, even Carter the previous speaker knows you don’t attack the speaker or when the speaker is standing.

  2. Dv 2
    5 December 2018 at 6:05 pm

    Re the walk out I assume their pay will be docked.

    • Kat 2.1
      5 December 2018 at 6:09 pm

      Best if they were to just stay out even if continuing to be paid, they are not in any state to be an effective opposition.

  3. Ankerrawshark 3
    5 December 2018 at 6:19 pm

    Wading my way through the inquiry into mental health today. To date the phrase evidence based treatments have not been used. I despair. The implementation of treatments that have been shown to be effective in the treatment of depression and anxiety disorders and the development of the workforce to deliver is a key change that is needed…….

  4. swordfish 4
    5 December 2018 at 7:03 pm

    Labour / National Internal Polls
    (piecing together a timeline from various sources)

    https://twitter.com/swordfish7774/status/1070191711991750657

  5. Ad 5
    5 December 2018 at 7:03 pm

    Could some unionist please tell us their opinion of the new employment legislation, since it’s just been passed by Parliament?

    • Chris T 5.1
      5 December 2018 at 7:20 pm

      Winston 8 v Labour 5

      • Ad 5.1.1
        5 December 2018 at 7:22 pm

        If you are a unionist could you please tell me what that comment means for workers.

        • Chris T 5.1.1.1
          5 December 2018 at 7:39 pm

          Winston ate most of the chicken out of Labour’s carefully prepared and painstakenly made chicken salad sandwich, they made for their union friends, and then gave it back smiling, so the unions got to eat the left overs.

    • Craig H 5.2
      6 December 2018 at 8:37 am

      It’s good – sure, I’d have liked more, but it’s a generally solid change for unions, particularly for delegates and because pay has to be in a collective.

  6. ianmac 6
    5 December 2018 at 7:52 pm

    Jamie Lee Ross denied that he was the Leaker
    He is currently on leave.
    Today a Leaker claiming to be a National MP (can’t be Jamie.) carried on the leaking.
    Either there is more than one leaker or Jamie is innocent.

  7. Ankerrawshark 7
    5 December 2018 at 8:22 pm

    Yes anyone want to speculate on who the leaker is? Likely they are emboldened after simons enquiry didn’t discover them…..

    ? Paula. ? Sarah D. ? Maggie……thinking about who openly supported someone else….mark Mitchell….he was a mate of jami lee likely

    • miravox 7.1
      5 December 2018 at 8:38 pm

      “Yes anyone want to speculate on who the leaker is?”

      I think Simon really does need a new inquiry…

    • Robert Guyton 7.2
      5 December 2018 at 8:43 pm

      I reckon it’s Simon – have you seen “Fight Club”?

    • BM 7.3
      5 December 2018 at 9:15 pm

      If it’s not a staff member, Mark Mitchell is who I’d be applying red-hot tongs to the nipples.

      The mate of Ross, the client of Lusk, ran for Leader, why am I thinking of Scott Morrison?

      • Charlie 7.3.1
        5 December 2018 at 9:22 pm

        Mitchell is as thick as pig shit, worse than Bridges and would probably enjoy having his nipples fired up.

        • BM 7.3.1.1
          5 December 2018 at 9:30 pm

          I do wonder if Mitchell isn’t the culprit, undermining Bridges and at the same time trashing the next in line, Judith Collins through innuendo and speculation, thus clearing the field for the complete outsider a la Scott Morrison.

          It’s the sort of strategy I’d expect from someone like Lusk

          • Ankerrawshark 7.3.1.1.1
            5 December 2018 at 9:33 pm

            BM for once I agree with you about Mitchell.

            Whoever is doing it is pretty bloody confident

            • BM 7.3.1.1.1.1
              5 December 2018 at 9:42 pm

              Whoever is doing it is pretty bloody confident

              If everyone is pointing the finger at someone who isn’t the culprit you’d be feeling pretty confident.

              Stay under the radar till the last moment and then strike.

              • Charlie …
                5 December 2018 at 9:55 pm

                You could be right, who with any intelligence would want to be leader or have anything to do with leadership of a sinking ship of fools, wankers and has beens, so it could be Mitchell.

              • DJ Ward …
                5 December 2018 at 10:18 pm

                Who’s the reporter freinds with, or gets phone calls from.

                Please, please, Simon, ask Mallard who it is.

                Then because Mallard is slightly smarter than Bridges, an internal investigation will result. Trolling the network for emails, text messages, calls. A secret search for those willing to help in character assassination, and bingo.

                Some family time, backbench time, quite exit at the next election.

                Or another fiasco.

                Which is kind of right now.

                ……………….

                Really I don’t care if what got discussed in some meeting got leaked. They do work on my behalf. I understand national security, and sometimes people need to be able to argue about complex subjects, and having a devils advocate in important discussions. The person may not have the belief but argue it as a way of seeing the opposition to a subject. It would be unfair to leak those meetings as it unfairly portrays people.

                Most of these are pretty normal things.
                Many MPs will be too busy to know everything going on so get briefs on how to respond to questions. Those with actual knowledge might respond differently. The Prime Minister sits down with staff and discusses possible questions. Expenses leak just before it gets released anyway.

                The fun begins when the leaks become targeted at a person. Then you know someone’s making there move. And a well connected Journo will probably have a good story to tell as well.

  9. Dennis Frank 9
    5 December 2018 at 8:46 pm

    Young people who have poor socialisation skills due to being raised on smartphones have apparently become bullies due to something called `call-out’ culture’. In this culture group-think has morphed to a higher level of compulsion and conformity, in which it has become a collective agency of social darwinism. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Call-out_culture

    Listening to Kathryn Ryan interviewing an academic specialist on this today [https://www.radionz.co.nz/audio/player?audio_id=2018674210] has been somewhat depressing but maybe a bright side will become evident eventually. Wikipedia explains how the belief system makes social media toxic: “Call-out culture (also known as outrage culture) is a term for the social phenomenon of publicly denouncing perceived racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, and other forms of bigotry. Denunciation (“call-outs”) can happen in person or online.”

    Political relevance: “A 2013 essay, “Exiting the Vampire Castle”, by Mark Fisher, is often cited as an early critique of call-out culture. Fisher argued that “call-out culture” created a space where “where solidarity is impossible, but guilt and fear are omnipresent”. Fisher also argues that call-out culture reduces every political issue to criticizing the behaviour of individuals, instead of dealing with such political issues through collective action.” “Other commentators have argued that callout culture can harm progressive politics by attacking people perceived to have exhibited prejudiced behaviour, rather than using dialogue”.

  10. Kat 10
    5 December 2018 at 8:59 pm

    David Carter reckons he has never seen a PM look so worried as the PM was today. I thought the PM looked radiant and very much in control. It certainly must be a challenge for the PM to one moment be dealing with foreign heads of state and then turn up to the house to face a barrage of repetitive nonsensical questions similar to squealing children at a lolly scramble. I would say this National opposition is the worst I have seen, severely lacking in leadership with the focus all on trying to score big hits. Paula Bennett so animated and so vigorously poked so many holes in the air during her speech that it is likely Simon Bridges when next in the house will fall through them and disapear.

    • Muttonbird 10.1
      5 December 2018 at 9:39 pm

      +1

      If Bridges’ final question was anything to go by before being thrown out of the house then this opposition has descended to a level of incoherent desperation not seen before.

      National’s pursuit of this in the form of their questioning runs totally against their fake concern for the ex-wife/informant.

      It’s as it ever was – the Nats are using her for political purposes.

  11. Ankerrawshark 11
    5 December 2018 at 9:05 pm

    Kat I thought jacinda looked fine. Her answers were very clear and articulate and the content was relevant and appropriate.

    Carter trying to spin idea of JA under pressure. ………..

  12. Fireblade 12
    5 December 2018 at 9:10 pm

    Bryce Edwards has written a detailed analysis about the seriousness of the Maggie Barry allegations.

    A complaint has also been made to the Auditor General.

    https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12171903

  13. joe90 13
    5 December 2018 at 9:43 pm

    Yay! Been scanning the twitterverse and after a long absence, it looks like @wekatweets is back on the boards.

    [lprent: Good – I miss her and I hope this means that she has gotten through whatever medical issues she had. (Nope I don’t know any more than anyone else, but that was the most likely). ]

    • BM 13.1
      5 December 2018 at 9:46 pm

      I liked weka but she was a terrible mod, the power went to her head and she almost destroyed The Standard.

      Every one walking on egg shells, the place sucked.

      • marty mars 13.1.1
        5 December 2018 at 9:50 pm

        She was a rocker.

      • joe90 13.1.2
        5 December 2018 at 9:56 pm

        Yeah, but it’s a thankless task requiring a thick skin, a sharp tongue and a worldliness few possess.

        • BM 13.1.2.1
          5 December 2018 at 10:01 pm

          I’m grateful Red logix stepped in and saved the place.

          We’re all adults, we don’t need a Big Mother to tell us what’s right or wrong.

          • marty mars 13.1.2.1.1
            5 December 2018 at 10:05 pm

            big red didn’t save the place mate – and to say people are adults is missing the point – look at all the shit things adults are doing, the shit things they are saying and ALL around the world. Being reminded of the bigger picture is helpful not constraining imo.

      • lprent 13.1.3
        5 December 2018 at 10:49 pm

        I liked weka but she was a terrible mod, the power went to her head and she almost destroyed The Standard.

        I realise that you act like a misogynist dickhead, however that isn’t what I saw. And I suspect that I have a far better view on what happens on this site than you do.

        What I saw was that while she was moderating we started to have a slow rise in the number of women reading the site. We started at about 28% according to google analytics and then it started to rise. Even after she stopped contributing here it continued to rise. Currently GA shows it as 38% of our readership. It has been as high as 42% in recent months.

        Between her, and the other women authors / moderators / commenters here over the last 4 years they have both managed to raise the number of women reading and commenting, raised the standard of debate, and probably most important of all to me – have reduced the amount of required moderation to keep the site civilised to a more acceptable level.

        I’m not saying that Weka did all of that herself. What I am saying is that the thing that saved The Standard was that she did and the others that listened to people like her did. The place wouldn’t exist now if she and others hadn’t taken up the challenge that was passed to them before and after the 2014 election to take control of the atmosphere of the place – because I and some of the other moderators didn’t have any more time. And weka with her patience and civilised behaviour was a really important part of that.

        Basically you’re both completely wrong, and you show little understanding of the dynamic of the site.

        • RedLogix 13.1.3.1
          5 December 2018 at 11:52 pm

          It would help others understand if you opened up the hidden thread that went on leading up to her leaving. But given there are other reasons not to, I’m going to explain briefly (and probably incompletely) my version of what happened here in the open. This is a once only and I’m not entering into a debate on it.

          The principle problem was my original assertion made some years back, that domestic intimate partner violence was best understood from a gender neutral perspective. Most of the modern research I’ve encountered over the past few years backs this up. However it does fatally undermine the feminist claim that it’s all about patriarchy. My position was simple, after 40 years of the feminist ‘male abuse of power’ narrative it seems that rates of IPV remain stubbornly higher than anyone would like, and maybe a fresh approach was called for.

          This she hated with a passion and from then on in I became someone she wanted to get rid of. I tried a year of simply not commenting on gender issues at all, but this was not enough. In the end I was fed up with being stalked by her or tracey who seemed to work in tandem on me constantly reading shit into just about anything I said. Also in the author thread she made several clear comments that she wanted to see the ‘men who ran this site’ cleared out and the way opened for her to impose whatever agenda she wanted. She was starting to behave increasingly as if she was entitled to appoint herself “Chief Editor”.

          When I challenged this … and I did it respectfully, but without ambiguity or ‘egg shell walking’ … it was not appreciated at all. Mixed in with this was the episode with Psycho Milt who made a sly accusation to CV of being a Nazi, and weka goes off the farm and uses CV’s somewhat restrained response as an opportunistic excuse to ban him for a year. In order to bring the stupidity of this to a head I banned PM for a year as logically he was the perpetrator of the exchange. (We’d seen far worse many times with no year long bans.)

          Then in the mess weka unilaterally changes my backend editing privileges; which prevents me from rescinding the ban I’d put on PM (I had only ever done it to make a point). Sometime in this mix I get a message from the email account linked to my WordPress account that tells me someone had tried to hack into it. Fed up with this I deleted that account and have never accessed the backend since.

          Apparently some days after this (I was no longer privvy to what she said) weka chose to quit. That was entirely her choice and certainly fitted the pattern of strongly pro-feminist authors not tolerating dissent from their ideology. If they don’t get the complete acquiescence they demand, they storm off leaving everyone feeling abused and dissapointed.

          I had made it abundantly clear to weka that I valued her substantial contribution enormously, but her approach to moderation needed to be reconsidered. This had nothing to do with her, we’d had the same issue with TRP in the early days and he’s returned with great success. I was and remain deeply unhappy about weka’s actions, but in the end I’ve taken the view I’m not responsible for them.

          At the same time I felt I had to take accountability for the part I unhappily played in the entire mess, and I’ve stepped back from any role as moderator or author. I have zero intention or expectation of ever taking it up again.

          From my perspective we’ve had a better outcome persuading people to self-moderate and by setting the example we wanted. Bold type moderation has been rolled out far less often and we’re seeing the majority of threads constructively conducted with far less pointless abuse.

          • marty mars 13.1.3.1.1
            6 December 2018 at 7:44 am

            Ha I knew that something like that had happened. It is good the ugly truth is finally coming out and not the hiding of the truth.

            You know what I think about your posting on this feminist subject – I have always been in the equality camp and you have insulted and tried to shame me for that for years.

            You basically fucked it up for everyone else who wanted what weka wanted.

            • greywarshark 13.1.3.1.1.1
              6 December 2018 at 8:45 am

              It could be called the ‘leg-up’ culture as it helps a person to gain a feeling of superiority by catching out someone else and gives a feeling of power and authority, right and righteousness to the person criticising.

              It’s a mealy-mouthed bullying approach to others and turns individuals into priggish,
              judgmental people rule-bound like a severe religious cult. The adjectives below provide a cover of descriptions of the behaviour deriving from the word ‘preachy’:

              having or showing a tendency to give moral advice in a tedious or self-righteous way.
              “his patriotic pictures had a preachy tone”
              synonyms: moralistic, moralizing, sanctimonious, self-righteous, holier-than-thou, priggish, sententious, pietistic, didactic, dogmatic;

              That can even be seen on this blog FTTT. Finding balance in life is the hardest thing – encouraging people to speak up and discuss stuff in an intelligent way so all can learn from different viewpoints, including the person who initiates the opinion, is a major difficult process.

            • greywarshark 13.1.3.1.1.2
              6 December 2018 at 9:37 am

              marty mars
              Everyone else doesn’t want what you want and doesn’t want what weka wants either. The whole purpose of coming here to discuss important issues is to see what is the best way forward and look round the subject seeing the flaws or advantages in what is, and what can be changed for everyone’s benefit.

              You marty mars feel sure that your background, your experience, your knowledge when you support those who are not treated fairly, is so great that your opinions must always be right and others should step back and be quiet. Definitely you and others feeling the same, should have a fair hearing and then action to first improve and then overcome the situation as soon as possible. But proper time and hearing about all the problem is necessary for reasoned, lasting outcomes.

              Red Logix is not to be blamed for trying for reasoned discussion. I thought he was wasting his time that’s my opinion. The call-out culture that has been referred to in recent comments, was often rife here when discussing sensitive issues like rape culture, racism and ‘identity politics’. The ambush behaviour from various people is a deterrent to discussion but was very revealing about those using this tactic; their prejudices and drive towards authoritarianism and cult behaviour.

              I suggest we shape our input to thinking about better ways of managing ourselves rather than venting our spleen, and work with people who have a good faith approach showing a respectful concern about others needs and concerns. This could a type of government reflecting this approach: Geniocracy.

              The term geniocracy comes from the word genius, and describes a system that is designed to select for intelligence and compassion as the primary factors for governance.

              While having a democratic electoral apparatus, it differs from traditional liberal democracy by instead suggesting that candidates for office and the body electorate should meet a certain minimal criterion of problem-solving or creative intelligence.

              The thresholds proposed by the Raëlians are 50% above the mean for an electoral candidate and 10% above the mean for an elector.[1]
              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geniocracy

            • RedLogix 13.1.3.1.1.3
              6 December 2018 at 2:40 pm

              The equality of men and women is a fundamental principle I’ve totally upheld here. Yet it seems unless I acquiese to exactly the version of this feminists demand I believe I’m labelled a misogynist. Kind of odd really considering that not even a majority of women consider themselves feminists.

              Still I have tried not to be provocative on what is clearly a sensitive topic and I truly cannot recall s single instance where I attempted to shame you or anyone else on this. By contrast you regularly indulge in insults and shaming as you have done exactly above.

              Such a lack of self awareness Marty. I’m going to go back to not responding now. That was the deal.

              • miravox …
                6 December 2018 at 3:29 pm

                Such a lack of self awareness

                I’m not sure you realise how entrenched your position is, RL, and this does make it difficult for others with lived experience of dv, that is different from yours, to effectively work through various aspects of this topic. So I agree with marty, in principle, if not words.

                And my view of the reason that 40 years of dv discussion hasn’t changed anything is because societal & economic structures haven’t changed, and because males won’t work on this shit (the violence and the structures).

                https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/dec/04/domestic-violence-abuse-patrick-stewart-david-challen-hart-brothers

                That’s all I’ll say.

                Oh, and cv deserved his ban (imo)

                • McFlock …
                  6 December 2018 at 3:40 pm

                  good article.

                  I don’t have the words on this one.

                  But I did enjoy Weka’s writing, and thought her moderation was more moderate and fair than most – people got multiple clear warnings and frankly they can’t blame anyone but themselves if she banned their arse.

                • RedLogix …
                  6 December 2018 at 3:48 pm

                  Of course men have their role to play in preventing IPV. That’s so obvious it scarcely needs saying.

                  What is less obvious is that it leaves out the entire male experience and voice. All we get from most men is a sullen silence and not much change.

                  It should not be this difficult.

                  • Anne …
                    6 December 2018 at 6:12 pm

                    Hi Redlogix,
                    I remember that episode and I stood up for you because I believed I understood what you were trying to say. Unfortunately in the melee of the subsequent comments yours was sadly misunderstood.

                    What you were trying to point out was that on occasion it is the man who is the victim of domestic violence and that the consequences can be just as devastating. You proceeded to give a description of your own experience which I thought was horrifying. Instead of showing respect for you for having the courage to reveal that experience a few people lashed out at you.

                    I don’t think it was deliberate, but the emotional aspect of the subject seemed to get the better of some people and they took your intentions the wrong way.

                    That is the way I saw it anyway.

                    • RedLogix …
                      6 December 2018 at 9:38 pm

                      Appreciated. It was an episode in my life that caught me more by surprise than hurt. I’d grown believing only men did that sort of thing.

                      Now I understand better I’m free of it. I only mentioned it by way of explaining where I was coming from.

                  • miravox …
                    6 December 2018 at 6:52 pm

                    Of course men have their role to play in preventing IPV. That’s so obvious it scarcely needs saying.

                    What I’m saying (and plenty of others, including the men in the article I linked to – which are male voices) is that this “role to play” that men have could be way the forward that you keep arguing for.

                    • miravox …
                      7 December 2018 at 8:26 am

                      *the way forward. Sheesh.

                    • RedLogix …
                      7 December 2018 at 8:54 am

                      That’s a fair point and I’m not dismissing it. Yet just as not all women, not even a majority, identity as feminists … not all men respond to the kind of thinking your excellent link outlines.

                      Worse still it is largely those men who don’t respond who are the ones you really want to change.

                      Why don’t they respond? Why the sullen silence when the H&S Officer or HR lady does her obligatory annual spiel on White Ribbon day? (It’s a thing in Australia.)

                      Largely I think it’s because they feel excluded from the conversation, that they’re being lectured or preached to rather than anyone actually interested in what their life is like. It’s also linked to the same reason why seven men a day who take their own lives.

                      marty made an excellent comment below on Maori suicide (which is of course nothing more than self-inflicted violence) … and points out how the Ministry persists in marginalising the voices of the people who are directly involved. In much the same way the feminist narrative, while it speaks very clearly for female victims (and rightly so), has not given any space for the experience.

                      And it has to be said that being blamed by collective guilt for decades, for being shamed by their experiences, for not having anything or anyone to turn to when they really needed help … when men do finally speak out it’s often an inchoate mix of anger, resentment and sadness at how their lives have turned out.

                  • Ad …
                    6 December 2018 at 7:02 pm

                    Hang in there Red you do a good job.

                • joe90 …
                  6 December 2018 at 4:01 pm

                  Yup, men are the problem.

                  .

                  A woman was killed by a man on September 15 2018. [I can’t find her name yet]

                  Lynace Parakuka was killed by a man on the 7th of September 2018.

                  Yanyan Meng was killed by a man on April 27 2018.

                  Nicole Tuxford was killed by a man on 8 April 2018.

                  Aroha Kerehoma was killed by a man 4 April 2018.

                  Ariana Eva Mahu was killed by a man on 22 February 2018.

                  Alicia Crawford was killed by a man on 19 February 2018.

                  Amber-Rose Rush was killed by a man on 3 February 2018.

                  Anastasia Neve was killed (along with her male partner) by a man on 22 January 2018.
                  Arishma Singh was killed by a man on 12 November 2017.

                  Hayley Jane Williams was killed by a man 22 October 2017.

                  Verity McLean was killed by a man on 25 April 2017.

                  Chozyn Koroheke was killed by a man on 4 April 2017.

                  Lois Tolley was most likely killed by men on 9 December 2016.

                  Clare Bremner, Mona Tuwhangai (and her male partner) were killed by a man October 4 2016.

                  Kim Richmond was killed by a man on 16 July 2016.

                  Amokoura Daniels-Sanft was killed by a man on 2 June 2016.

                  Renee Duckmanton was killed by a man on 14 May 2016.

                  Te Awhiahua Toko was killed by a man. She died on 19 April 2016.

                  Maija​ Puhi-Duff killed by a man 12 March 2016.

                  Sharon Comerfield was killed by a man March 7 2016.

                  Jo Pert was killed by a man January 7 2016.

                  Karin Ann Ross was killed by a man on 2 December 2015.

                  Victoria Foster was killed by a man on 26 October 2015.

                  https://medium.com/@charlie__M/a-list-of-women-and-girls-killed-by-men-in-aotearoa-new-zealand-from-2015-on-966caa09db55

                  • RedLogix …
                    6 December 2018 at 4:27 pm

                    That says nothing we haven’t known for ages. But what it is also intended to do is frame the issue using a power group analysis (one gender Vs the other) in a manner that has seen little progress and increasing antagonism in recent years.

                    It also omits a lot of other information about violence in our society.

                    All I’m arguing this one sided approach doesn’t seem to be helpful and maybe there is a better way forward. It baffles me why such a small suggestion is so upsetting.

                    • McFlock …
                      6 December 2018 at 4:55 pm

                      Because it comes across as belittling murders with whataboutism.

                    • RedLogiX []
                      6 December 2018 at 5:53 pm

                      Murder exists at the extreme on one end of a continuum of aggression. It’s no surprise that men being somewhat more aggressive than women on average are grossly over represented at the extreme. It’s how normalised distributions work.

                      Put it this way, even by some kind of wonderful no men ever murdered any women ever again, do you think the problem of human aggression would vanish?

                    • McFlock …
                      6 December 2018 at 7:52 pm

                      Given that murder is usually a culmination of behaviours and often the rejection of those behaviours,I suspect any intervention(s) that eliminated men murdering women would dramatically lower the incidence of other types of IPV.

                      And then we can move on to the next most extreme outcomes.

                    • RedLogix []
                      6 December 2018 at 9:28 pm

                      In other words no. Murder only represents a tiny fraction of the total IPV, the vast bulk of it demonstrates similar rates between the genders.

                      Given this was my experience I had to think that a gender neutral approach might get a more open reception across the whole social landscape.

                      In essence I’m suggesting if we understood the whole phenomenon and addressed that we’d likely make better progress.
                      .

                    • McFlock …
                      6 December 2018 at 9:49 pm

                      Maybe the “whole phenomenon” approach would make more sense if the most serious aspect of the phenomenon wasn’t so heavily weighted in one direction.

                    • RedLogix []
                      6 December 2018 at 10:18 pm

                      If it was exclusively 100% male perpetuators your point would be well made. But it isn’t. What we actually see is two overlapping normal distributions with different means.

                      Yes murder is absolutely the most serious extreme, but there is a continuity of root causes across the whole spectrum of aggression. Understanding the dynamics of how both genders have some drivers in common, and others that are quite different, and that acknowledging how these work is not the same as victim blaming feels like a good starting point.

                    • McFlock …
                      6 December 2018 at 11:11 pm

                      Yeah, nah. The most serious aspects need the primary focus in the discussion.

                      When sociologists and psychologists and so on find the single thing that will satisfy your desire for a 100% cure, cool.

                      Until then the majority of the public discussion needs to be about the most extreme aspect of the problem, because death has no known cure.

                    • RedLogix []
                      7 December 2018 at 6:24 am

                      Maybe my thinking is aligned with 40 years of problem solving and delivering actual results. Like this machine has to be going an hour ago.

                      The hardest thing many people struggle to grasp is that unless you take the time to understand and fix the root cause of a problem, no amount of tinkering with symptoms will produce a happy outcome.

                    • McFlock …
                      7 December 2018 at 1:28 pm

                      Hey, the full systemic approach is the best way to go, most of the time.

                      But sometimes the best course is to establish an airway before you worry about bleeding, and leave the full incident analysis for later..

                  • DJ Ward …
                    7 December 2018 at 7:25 am

                    I thought you might put the female list up to for some perspective.

                    For a second I thought you might put the 6000 women who lied about the father on a birth certificate last year, the year before that etc. IE the 24000 women who have done this in that period. 0 men have done that. Plus the 8000 non name at all by women vs about 10 by men.

                    • dV …
                      7 December 2018 at 8:22 am

                      I would like to see a link to show that this is just not BS.

                    • DJ Ward …
                      7 December 2018 at 10:04 am

                      http://empathygap.uk/?p=238

                      Of all DNA tests ordered by the CSA in four consecutive years the following percentages revealed the man whom the woman claimed to be father in fact was not the father: 10.6% (2004/5), 16.4% (2005/6), 13.6% (2006/7) and 19% (2007/8). This data is not normally published but was obtained via a Freedom of Information request and reported in The Guardian in August 2008.

                      In 2001 out of 310,490 cases tested by the AABB some 90,227 were “reported as exclusions”, i.e., the man was not the father in 29% of these cases. However, there is no guarantee that this figure is representative of the population at large, even in the USA. The sample size is impressively large, though.

                      Since DNA paternity testing figures began to be collected in 1998-99, 4,854 paternity claims have turned out to be false after DNA testing. Under child support legislation it is a criminal offence to make a false statement or representation, and to provide false documents or information. However, according to the CSA, there has not been a single prosecution of a woman for making a false claim.

                      NZs rate is the highest on the planet.

                    • Molly …
                      7 December 2018 at 10:16 am

                      Your link from empathy shows a degree of non-paternity, but ignores the fact that some of those tests are because the father was denying paternity:

                      A multi-nation study by Bellis et al, Ref.[1] indicates average rates of paternity fraud across the data collected of ~28%, though these data relate to cases where paternity had been disputed prior to testing and hence might be expected to be higher than in the public as a whole.

                      In fact, the whole article is a series of cherry picked data that doesn’t even consider the issue of father’s denying paternity.

                      For the quote above – in the case of disputed paternity – the rate was 72%, where the fathers were found to be the biological parent despite denial.

                      The average from your other articles was 10% – where the stated father was not the biological parent.

                    • DJ Ward …
                      7 December 2018 at 12:26 pm

                      So my comment is about right then.

                      24000 since 2015.

                      More crimes involving sex by women than all the male sex crimes combined. That’s without lying about being on the pill, or sex crimes that men get charged with but women don’t, which is pretty much all of them.

                      You seem upset Molly that I can expose feminist crimes and misandry so easily.

                      Here’s one.

                      When IRD Child Support pay out the stolen money they destroy all documents relating to the payment. Its naughty to destroy evidence relating to criminal offending. Nah its a crime to do that!

                    • Molly …
                      7 December 2018 at 1:47 pm

                      “You seem upset Molly that I can expose feminist crimes and misandry so easily.

                      Here’s one.

                      When IRD Child Support pay out the stolen money they destroy all documents relating to the payment. Its naughty to destroy evidence relating to criminal offending. Nah its a crime to do that!”

                      No. I’m pointing out your narrow view, which gives a strident voice to only part of the issue in an attempt to drown out any others.

                      BTW: I was unaware that the whole of the IRD Child Support department was female.

                      (You do have a tendency to cherry pick information and data for interpretation, and then use it for generalisation. Stop doing that, and I’ll stop pointing it out)

                      As an aside: I visited some of those forums that you described having conversations with “hurt and scared men”, and found no evidence of such, but did find a lot of posters there that had a “scary” world view.

                    • DJ Ward …
                      7 December 2018 at 2:05 pm

                      @Molly.

                      just like lying about being on the pill you avoided the topic again.

                      Do you support those 24000 Paternity Frauds.

                      Yes or No Molly.

                      The MGTOW groups exist because of these men’s experiences. They do portray some out there views as a resultant of that. But based on our previous conversations I would guess that anything that involves harm to men is acceptable to you.

                    • Molly …
                      7 December 2018 at 2:11 pm

                      “But based on our previous conversations I would guess that anything that involves harm to men is acceptable to you.”
                      Please link to any comment of mine that indicates this to be true.

                      “@Molly.

                      just like lying about being on the pill you avoided the topic again.”
                      And I have absolutely no idea what this comment is about.

                      I will engage in honest discussion with others and try to link to source, and have never advocated harm to either males or females on this platform.

                      I would ask that you do the same when you engage with me. I also think an apology would be in order, but don’t have an expectation of one.

                      I have several problems with the current Child Support payments, not least of which they are often unable to support the children – regardless of parents. In NZ, paternity on a birth certificate is only declared with the agreement of the father. Birthright org This seems the most straightforward way of dealing with a complex issue. Although a DNA test can be recommended by a court, it can’t be enforced.

                      Do you have a better system in mind?

                    • McFlock …
                      7 December 2018 at 2:24 pm

                      Hang on, DJ, so you had a list of women murdered by men and for balance you thought a count of incorrect (knowingly or unknowingly) patronage claims was equivalent?

                    • DJ Ward …
                      7 December 2018 at 3:23 pm

                      I also asked for the female murderers list. For some perspective.

                      How about the males subject to false allegations in the family court male suicide list.

                      That’s murder too isn’t it. Definitely involves at least 1 major crime. Profoundly larger list.

                      Hypocrisy.

                      So the 24000 figure is irrelevant to you?

                      How much Domestic Violence was caused by that? The males cop the blame and the sex offender walks free. Typical gynocentrism.

                      Because women are helpless innocent princesses?

                      But no!
                      We must persecute the men because McFlock only wants to focus on that one statistic. Lock up more men, ban more men from seeing there kids, enslave them and take all there money. Send them to Womens Refuge indoctrination courses at the threat of imprisonment.

                      That will fix it.

                    • Molly …
                      7 December 2018 at 4:45 pm

                      Your figure of 24,000 is related to a multi-national study, and does not actually link to a complete number of births for context.

                      BTW, I am noting that at no point do you suggest that the 72% of fathers who denied paternity – and by DNA tests were shown to be the parent – be sued for fraud. Why is that?

                      (Note: possessive pronoun is their. Not usually so pedantic about spelling, but you use the word a lot, and it appears you are unaware of the error).

                    • McFlock …
                      7 December 2018 at 4:56 pm

                      All your “24,000” figure does is show another area where many more men are incorrect than women.

                    • DJ Ward …
                      7 December 2018 at 5:34 pm

                      Well I’m guessing that 0% of women ever have to be concerned about falsely named as a mother.

                      I have no idea how your working out what goes on inside of men’s minds on this issue. For many it sits in the back of their minds rotting away. Women force unhealthy things on men because of women’s dishonesty.

                      What if a mans not sure? He knows for example his partner was having an affair. Should he just accept her cliam of paternity.

                      Molly if a man does a test to find out the truth because he has no other way of knowing the truth then presently he pays all costs if she is telling the truth.

                      If she is not telling the truth then she puts false details in a legal document, and Dishonestly uses a Legal Document for Personel Financial Gain. A crime.

                      There is no such thing as misattributed paternity. It is an excuse by feminists to minimise, and justify the crime.

                      Are you saying that women are so stupid that they can’t understand if you put a penis in your vagina you can get pregnant?

                      If a women gets pregnant and more than one male can be the father then she knows that she could be having a child with the man she is not naming. It is an intentional decision to either guess or far more likely pick the best option for her. There is never informed consent with the named father that he may not be the father based on the fact at best it’s 50:50 that he is the father.

                      You own this bulshit. This is women’s responsibility. You own this crime. Take responsibility for once in your lives.

                    • solkta …
                      7 December 2018 at 5:40 pm

                      Woman always dishonest, man perpetual victim.

                      Man, you need to get some help.

                    • McFlock …
                      7 December 2018 at 5:45 pm

                      What if a mans not sure? He knows for example his partner was having an affair. Should he just accept her cliam of paternity.

                      Just to be clear, this is your response to a comment about men murdering women. And the list of women murdering men is much shorter.

                      But to be additonally clear, most of the time that paternity is disputed, meaning each case has thousands of dollars are spent on lawyers and tests in order to simply demonstrate that the dude is actually the dad and needs to take responsibility for his part in the child. Which suggests that guys are already erring on the side of avoiding their responsibilities. What more would you have? The male pill is still quite a ways away, so maybe suggest male celibacy until it’s released?

                    • Molly …
                      7 December 2018 at 5:46 pm

                      “There is no such thing as misattributed paternity. It is an excuse by feminists to minimise, and justify the crime.

                      Are you saying that women are so stupid that they can’t understand if you put a penis in your vagina you can get pregnant?

                      If a women gets pregnant and more than one male can be the father then she knows that she could be having a child with the man she is not naming. It is an intentional decision to either guess or far more likely pick the best option for her. There is never informed consent with the named father that he may not be the father based on the fact at best it’s 50:50 that he is the father.

                      You own this bulshit. This is women’s responsibility. You own this crime. Take responsibility for once in your lives.”

                      A fairly accurate and inexcusable view of your idea of supporting equality then.

                      I would ignore you if your views were only distasteful. They are also harmful to men, women and children.

                      You are not engaging with any integrity. I’ve also had a longer look at your linked site, and have noted errors in statements stated as facts. No links to trustworthy sites for data.

                      A terrible perspective on human relationships – whether male or female.

                    • DJ Ward …
                      7 December 2018 at 6:03 pm

                      Blah blah.

                      So men get to slave away for women, raising other men’s children.

                      I get it. None of you care about integrity.

                      None of you care about the child’s right to know who they are. Their heritage.

                      None of you care about the theft of about $1.2 billion dollars a year from men.

                      But let’s focus on men killing women.

                      Why don’t women act with some integrity because clearly there’s 24000 in the last 4 years who have absolutely none. Maybe since we don’t have the male pill yet women should act with integrity and not lie about being on the pill. Then men might start to behave better because women aren’t ruining there lives.

                      Until then why ask men to act with integrity when clearly women have no intention of doing so.

                      What do you propose men do to lower the male vs female murder rate? More persecution?

                      DV has been legislated against, upgraded, upgraded, upgraded, more funding, and more funding.

                      It gets worse and worse, and worse.

                      But heh don’t listen to me. I’ve only looked at this stuff for a few decades trying to work out what the real problems are. I guess Women’s Refuge, Women’s Studies, Ministry for Women have all the solutions then.

                      You should ask The Minister for Men what she thinks.

                    • solkta …
                      7 December 2018 at 6:15 pm

                      Let’s not focus on men killing women because they deserve it. Oh wait.

                    • Molly …
                      7 December 2018 at 7:16 pm

                      “Why don’t women act with some integrity because clearly there’s 24000 in the last 4 years who have absolutely none.

                      Although that figure is determined (how?) it appears to relate to the experiences from the US.

                      Birth rates for the US for the last four years – about 15.78 million.

                      In that context – your figure – which you believe gives you permission to rail against half of the world’s population is 0.001 (3 sig fig) %.

                      That is not to say I give any credence to your 24,000 figure, which is not provided on your link in any context. But this is basic source checking.

                      The main reason I am engaging with you is because this perspective that you embrace harms men and families as well as women. You are exhibiting the behaviour you claim to abhor in women advocating for women without regard to mens’ wellbeing. You are doing exactly the same, but using advocacy to excuse behaviour that disregards societal wellbeing.

                      You have appropriated a legitimate need in terms of men dealing with toxic masculinity expectations, and used it to cause further harm – not in order to find a solution.

                    • DJ Ward …
                      7 December 2018 at 7:19 pm

                      That was childish Solka. How about you search the whole internet for any comment where I’ve said that.

                      You focus on punishing men, and solve nothing.

                      I’ll focus on the causes of there behavour and actually try and solve things.

                      Things like the education system failing them.
                      Men having no where to go when they are angry at there partners and no support to help resolve problems.
                      Men having no options when subject to a domestically violent relationship.
                      The protection order system used to prevent fathers seeing there kids causing bad actions in desperation.
                      Bigotry by the police.
                      False accusations which are prolific in the family court.
                      Hopelessness caused by financial destitution.
                      Drug use as self medication for psycological harm.
                      Discriminatory prosecutions.
                      Discriminatory sentences.
                      Negligent, or absent representation.
                      Societal culture or gynocentrism.

                      It’s gos on and on.

                      Women have got, the murder rate and a mythical pay gap. That’s about it.

                      Do you know what gynocentric means?

                    • Molly …
                      7 December 2018 at 7:30 pm

                      You still haven’t provided the information I requested in the above comment.

                      “But based on our previous conversations I would guess that anything that involves harm to men is acceptable to you.”
                      Please link to any comment of mine that indicates this to be true.

                      “@Molly.

                      just like lying about being on the pill you avoided the topic again.”
                      And I have absolutely no idea what this comment is about.

                      In fact you don’t provide links to verifiable stats at all. Mostly self-authored blog or websites.

                      Another issue I have, is that on a New Zealand platform you are using non-verified overseas experiences, even when they are not duplicated in our legal or justice system.

                      The issues you outline – are often created, designed and upheld mostly by men – in well paid positions of power and authority. The organisations of support for women, are often created, designed and sustained by women – through volunteerism, fundraising as well as paid positions.

                      Why do you continue to solely blame women for any injustices in institutional systems?

                    • solkta …
                      7 December 2018 at 7:56 pm

                      That is what you have effectively been saying. Every time someone mentions how men are murdering women you go on a long rant about all the nasty things that women do to men.

                    • DJ Ward …
                      7 December 2018 at 8:10 pm

                      Molly.

                      What the hell are you talking about.

                      That link referenced a OIA request.

                      I provided one link because I have looked in depth into this subject and written extensively on it. I don’t need you to argue about if it’s 10%. I simply can’t be bothered verifying something I get endlessly asked to prove.

                      Women having children to other men is part of history. Loyalty in marriage as a culture is a resultant of paternity fraud. Isolating women from other men in things like Harems. Male jealousy behavours, a significant issue in murders of women, is a evolutionary response.

                      So when I say the issue of paternity fraud needs to be fixed, and for the first time in history we can its not only because men are unfairly treated but men respond to that by controlling women in an attempt to protect themselves.

                      See I got attacked for not discussing men murdering women. The reality is I went strait to one of the causes of male behavour and domestic violence against women. Something that has occurred for 100s of thousands of years.

                    • Molly …
                      7 December 2018 at 8:32 pm

                      “Molly.

                      What the hell are you talking about.

                      That link referenced a OIA request.”

                      No. The comment you provided does not link to an OIA request.

                      “I simply can’t be bothered verifying something I get endlessly asked to prove.”
                      Perhaps the endless requests are due to the lack of verification.

                      The rest of your comment is you wilfully and delightedly returning to your one-track argument, the premise that women are essentially the cause of all men’s problems.

                      BTW, I’m still waiting for your evidence for putting forth this comment:
                      ““But based on our previous conversations I would guess that anything that involves harm to men is acceptable to you.”
                      Let’s call that request number three.

              • marty mars …
                6 December 2018 at 4:33 pm

                The deal you broke with me just like you broke with weka and the non woman commenting you agreed to.

                Sigh )( sadly I doubt you’ll ever get it.

                • RedLogix …
                  6 December 2018 at 5:05 pm

                  They made that spurious claim but never produced a single link to it.

                  And I’ve observed the same deal with you except for one instance when I misread who you were replying to on my phone which doesn’t show the indents.

                  • marty mars …
                    6 December 2018 at 5:16 pm

                    I remember you agreeing and saying sorry for it mate.

                    Anyway truth is I don’t care. It is what it is. They’re gone you are here. I know what I know and so do you. Fuck it life’s too short.

                    • RedLogix …
                      6 December 2018 at 6:05 pm

                      I made it clear I valued their contribution and respected their views even if disagreed on some points. I wanted them to stay. The reverse was not true.

                    • marty mars …
                      6 December 2018 at 6:13 pm

                      Further up it sounded like you felt pretty hurt and devalued by their responses to you. You retaliated and as usually happens unintended consequences occured perhaps even things you wished didn’t happen.

                      You know me I’d rather have them than you if I had to choose. But whatever…

                    • RedLogix []
                      6 December 2018 at 10:31 pm

                      Well I’m standing in a pizza queue watching Santa’s pixies dinging Christmas songs at Bunnings Manly Brisbane party.

                      It’s a happy pleasant moment and for now I’ll set all this aside. Best Wishes marry.

          • lprent 13.1.3.1.2
            6 December 2018 at 8:58 am

            I’d have to look back on the threads. Since 2014/5 I’ve been tied down getting projects out the door and on to the customers site for work. So I’ve had to prioritize my time time far more than I had. I simply haven’t been following the intercine fighting as much as I once would have. I’ve pretty much concentrated on the site ops and the the posts.

            So I probably didn’t see too much of this because I simply didn’t have time.

            However, the attempted hacking of the logins happens all of the time. My login has had a *lot* of hacks on it all of the time. So do all of the authors and the remaining commenters with logins. I have a email folder full of reports of it happening multiple times per day. Just as I have reports of when passwords are changed. At various times when it gets too intense, I’ve had to shutdown the email system that supports external password changes. And earlier this year I had a problem when the wretched thing started rejecting mail from the server (which I must retest – still getting odd emails saying that it fails sometimes).

            With weka’s departure, I didn’t notice anything in the backend. But I may have simply missed it. However her not being around for periods wasn’t uncommon (like yourself when you’ve moved countries). She’d stopped several times from contributing for quite long periods when she wasn’t feeling too good.

            What I have noticed after those internal disagreements after the 2014 election has been the slow but steady increase in women readership and eventually the slow decrease in the need to moderate. Neither has particularly affected the number of active readers.

            The numbers of 200+ session readers per month has steadily increased. The slow decreases in page views has been from the overseas 1 page readers – which shouldn’t be a target group for a NZ political website.

            Anyway, I’d better get on my bike and get to work.

            • RedLogix 13.1.3.1.2.1
              6 December 2018 at 2:57 pm

              Maybe your explanation is the correct one, I have no way to tell.

              On the other hand in the whole decade I ran that account this was the one and only time I got that message. And it occurred on the exact day mentioned above.

              • Antoine …
                7 December 2018 at 9:05 am

                Banning Psycho Milt for a year was pretty clearly the wrong decision and should have been reversed.

                I think I’d be a great moderator, by the way, if anyone wanted to make me one.

                A.

                • RedLogix …
                  7 December 2018 at 10:00 am

                  It was always my intention to reverse PM’s ban once the point had been made. But weka had doubled down and removed my ability to moderate. Quite how she did this, or why she thought she had the right baffles me, but the effect was that I couldn’t rescind PM’s ban as intended.

                  At that point I was still able to login to the backend, and some other authors were very upset at her action. After all if she felt entitled do it to me, no-one was exempt.

                  Then someone tried to hack the email account I used for WordPress. Lynn says this happens all the time to him. But this was the only time it ever happened to me … on the same day. And at this point my password to login to WordPress no longer worked. It could of course all be a mad coincidence … these things happen all the time right 🙂

                  I simply deleted the email account in disgust and have never been interested in logging in and accessing the WordPress backend ever again. It’s been quite nice being an ordinary participant again; no-one gets to make stupid claims about ‘abusing privilege’ and ‘censorship’ against you. Be careful what you wish for Antoine.

                  And of course with the ban on PM left hanging, so remained the one on CV. Both on equally spurious grounds.

                  • marty mars …
                    7 December 2018 at 10:58 am

                    Come on red. I know the victor gets to write the history but jeeze – you got the pricker cos CV was banned so you banned PM in retaliation. Then all your back end stuff happened. You won, you’re not some victim.

                    I wish it was hadn’t happened but probably inevitable.

                    Anyway hope the parade went well over there – I spent the morning hanging flower baskets along the main road of town to beautify the area.

                    • RedLogix …
                      7 December 2018 at 12:19 pm

                      No. Your interpretation is wrong and that’s the truth. Nor can I quite see how I got to be the ‘victor’ here; it’s certainly not how I feel about it. weka is a big grown up adult and is entirely, 100% her choice to leave.

                      Although in the end I suspect it was her completely wrong actions against at least two other authors that she didn’t like that led to position here becoming untenable. Also she mention health issues that may have been involved. Whatever her reasons I absolutely assure you I never saw it as a ‘victory’.

                      What you don’t know is weka had been on CV’s case for at least a year in the backend, stalking him and moderating on content not behaviour. That’s the critical point she failed on, an inability to distinguish between an opinion or ideas she didn’t like and behaviour that was unacceptable.

                      The specific incident with PM that she used as an excuse to ban him was entirely trivial. CV’s response to PM slyly labeling him a nazi (and PM is a smart guy he knew what he said) was well within normal boundaries and by itself could never have justified a one day ban, much less a year. To claim it was the result of some unspecified ‘accumulation of offenses over time’ was an opportunistic abuse of moderation. I logically countered that by acting to ban the perpetrator of the exchange with the same ridiculous ban; which of course exposed it exactly for what it was.

                      The idea that female authors are undervalued or unwelcome here is ridiculous. Quite the opposite; if it had been some male author who’d departed no-one would care and we wouldn’t be dissecting these events a year later.

                      She became a queen bee, started behaving as if she was untouchable and had everyone walking on eggshells around her. She had extracted an agreement from me to be silent on a specific topic she didn’t like (and then falsely claimed whenever I made even the most generalised, indirect reference to gender in any context that I’d broken it); banned a fellow author with no authority or group agreement to do so, and handed out year long bans using opportunistic excuses. Then started making claims she wanted to clean out the ‘male club’ who had started The Standard.

                      All of this was unprecedented on any authors part and I’m only explaining because what happened in the backend was much more revealing of motives than you see here.

                      As for my motives, for the most part I was busy that year in the Arctic and only sporadically checked in with the site, but the growing authoritarian pattern was clear. Which was incredibly unfortunate. I sincerely, as you do, valued her content and contribution. In the end The Standard is bigger than any single author, however valuable, hard-working or well-liked.

                      I know that nothing I can say will persuade you marty. However this is pretty much all I have to say on this matter.

                    • marty mars …
                      7 December 2018 at 1:19 pm

                      Your his story is yours. It’s all irrelevant and sorta nanasplaining now.

                    • RedLogix …
                      7 December 2018 at 1:45 pm

                      That’s a typical shaming trick right there marty. And you claimed above that I did it to you.

                      Are you aware of which way the river is flowing here?

                    • marty mars …
                      7 December 2018 at 1:55 pm

                      Whatever – do you really care. You’ve had your big chance to put your story. I’ve moved on. I don’t need any further evidence to know what sort of a bloke your persona is on here.

                    • RedLogix []
                      7 December 2018 at 7:43 pm

                      Truly you are better than this.

                      I had no intention of talking about these events for a long time and was quite dubious about doing so now because I just knew it would attract sneering and abuse from you.

                      But it seemed some people were still curious over what happened and I judged it best to give my version of events. It’s all any of can do really.

                      Are you happy now and can we just go back to not talking again?

                    • McFlock …
                      7 December 2018 at 2:15 pm

                      Your interpretation is wrong and that’s the truth.

                      But that’s your point of view.

                      And in a text-based medium, content is behaviour.

                      Maybe checking in periodically meant you missed how much of a fucking jerk CV turned into. But you have one commenter calling him an “authoritarian nationalist” and a moderator strongly focussed on him, and you felt it was just a difference of opinion. Maybe that’s because your opinion’s were closer to CV’s than weka’s in one or two areas, but that doesn’t mean CV’s shit wasn’t repetitive. This was the ban-for-ban.
                      It was the latest in a long line of him being a jerk, getting banned, then lying about why he was banned, getting banned for that, coming back, starting flamewars, getting banned, etc etc etc.

                      It actually became a popcorn challenge to see how long he’d manage not being a fuckwit. One morning his ban expired, he came back, made multiple comments of growing disruptiveness, and got banned again, all before I was out of bed.

          • Molly 13.1.3.1.3
            7 December 2018 at 9:53 am

            RL, I don’t know whether you are self-aware but I suspect your “respectfully, but without ambiguity or “egg-shell” walking” is experienced by the recipient in ways other than respect.

            Your call for gender neutrality in dealing with domestic violence is mirrored in calls for other services to be race-neutral. If you can view the benefit of race-aligned health services in New Zealand, it may give you a different perspective on how gender aligned responses to domestic violence can be more effective.

            There are a couple of links that may be worth your while to read instead of having me unsuccessfully fitting in this before heading out for the morning. I don’t really want to drop and run, but think this is an important issue and one that requires discussion:

            A Review of Research on Women’s Use of Violence With Male Intimate Partners

            Domestic abuse and violence is not gender neutral. Wake up Britain

            Also, don’t know where I picked up the link, but just watched a Ted talk that spoke about the gender component of violence:

            Jackson Katz: Violence against women – it’s a mens issue

            The comments underneath show the binary positions of acceptance for this talk, and the strong resistance against it.

            • RedLogix 13.1.3.1.3.1
              7 December 2018 at 12:41 pm

              but I suspect your “respectfully, but without ambiguity or “egg-shell” walking” is experienced by the recipient in ways other than respect.

              At no time did I attack weka in personal terms whatsoever. I can pretty much stand on my record here to back that claim. However … and this is the critical point … an inability to distinguish between an attack on your essential dignity and worth as an individual, and an attack on the ideas or behaviours you hold to is always going to result in unhappy feelings.

              If you can view the benefit of race-aligned health services in New Zealand, it may give you a different perspective on how gender aligned responses to domestic violence can be more effective.

              That would be nice. Exactly where are the ‘male aligned’ support services for men in this country? For both victims and perhaps more importantly men who find themselves trapped into increasingly violent behaviours they neither understand nor can control?

              This is something women seem to have a very poor grasp of. My partner has a close friend who is having a great time getting out dating for the first time in decades. They happily natter on at least 3-4 times a week for at least an hour. This is normal for women, they readily access each other for support and mental health refreshes with no hesitation whatsoever.

              By contrast most men are completely locked out from any of this. When we talk it’s almost never about our partners, or emotional life. (The only exception in my life was a rather remarkable period of some years in the 80’s when I was hugely fortunate to be involved with a very positive and supportive men’s group, the like of which simply does not exist these days.)

              Worse still we live in a society that routinely denigrates men’s roles in life, discounts the status of fatherhood, and openly mocks them as stupid, hapless loons with stunted emotional lives. White males in particular are held collectively responsible for all the evils in the world; everything that goes wrong has to be 100% some man’s fault. Their voices are sneered at as angry and misogynistic when they do finally say something; their experiences treated as disposable as toilet paper.

              And then we wonder why they go off the rails or check out.

              • Molly …
                7 December 2018 at 1:13 pm

                “That would be nice. Exactly where are the ‘male aligned’ support services for men in this country? For both victims and perhaps more importantly men who find themselves trapped into increasingly violent behaviours they neither understand nor can control?”
                That is in complete contradiction of your previously stated:

                The principle problem was my original assertion made some years back, that domestic intimate partner violence was best understood from a gender neutral perspective. Most of the modern research I’ve encountered over the past few years backs this up.

                I’ve given you some modern links that indicate the issue is related to gender, in terms of how it is perpetrated, experienced and effectively supported.

                “That would be nice. Exactly where are the ‘male aligned’ support services for men in this country? For both victims and perhaps more importantly men who find themselves trapped into increasingly violent behaviours they neither understand nor can control?”

                Do you believe current support systems were created without a lot of advocacy, volunteerism and without pushback? I would think the history of many of our organisations will indicate how hard-won some of our services are. Many services too have come and gone as the energy of those involved become depleted.

                I agree that support is necessary for any victims of domestic violence regardless of gender.

                I disagree that there is any benefit at all in viewing it as a gender neutral issue, whether in terms of dealing with perpetrators, support systems or prevention programmes.

                “This is something women seem to have a very poor grasp of. My partner has a close friend who is having a great time getting out dating for the first time in decades. They happily natter on at least 3-4 times a week for at least an hour. This is normal for women, they readily access each other for support and mental health refreshes with no hesitation whatsoever.

                By contrast most men are completely locked out from any of this. When we talk it’s almost never about our partners, or emotional life. (The only exception in my life was a rather remarkable period of some years in the 80’s when I was hugely fortunate to be involved with a very positive and supportive men’s group, the like of which simply does not exist these days.)

                If you as a male recognise this, then surely that is something for you to change. Or would you expect women to either: drop the existing support system to make an equal playing field, or alternatively, create a male support network? (BTW, this generalisation is not necessarily the case in terms of intimate connection and support. Just as sports mad people can speak often and long, and have no idea of the other’s innermost thoughts, so too, can conversation be light and non-supportive amongst female acquaintances. I’m just really trying to point out – what relevance does this have to gender neutrality – if anything, you are making the point that gender nuanced services are required.)

                “Worse still we live in a society that routinely denigrates men’s roles in life, discounts the status of fatherhood, and openly mocks them as stupid, hapless loons with stunted emotional lives. White males in particular are held collectively responsible for all the evils in the world; everything that goes wrong has to be 100% some man’s fault. Their voices are sneered at as angry and misogynistic when they do finally say something; their experiences treated as disposable as toilet paper.

                And then we wonder why they go off the rails or check out.”

                This is not true in my experience.

                It may be in yours, and those with whom you align. It is a generalisation, and of necessity has to remove any other perspectives to be relevant.

                • RedLogix …
                  7 December 2018 at 1:40 pm

                  That is in complete contradiction of your previous

                  Not in the slightest. It’s one thing to frame the issue in gender-neutral terms, and another to talk about how you might go about delivering services.

                  By gender neutral what I mean is framing the discussion that doesn’t privilege one gender over the other, recognising the mutual dynamics and the root causes of aggression and violence of all types from both genders. It says nothing to the optimum way of producing outcomes; if male and female specific support systems are considered best … then go for it.

                  And yes I fully accept many services women fought for were hard won; we’ve barely started with anything comparable for men. We don’t really know what they should look like, although personally I suspect they won’t be the same as what works for women with a different coloured label.

                  This is not true in my experience.

                  Well no. I’d never dream of telling a woman what her experience should or should not be; I just cannot really know. Consider how the reverse might be true?

                  And yes most comments here are by nature generalisations. I do try to leaven this with personal experiences, but they’re not the whole story either.

                  • Molly …
                    7 December 2018 at 1:59 pm

                    “This is not true in my experience.

                    Well no. I’d never dream of telling a woman what her experience should or should not be; I just cannot really know. Consider how the reverse might be true?”

                    This reads well but in practice you often dismiss other experiences or perspectives as not the same as yours. Effectively, silencing them by implying they are not relevant or do not need to be considered.

                    “By gender neutral what I mean is framing the discussion that doesn’t privilege one gender over the other, recognising the mutual dynamics and the root causes of aggression and violence of all types from both genders. It says nothing to the optimum way of producing outcomes; if male and female specific support systems are considered best … then go for it.”
                    The repeated requirement for gender neutral terms – even though you yourself acknowledge the point that gender experience of domestic violence differs, and support systems that acknowledge gender difference are more effective – is a case in point.

                    Until everyone agrees with you – even though you provide no benefit to anyone for that requirement – you refuse to discuss anything else or focus on that disagreement.

                    “And yes I fully accept many services women fought for were hard won; we’ve barely started with anything comparable for men. We don’t really know what they should look like, although personally I suspect they won’t be the same as what works for women with a different coloured label.”

                    This doesn’t fully address the issue of women’s energy and volunteerism contributing to many of the existing support systems for women. Why not? Surely your request for male victims of domestic abuse would acknowledge that men need to play a part in creating those supports – or would you like women to add that to their list?

                    Well no. I’d never dream of telling a woman what her experience should or should not be; I just cannot really know. Consider how the reverse might be true?
                    Except you did, when you included me in your generalisation about the view of society – of whom I am a member. I’ve haven’t done that in discussion with you.

                • Antoine …
                  7 December 2018 at 1:40 pm

                  @Molly

                  I don’t think RL is in any mood to hear all this, and nor do I think he will change his position for anything you say

                  (None of this prevents you from saying it of course)

                  A.

        • mauī 13.1.3.2
          7 December 2018 at 1:18 pm

          Genuinely hope weka is ok and that she will be back here. Her posts were always very interesting to anyone interested in Green ideas / issues. One very smart bird.

  14. marty mars 14
    5 December 2018 at 9:56 pm

    Agree – it is not working for many and the solutions proposed don’t address it in relation to tangata whenua.

    The chair of Suicide Prevention Australia and the Auckland District Māori Council says Māori are sick of turning up for a karakia and cup of tea and then being told to leave the table.

    Matthew Tukaki says that’s his immediate response to He Ara Oranga, the report of the Government Inquiry into Mental Health and Addiction.

    He says there was a compete disregard of the need for Māori co-design of mental health and suicide prevention initiatives, and all the power remains in the hands of the Health Ministry.

    What was needed was an investigation into the failure of the health system for Māori.

    “The highest suicide rate per head of population in the world is our people. The largest number of people who are filtering through the mental health system per head of population are our people. The highest number of people who are facing everything from addiction to P and alcoholism and all the rest, they’re our people so why in god’s green earth were our stories and our narratives as a first nations people overwhelmed by everybody else,” Mr Tukaki says.

    https://www.waateanews.com/waateanews/x_news/MjA3MzU/He-Ara-Oranga-overwhelmed-by-mainstream

  15. Whispering Kate 15
    6 December 2018 at 2:34 pm

    Interesting observations from a Psychiatric Nurse the other day. She was interested. as a lot of us are, on the results of the submissions to overhaul our Mental Health Services.

    She said one of the major problems with the service is that Mental Health and Alcohol and Drug addiction are both treated under the same umbrella. She said that almost all of their time is taken up with policing drugs in the mental health acute wards and drug dogs regularly being walked through the wards and finding drugs on the wards etc. She said all of their training goes down the gurgler when they are at work just being guardians for drug and alcohol addicted patients.

    She recommends that there are separate operations at work here, one to deal with addiction related mental illness with counselling, withdrawing of substances etc and another for dealing with genuine serious mental health disorders such as bi-polar, Psychosis, Schizophrenia etc, illnesses for which they trained for. She said they get so discouraged and burnt out just policing and wee testing patients and searching toilet bags etc in patient’s rooms for smuggled in drugs.

    Just a thought folks so don’t bring the clobbering machine down on my head.