Open mike 01/04/2024

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, April 1st, 2024 - 186 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:


Open mike is your post.

For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose.

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

Step up to the mike …

186 comments on “Open mike 01/04/2024 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Kay 1
    1 April 2024 at 9:15 am

    I have tried very hard to understand where certain commentators here have been coming from with their trans comments. I've read them, followed some links to see where it stems from.

    But I am always thinking of my friend, Alexandra. She's a wonderful human being, a very talented artist, and just happens to be a trans woman. And the latter to me is completely irrelevant to who she is as a person. Alex takes so much crap and blatant bigotry and discrimination on a daily basis because of society in general, and it's being made a hell of a lot worse since it's become politicised via the 'culture wars.' She's survived suicide attempts- not because she's ashamed of who she is, but because of everyone else. Many of her peers didn't survive.

    A question to all those who wish to continually rave on about how her existence is some sort of threat, and won't someone think of the children- have you ever met a trans person? Have you ever sat down with them and learned about their lives? If you haven't, then you have absolutely no right to define who you think is a 'woman', bathroom, pay rates, etc etc.

    This 'not allowed to have the conversation' thing is only because there is nothing to have a conversation about. These attempts to, and a lot of what I'm reading and hearing, are nothing more than prejudice and bigotry under the guise of 'discussion' and an attempt to be academic about it, rather than in your face, a la Destiny. At least they're open about it.

    Once upon a time this same thing was happening to gay people, and also to disabled. Remember when parents didn't want disabled kids in schools, because their little darlings 'might catch something?' And remember when all gay men were automatically paedophiles? As for public toilets, it wouldn't bother me in the least if Alex or one of her peers were in the stall next to me. In my life, I've been harmed by straight males, never gay or trans. I've felt unsafe around other women in some public toilets. So your point is?

    Alex is a person, she's a human being, yet there is a group of her fellow citizens who behave like she isn't, and are politicising her existence for their own agenda. And it's disgusting. I know you won't necessarily agree with anything I've said, but this site is for challenging ideas and opinions, so that's what I'm doing.

    • Robert Guyton 1.1
      1 April 2024 at 9:34 am

      I hope you had a good sleep last night, Kay, and a hearty breakfast – this could be a long day 🙂

      I support your heart-felt comments and hope nobody responds by demanding that you explain what "No Debate" means, or links to any unpleasant tabloid articles in the UK, or posts nsfw images on today's Open Mike 🙂

      • Kay 1.1.1
        1 April 2024 at 9:59 am

        Thank you Robert. I've had my porridge and pills smiley Like I said, just challenging opinions. But I'm well aware I probably won't change any.

        • Anne 1.1.1.1
          1 April 2024 at 11:29 am

          Bravo Kay. Thank-you for your honesty. I met Georgina Beyer when she was a well respected Labour MP and found her intelligent, gracious and very empathetic – vastly superior to some of the hate filled 'ranters' that seem to exist today.

          I expect you will be challenged by those who allege superior knowledge on the subject. Some will know what they are talking about, others will not.

    • Robert Guyton 1.2
      1 April 2024 at 9:50 am

      Nick Rockel must've been pondering overnight as well 🙂

      "A segment of our society is still unsure about the whole trans thing. They wonder is it real or are people just making choices? Are they just pretending? Can’t they just behave like the rest of us?

      And that’s the same argument people used a while back for gay people, and no doubt before that other groups too. Back when those other forms of prejudice didn’t seem so ridiculous."

      We like Nick here on The Standard, right?

      https://nickrockel.substack.com/p/love-is-love

      • weka 1.2.1
        1 April 2024 at 10:20 am

        A segment of our society is still unsure about the whole women's rights thing. They wonder is it real or are women just making a fuss? Are they just pretending because they're bigots? Can’t they just behave like the rest of us?

      • francesca 1.2.2
        1 April 2024 at 10:23 am

        I occasionally read Rockel, and did read the one you link to .Within that was a description of what happened at MT Albert.

        So far as I’m aware the only people actually assaulted were Marama Davidson, Green Party co-leader, who was ridden into by a motorbike in what looked like a deliberate act of aggression. And the other being Eli Rubashkyn, the person who threw the tomato juice.

        Total denial of the elderly woman punched in the face 3 times.So I tend to take his writing with a pinch of salt

        • weka 1.2.2.1
          1 April 2024 at 10:31 am

          please link directly to where that quote is from.

        • weka 1.2.2.2
          1 April 2024 at 10:34 am

          Tbf, that quote was written a day after the LWS in Auckland. Unless someone was following GC accounts on SM, it's unlikely they would have known what actually happened.

          This is why we are sticklers for links with quotes, and backing up with evidence when asked. Context matters.

          If on the other hand Nick still believes what he wrote he is at best another leftie dude pontificating without regard for women's rights. It would be hard not to see that as intentional giving how much video evidence there is.

          • francesca 1.2.2.2.1
            1 April 2024 at 11:11 am

            Rather a rush to publish then, before the dust had settled .I have yet to see a follow up acknowledging that omission

            • Robert Guyton 1.2.2.2.1.1
              1 April 2024 at 3:36 pm

              Rush to publish?

              He publishes regularly and often.

              • Belladonna …
                1 April 2024 at 4:48 pm

                And has he retracted his mis-statement – in his regular and often publishing schedule?

          • Robert Guyton 1.2.2.2.2
            1 April 2024 at 3:40 pm

            "If on the other hand…"

            Well? Does he?

            • weka 1.2.2.2.2.1
              1 April 2024 at 4:15 pm

              Here he flat out denies that KJK was assaulted apart from the tomato juice assault.

              https://nickrockel.substack.com/p/a-posie-parker-postscript-what-have

              There are multiple first and second hand accounts of women being assaulted that day. I'd classify this as an assault on KJK. Because of the political context, it's also terrorism. The liberal left won't condemn it because it would harm their political position. Which is another reason so many people not only don't trust the left but actively hate it.

              https://youtu.be/uxTXEy5OFBk?si=ehKORcynz5oOy-SZ

              • Robert Guyton …
                1 April 2024 at 5:32 pm

                Did the judge judge that Posie was assaulted?

                • Grey Area …
                  1 April 2024 at 7:34 pm

                  No. According to the National Herald the case was held over from the judge deciding not to dismiss charges last October to 26 Feb for a trial call-over. I can't find any online reference as to whether a trial date has been set.

                  stephttps://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/posie-parker-assault-case-tomato-juice-protester-eli-rubashkyn-fails-in-bid-to-have-charges-dropped/5BT76CBC3RCM3CVTDYXGA6DLWI/

                • Traveller …
                  1 April 2024 at 7:48 pm

                  "An activist who acknowledged dousing controversial British speaker Posie Parker with tomato juice during a raucous speaking event and counter-protest in Auckland earlier this year has failed to have her charges dismissed."

                  Posie Parker assault case: Tomato juice protester Eli Rubashkyn fails in bid to have charges dropped – NZ Herald

                  Do you think that dousing someone with tomato juice is assault? Or is that behaviour you think is perfectly reasonable?

                  • Robert Guyton …
                    1 April 2024 at 8:51 pm

                    I wondered how the judge judged, that's all.

                  • Robert Guyton …
                    2 April 2024 at 10:43 am

                    Being doused with tomato sauce can be described in many ways; assault probably being being one of them but I don't know the exact definition or application in law; I'd wait till a judge made that decision before declaring on the matter. As to it being perfectly reasonable, is that the same as reasonable? The pourer of the sauce will have had their reasons, I suppose. Political protest often involves actions that seem unreasonable to some people: stopping traffic with a bridge-full of bicycles, dropping bags of flour on a rugby field, throwing yourself under a galloping horse…

                    • Traveller …
                      2 April 2024 at 11:15 am

                      Having a reason is not the same as being reasonable. Being reasonable has a sense of good judgement, not extreme or excessive. Reasonable Definition & Meaning – Merriam-Webster

                      The rest of your answer sounds like obfuscation to me.

                    • weka …
                      2 April 2024 at 11:19 am

                      being doused with tomato sauce. an be described in many ways. However the issue here is how dousing someone with tomato sauce is understood in law (see the difference?).

                      Throwing things at people is covered by assault law in NZ.

                      The legal definition of assault is very wide – it covers any situation where you intentionally apply force against another person’s body. It also includes when you do this indirectly – by throwing something for example.

                      https://communitylaw.org.nz/community-law-manual/chapter-33-common-crimes/assault/

                      Afaik, the process in NZ is: police, Crown prosecutor, jury trial, judge and sentencing.

                      A judge as already ruled the case will go to trial, afaik Rubashkyn is charged with two counts of assault (against KJK and another woman), and after EB applied to have the charges dismissed, the judge has said there is a case to answer.

                      https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/300996811/protester-who-threw-tomato-juice-over-posie-parker-to-face-trial

                      I think it’s fair to say that throwing a substance in that context is considered an assault. What is at issue is whether EB is guilty and that is up the jury.

                      I agree that political protest has lines it can cross, and in this instance I don’t particularly have a problem with it. The problem is the paying mob which made it dangerous for KJK and others to leave and that led to the serious assault on Hobson. I also think that if protestors are going to cross this line they need to be aware of the consequences. Interesting to compare with the climate activists using different tactics but who have been not convicted because the judge accepted that they were protecting society (or something to that effect). The judge in the EB dismissal hearing didn’t accept that this was a defence sufficient to dismiss the charges.

                • weka …
                  1 April 2024 at 9:01 pm

                  quite hard to arrest a mob I imagine.

              • Robert Guyton …
                1 April 2024 at 9:11 pm

                Can you provide the quote please, weka?

                You also wrote:

                "There are multiple first and second hand accounts of women being assaulted that day. I'd classify this as an assault on KJK."

                That sounds nonsensical, weka: are you sure you meant to write that? Assaults on people who are not Posie = assaults on Posie?

                Quite a stretch, imo.

                • weka …
                  1 April 2024 at 9:16 pm

                  the quote is in Francesca's comment that I was replying to.

                  https://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-01-04-2024/#comment-1994504

                  "There are multiple first and second hand accounts of women being assaulted that day. I'd classify this as an assault on KJK."

                  That sounds nonsensical, weka: are you sure you meant to write that? Assaults on people who are not Posie = assaults on Posie?

                  Quite a stretch, imo.

                  Did you watch the video? There were assaults on multiple women that day, including KJK.

                  • Robert Guyton …
                    1 April 2024 at 9:20 pm

                    "There are multiple first and second hand accounts of women being assaulted that day. I'd classify this as an assault on KJK. "

                    Do you stand by the second sentence of this statement, weka?

                    • weka …
                      1 April 2024 at 9:31 pm

                      Yes. I think when KJK was mobbed, that was an assault on her. She was terrified and had to be physically protected by multiple people for her safety.

                      What do you think?

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      1 April 2024 at 9:36 pm

                      Well, it reads as though you believe that the assaults on women-other-than-Posie equal assault on Posie. You didn't refer to the mobbing of Posie. I doubt a judge would consider "mobbing" as assault, but perhaps…

                      Maybe just untidy expression.

                    • weka []
                      1 April 2024 at 9:45 pm

                      multiple women were assaulted in that mob, one of those women was KJK.

                      There were also individual assaults, most notably Judith Hobson.

          • Traveller 1.2.2.3.1
            2 April 2024 at 7:21 pm

            "You omit the rest of the quote by NR, a refusal to admit that the person who poured the juice over K K-M was later assaulted?"

            I'm not a columnist writing an opinion piece on the event. I'm commenting on what Nick actually wrote. That's a big difference.

        • Robert Guyton 1.2.2.4
          1 April 2024 at 3:38 pm

          Nick denied that an "elderly woman (was) punched in the face 3 times"?

          I didn't see that.

          Did you?

          • Belladonna 1.2.2.4.1
            1 April 2024 at 4:53 pm

            Did you see Nick acknowledge that an elderly woman was assaulted by a trans activist?

            His quoted words from the link above:

            So far as I’m aware the only people actually assaulted were Marama Davidson, Green Party co-leader, who was ridden into by a motorbike in what looked like a deliberate act of aggression. And the other being Eli Rubashkyn, the person who threw the tomato juice.

            Claiming that the only people assaulted were Davidson and Rubashkyn – is flat-out ignoring the other very-well-documented assault.

            Or is lying by omission OK when he does it?

          • francesca 1.2.2.4.2
            1 April 2024 at 4:59 pm

            He certainly claimed that on the day , as far as he knew , only two people were assaulted .Neither of them were the elderly woman He most probably didnt know about it on the day , we'll give him that benefit of the doubt shall we?….possibly the day after,….? and didn't mention it on subsequent days.How he could not know about it baffles me.Wilful ignorance?

            • Robert Guyton 1.2.2.4.2.1
              1 April 2024 at 5:08 pm

              No, he didn't, Francesca, deny. You are twisting the story to suit your narrative.

              Not fair to Nick, imo.

              • weka …
                1 April 2024 at 5:17 pm

                how is it that on the day we all knew there were women assaulted but Nick didn't?

                • Robert Guyton …
                  1 April 2024 at 5:29 pm

                  Seems Nick didn't.

                  Nor did he deny.

                  Francesca is making it up.

                  • Francesca …
                    1 April 2024 at 6:00 pm

                    You're accusing me now of lying?

                    Read my words

                    Total denial of the elderly woman being punched etc…

                    I stand by what I wrote

                    Where did I say "Nick denied ..etc"

                    You twisted that for your own purposes

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      1 April 2024 at 6:17 pm

                      You wrote,

                      "Total denial of the elderly woman punched in the face 3 times."

                      francesca1.2.2

                      1 April 2024 at 10:23 am

                      Am I wrong, Francesca?

                    • francesca []
                      1 April 2024 at 6:26 pm

                      Thats exactly what I wrote…as I have just pointed out to you

                      In that piece there was no reference to the elderly woman's assault

                      In other words …total denial of that fact

                      There is a different meaning ascribed to "Nick denied"….

                      That would suggest he knew about it but denied it

                      If Nick didn't have all the facts , that's a reason why I take his writing with a pinch of salt

                      Were you ever a teacher…of the old order?

                      You have a hectoring streak

                      I will not respond or interact with you any longer

                    • David []
                      1 April 2024 at 8:01 pm

                      Robert, since no other bloke is going to say this to you, I will. Do you have a problem with women?

                      And I mean actual women.

                      Whenever there has been any discussion about trans issues, particularly mentioning the degenerate granny basher, you seem to take the side of blokes who bash women, or at the very least blokes who put on a frock and demand that the whole of femininity must revolve around them. It’s kinda disturbing, at my age I’ve been around a lot, seen plenty of disturbing things. But I’m always surprised at how some strange little man pops up and says weird stuff about the Sheila's & certainly leaves me with the impression that he considers woman nothing more than a second class human. Personally I’m getting sick of this shit, & dealing with the fallout of women being abused by a man.

                      If you’re on the side of blokes who bash women, you’re on the wrong side.

                      Seriously I’m beginning to think that the whole transgender issue is being pushed by the right to troll the left.

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      1 April 2024 at 8:48 pm

                      No, David, but I do have an issue with pillocks.

                    • David []
                      1 April 2024 at 10:41 pm

                      Well I’m wondering why you, as a bloke, are so determined to minimise the violence against an elderly woman. I’m also wondering why so many men acted so violently in shutting down the posie parker event. Was it because some women dared to define what a woman is, to the exclusion of men?

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      1 April 2024 at 9:04 pm

                      You are wrong, Francesca. Denial requires refusal. Refusal is an active decision. You cannot justifiable claim that Nick refused to mention something.

                      You are wrong to accuse him of that.

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      2 April 2024 at 10:29 am

                      David wrote:

                      "Well I’m wondering why you, as a bloke, are so determined to minimise the violence against an elderly woman."

                      Shouldn't all blokes be determined to minimise violence against an elderly woman?

                      Your arguments are sloppily presented, in my opinion, and your thinking is faulty. In particular, you make sweeping claims and assumptions that don't interface with reality reliably.

                    • weka []
                      2 April 2024 at 10:39 am

                      Shouldn’t all blokes be determined to minimise violence against an elderly woman?

                      Yes, they should. But they’re not. Which is a specific problem in the context of women’s sex based rights and thus this thread/

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      2 April 2024 at 10:47 am

                      David's declared that I'm one of the good guys then 🙂

                    • weka []
                      2 April 2024 at 10:51 am

                      he’s asking why you spend so much time arguing support for an ideological movement that led to an elderly woman being punched in the face three times by a young man, and the people in that same movement then largely refused to condemn the violence against that woman. And other women.

                    • David []
                      2 April 2024 at 11:28 am

                      Hi Weka, Yeah I’m really confused as to why Robert seems to be spending so much time either defending or minimising the violence from men, directed at women and specifically defending the bloke who punched an elderly woman. It just seems too much, it’s one thing to support the whole transgender thing, but it’s still okay to acknowledge that there was violence directed at women that day, and it was unacceptable.

                      Reading his latest comments today, has taken me right back to relative who was in a violent relationship. Despite audio recordings, and video recordings of her husband very seriously verbally abusing, then physically assaulting his wife and young children, the guy just minimised what happened, he came up with all sorts of convoluted excuses and scenarios, and then he introduced his “superior” intelligence to bolster his self image, unbeknown to him, he was unwittingly exposing himself to his family and friends for what he really was, a pathetic, ugly, self loathing, spiteful man whose only pleasure could come from the abuse and pain he could inflict upon others, and in doing so he hated himself further. His now grown children along with the rest of his family have and want nothing more to do with him.

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      2 April 2024 at 11:00 am

                      Is he. Then he has confused himself and misunderstands my position, despite my having dutifully responded to questions from him and others. He has the wrong end of the stick and his characterisation of me is way off.

                      What I feel I am doing is testing the claims made here. I see a willingness to declare, rather than debate. If someone notices a flaw in the accepted story, they ought to be able to pop in a genuine question, without being stropped-up for doing so 🙂

                    • weka []
                      2 April 2024 at 11:27 am

                      it looks to me like you are both supporting the movement that is passively sanctioning violence against women, and also minimising assaults on women that are being discussed. This doesn’t preclude testing claims, we all do that. It’s in how you do it, and the absence of taking a stance on violence against women generally and in this context specific assaults.

                      it’s reasonable because of that to question your position on those things, especially in light of you most often refusing to explain your thinking.

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      2 April 2024 at 11:54 am

                      weka – SPC notes that the sauce-pourer was assaulted; do you know by whom? I ask because you have watched the videos.

                    • weka []
                      2 April 2024 at 12:01 pm

                      I don’t know what SPC is meaning, because they didn’t say.

                      this is the best place to find video of Albert Park. Scroll back to March 2023

                      https://www.youtube.com/@SimonRAnderson/videos

                    • weka []
                      2 April 2024 at 12:20 pm

                      EB’s assault on KJK and what happened immediately afterwards is in the second video on this page

                      https://www.1news.co.nz/2023/03/25/posie-parker-rally-protester-explains-tomato-juice-throw/

                  • Traveller …
                    2 April 2024 at 10:10 am

                    "Denial requires refusal. Refusal is an active decision. "

                    I'd suggest you look more closely at the definition of denial.

                    Denial Definition & Meaning – Merriam-Webster

                    Denial can be an act of omission, a simple refusal to admit to reality of something.

                    • SPC …
                      2 April 2024 at 10:21 am

                      For there to be an wilful act of omission requires there to be knowledge of something.

                      The matter first came to attention by online video before it went to MSM and then a police investigation and charge weeks later.

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      2 April 2024 at 10:24 am

                      Hi Traveller – you've used the word, "refusal" to counter my explanation, which revolves around refusal.. If you, or anyone, can show that Nick refused to write about some aspect of the event, I'd take notice. As it is, you (and they) are guessing/projecting, which doesn't seem fair to Nick. As an aside, I find myself defending someone who is quite capable of defending himself – perhaps you could ask Nick on his blog? I can't speak for him.

                    • David []
                      2 April 2024 at 11:01 am

                      Robert, I see that you’re still attempting to minimise the violence directed at women during the posy parker counter demonstration.
                      What does it matter if a man punched a woman once, twice, three times, or half a dozen times? Surely once is bad enough?

                      [deleted]

                      All men know that you never hit a woman, well at least those of us who are grown up. Unfortunately there are still some [deleted] who let the mask drop, usually when it’s just us blokes around and you find out how much they really dislike women.

                      As for nick rockel (hope I’ve got the name right) and almost any other left wing commentator, there has been a denial of any violence occurring, then a minimisation of the level and effect of the violence on the women present, to something approaching the women deserved it.

                      Its a pretty clear message to women, there are still blokes out there looking for an excuse to give the bitch the bash.

                      [deleted]

                      Violence is not good full stop. But sexual violence is far worse. I’ve seen the effects on people who I love.

                      In this case, if you’re supporting or minimising the violence directed at women, then you’re on the wrong side.

                      I may well be a pillock Robert, and from the likes of you, I’ll take that as a compliment. [deleted]
                      I know enough about women’s issues to keep my nose out of it. If women are concerned about their safety, it’s not my place as a man to contradict them. But when a bloke puts on a frock and declares himself a woman, and starts to mansplain [deleted] what a woman is to actual women, all I see is a male bully behaving like a man to bully women.

                      [I’ve removed parts of you comment that were inflammatory and potentially defamatory. You cannot post defamatory content on this site that puts the site owners at risk. Mods also take a dim view of personalised comments designed to aggravate, this is flaming, leads to flame wars and we tend to stomp on them early on because they destroy good debate and commenters and readers then leave. Please keep your comments focused on the politics rather than personally attacking other commenters. – weka]

                    • weka []
                      2 April 2024 at 11:54 am

                      mod note. Please reply to me letting me know you have read and understood.

                    • David []
                      2 April 2024 at 12:40 pm

                      Hi Weka, yeah fair enough. I can be fairly blunt, which has made me unpopular with certain people. I guess I’m emotionally driven when issues of violence come up. But that is the toxic nature of violence, one side minimises the effects of violence, the other side feels a pent up frustration of not being heard or their feelings brushed aside as if they don’t count. Maybe we should be less forgiving, violent and domestic abusers are experts at deflecting criticism and place blame on to others while they carry on with their abuse. But it was wrong of me to suggest that Robert is one of them, certainly that was a generalisation that was not warranted.

                  • SPC …
                    2 April 2024 at 11:17 am

                    She accepted it was possible he did not know about the blatant assault captured in the video at the time of the blog post.

                    Her mistake was claiming, not mentioning it later, was a calculated or deliberate omission.

                    We all write posts on topics and then do not change them, or write about the new developments, when they emerge.

                    She has not written here about the recent attacks on power supply in Ukraine …

                    And there are fewer posts now about Gaza (more attention than the civil war in Ethiopia and famine there and the earlier famine in Yemen in the Trump years) and none about the re-turn to the same old in south Sudan …

                  • Traveller …
                    2 April 2024 at 11:31 am

                    "If you, or anyone, can show that Nick refused to write about some aspect of the event, I'd take notice."

                    I posted a link to a definition of refusal that includes this:

                    " refusal to admit the truth or reality of something (such as a statement or charge)"

                    Nick admitted knowing about the throwing of the tomato juice at the time he wrote his article. I quote from A Posie Parker Postscript, what have we learned? (substack.com)

                    "There were more headlines, claims Ms Parker had been assaulted. Which was curious because there was no assault, we all saw the pictures. There was a throwing of a tomato based beverage but that was it. Much of the media, as well as Ms Parker and JK Rowling repreated the lie."

                    Like you, Nick denies the seriousness of pouring a substance over someone.

                    He then goes on to say this:

                    "So far as I’m aware the only people actually assaulted were Marama Davidson, Green Party co-leader, who was ridden into by a motorbike in what looked like a deliberate act of aggression."

                    Note he wrote that on March 26th. This was previously pointed out to you above by Belladonna. The granny basher attack was circulating on social media by the time Nick wrote his piece. He could and should have had least acknowledged the accounts. Instead he refused to admit the reality of them.

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      2 April 2024 at 11:46 am

                      Nick (possibly) and I (certainly) wouldn't like to have tomato sauce poured on his/my head, but serious?

                      Seriously??

                    • SPC …
                      2 April 2024 at 11:47 am

                      You omit the rest of the quote by NR, a refusal to admit that the person who poured the juice over K K-M was later assaulted?

                      A few people were removed from the rotunda area by force (security guards doing their jobs etc) as well.

                      But this was still no less violence, than being "mob crushed" upon leaving under protected escort.

                      As we noted when debating this back then, "kettling" is a problem at protest events (public safety) – heckling has been part of politics and protest since before Beyonce grew up as a cowgirl, but the use of sound to drown out speakers is also a problem for free speech.

                      We disagree about what is serious violence.

                      The inclination to infer guilt on liberal commentators for what they do not say is noted.

                    • weka []
                      2 April 2024 at 11:57 am

                      Who assaulted Rubashkyn after they poured tomato juice over KJK?

                    • SPC …
                      2 April 2024 at 12:01 pm

                      That comes under the category of who assaulted K K-M when the escort group she was within was being jostled by those surrounding them.

                      I would presume those who acted in response afterwards to restrain and remove.

                    • weka []
                      2 April 2024 at 12:05 pm

                      what is your source for the idea that Rubashkyn was assaulted after assaulting KJK?

                    • weka []
                      2 April 2024 at 12:08 pm

                      nevermind, found it.

                      After Rubashkyn threw the juice she was dragged away by security. She said she was then bitten and beaten by Keen-Minshull supporters.”It was not assault, it was literally tomato juice. I did not beat anyone, I just dropped juice.”

                      https://nickrockel.substack.com/p/a-posie-parker-postscript-what-have

                      So rather than it being the case that EB was assaulted, they are claiming that they were. This is entirely possible, but you made it sound as if this had been established. The only thing I’ve seen about this is a MSM report on the dismissal hearing where the claim was made that EB was assaulted by the security guard who removed them. I’m doubtful this would be considered assault given the circumstances.

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      2 April 2024 at 12:35 pm

                      weka wrote/quoted:

                      "She said she was then bitten and beaten by Keen-Minshull supporters."

                      weka also wrote:

                      "it looks to me like you are both supporting the movement that is passively sanctioning violence against women, and also minimising assaults on women that are being discussed"

                      Hmmm… are you supporting the movement that (allegedly) bit and beat Rubashkyn and by their omission/denial, sanctioning violence?

                    • weka []
                      2 April 2024 at 1:03 pm

                      No. Because what I actually said (not your selected quote) was,

                      So rather than it being the case that EB was assaulted, they are claiming that they were. This is entirely possible, but you made it sound as if this had been established. The only thing I’ve seen about this is a MSM report on the dismissal hearing where the claim was made that EB was assaulted by the security guard who removed them. I’m doubtful this would be considered assault given the circumstances.

                      Unlike you who have had many opportunities to condemn the assaults on women, this is the first time in a long time that EB has come up. If someone asks me what I think I will tell them (again, unlike you)

                      In my opinion, EB is a loose unit, so I take their account with a grain of salt. Not so much in the sense of them lying but in the sense I’ve seen them spin a lot of stories. It’s entirely possible they were assaulted (as I already said), it’s also possible they were but are referring to the security guards as “Parker’s supporters” because calling them what they actually were, security guards, undermines EB’s narrative.

                      Rubashkyn also said they were beaten by Parker’s supporters after throwing the tomato juice.

                      “They took me over, dropped me to the floor. As I was getting down somebody beat me in the head and then they started spitting on me… and somebody was stepping on me,” Rubashkyn said.

                      https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/new-zealand/2023/03/transgender-activist-who-doused-posie-parker-speaks-out-claims-they-were-beaten-spat-on-at-weekend-rally.html

                      In the video of after the assault on KJK, the guard holds EB and it looks to me like rather than dropping them to the floor, EB drops themselves to the floor, but hard to tell, it could be either. Once on the ground, it’s entirely believable that they were knocked around and stood on, impossible to tell if that was intentional. Like I said both are possible.

                      We don’t know what happened after the second security guard took over, but he appears in the video without EB a few seconds later, so anything that happened after that point wasn’t about the guards and could have been other assaults off the rotunda. Feel free to do the research finding the evidence for what happened. There is a lot of video around and there may be first person accounts.

                      https://www.1news.co.nz/2023/03/25/posie-parker-rally-protester-explains-tomato-juice-throw/

                      I don’t think the security guards assaulted them, because afaik there is defence in the Crimes Act for when providing security for people in dangerous situations. It’s also why bouncers can physically remove people from pubs. Someone else can look that up, I’ve done enough of the research heavy lifting today.

                      The reason I am confident that women were assaulted at Albert Park is because there is video showing that they were. There are also multiple first person accounts of people being assaulted or seeing other assaulted around the same time. I don’t find it credible to believe they were all making that up.

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      2 April 2024 at 1:17 pm

                      If, as you said, it’s entirely possible they were assaulted, surely commenters here who decry others for not denouncing assaults, potential and/or real, ought to feel awkward at their own hypocrisy?

                    • weka []
                      2 April 2024 at 1:23 pm

                      did you miss this bit?

                      Unlike you who have had many opportunities to condemn the assaults on women, this is the first time in a long time that EB has come up. If someone asks me what I think I will tell them (again, unlike you)

                      Most people here will say what they think when asked or prompted.

                    • weka []
                      2 April 2024 at 1:27 pm

                      also going to add that this is yet another deflection. You still haven’t said what you think about the assaults on Hobson, KJK, and other women that day.

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      2 April 2024 at 1:30 pm

                      I didn't miss that at all. It's irksome to be asked, repeatedly, to say I abhor something, when I've made it very clear many times. The irksome bit, is the implication from those demanding repeated confirmation of my position, is their implication or bald claim, that I believe the opposite. I read ossification of thinking into that. It's peculiar to this issue.

                    • weka []
                      2 April 2024 at 1:38 pm

                      Ok, you didn’t miss it, you just ignored it, which is something you tend to do.

                      There are people in this conversation over the past few days, and readers, who won’t have seen previous conversations. Most of us will restate our position on things when prompted, just like I did about EB before.

                      You take a position of not clarifying, explaining, or restating, apparently on principle. That’s fine but you can’t complain when people then continue to read into your comments what they do.

                      I don’t recall seeing you responding to questions by repeatedly saying you abhor the violence against the women at Albert Park. Maybe it’s a communication style thing? You think you are saying something but others hear it a different way. Maybe instead of blaming them and making out they are deficient, you could just tell us what you think. You don’t have to, but again you can’t then very well complain about being misunderstood.

                    • weka []
                      2 April 2024 at 1:40 pm

                      you could also link to where you have said it in the past few days.

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      2 April 2024 at 2:06 pm

                      In any case, weka, WHY should anyone have to declare their position on a specific event? The thread was kicked off by Kay who didn't even allude to the Parker event. Does every discussion about trans people, or about women for that matter, have to begin with a series of disclaimers?? Talk about overkill.
                      As to asking me to link, you’re doubling down on something I expressed a passionate lack of interest in doing. Your suggestion is unreasonable, imo, especially given you wrote, “You take a position of not clarifying, explaining, or restating, apparently on principle. That’s fine…” I’m not complaining about being misunderstood, I’m just mentioning it when it happens.

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      2 April 2024 at 2:33 pm

                      Thanks for being so understanding, weka – I know my thinking can be difficult to follow at times 🙂

                      Oh, and David, thanks also for your response to weka – fyi, I am surrounded (in a good way) by wonderful, powerful women; in my home, my extended family/whanau, my community of volunteers, my places of work and everywhere else really. They seem to think I'm okay.

                  • Traveller …
                    2 April 2024 at 7:29 pm

                    "Seriously??"

                    Yes, actually. Some forms of protest merge into a form of terror…this is close to that. It's designed to generate fear. It's the idea that the perpetrator can get that close, can engage at such a base level of behaviour that anything goes. I don't expect you to understand.

                    • weka …
                      2 April 2024 at 7:55 pm

                      I count that as terrorism. Part of the point is to tell women what will happen if they do this again. The dude who turned up with armour on his forearms tells us a lot.

                      I also accept that there were many others there who intended a non-violent protest (I don't think the noise intention could be classified as peaceful). And there were protestors there who tried to stop the violence. But once you are in a mob, many have a choice to stay there or get out. Many chose to stay.

                      I feel reasonably confident that if the situation were reversed, if it had been trans people on the rotunda surrounded by a baying mob, the left would have been outraged.

                      So it comes down to the liberal left deciding which protest is legitimate and which isn't depending on whether people agree with the politics. Just like painting over the rainbows, or the occupation of parliament grounds. There is a great danger here in that the liberals appear to not understand why the ability to protest is central to a democracy.

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      2 April 2024 at 8:02 pm

                      Did you regard the Steven Joyce/dildo event "terrorism"?

                      Seriously?

                      He didn't.

                    • weka []
                      2 April 2024 at 8:31 pm

                      was Joyce surrounded by a mob of hundreds of people making loud noises and unable to leave without bodyguards? Was there a history of similar events where people were assaulted and this appeared to be escalating?

                      Sounds like you don’t understand what terrorism is.

                  • Traveller …
                    2 April 2024 at 8:39 pm

                    "Did you regard the Steven Joyce/dildo event "terrorism"?"

                    You're just not getting it, are you. This is pertinent (from my comment):

                    "It's the idea that the perpetrator can get that close, can engage at such a base level of behaviour that anything goes."

                    So, I'll be more direct. As Weka put it "Part of the point is to tell women what will happen if they do this again". Like this What is Acid Violence? – RISE (risecoalition.org).

                • Robert Guyton …
                  2 April 2024 at 11:06 am

                  weka – I presume you will take David's comment down immediately and apply an appropriate sanction to him.

                  His accusations and implications are scurrilous and actionable, I'd have thought.

                  • weka …
                    2 April 2024 at 11:29 am

                    if you mean the last comment, I won't take it down, but I will moderate because I agree he has stepped over a line. I will probably delete bits, just need to have a proper read through shortly.

                  • David …
                    2 April 2024 at 11:50 am

                    Robert, Too many times over my adult life I have known women who have been bashed, raped, abused by the man in their life. A couple of the women have been in my family. I’m dealing with the fallout from this and how it has affected some of the younger generation in my family.

                    You certainly have a bee in your bonnet about this issue, and it is obvious to me, and probably others as well. I’m guessing here, but you would be receiving more pushback if it were not for the current transgender ideology.
                    As a bloke, I’ve spent a lot of time around other blokes, in settings where it’s just us blokes. It’s always interesting how after a couple of beers, a certain type of bloke starts saying shitty things about women. So after years of experience, let’s just say my comments are qualified privilege

                    If you’re offended (and any decent bloke would be) maybe you should reflect on how you have been commenting on this issue.

                    But attacking me for what I’ve said is just further exposing toxic behaviour of men who abuse women.

                    Its quite often the types of men who you would least expect, at least in the white middle class people in the world I live in.

                    BTW, sorry Weka, but this whole issue really upsets me. People who I love and care for deeply have been hurt deeply by not just domestic violence, but by men who have it in their belief system that abusing women is acceptable.

    • Phillip ure 1.3
      1 April 2024 at 10:42 am

      Wot Kay said…

    • weka 1.4
      1 April 2024 at 11:01 am

      I think most of your comment is admirable. You obviously have a lot of aroha and compassion for your friend.

      This is a political blog, so I am going to point out some politics.

      One thing I would like to know is how you feel about the women you don't know who have been raped because they were forced to share a women's prison with a trans identified man.

      I'd also like to know if you can imagine what it is like for women to be housed in women's prisons with men who have raped and murdered before they were imprisoned?

      I was listened to a Scottish woman the other day who served a 6 year sentence, and there were male prisoners there when she was there. She said she had no idea that there were people outside trying to stop men from being put in women's prison, because she had zero contact with the outside world apart from a short visitor session once a month. Can you imagine what that would be like?

      My final question is why you believe that your personal experiences should form policy and law for all women? eg that women's toilets that were formerly single sex should now allow men. Do you think there is no risk to women from this? Or do you think that the risk is worth it to accommodate trans women? I'd really like to understand this.

      • Kay 1.4.1
        1 April 2024 at 2:03 pm

        I agree there is certainly a problem when it comes to incarceration of trans people, due to the nature of prisons and a lot of their occupants. A person's gender identity never precludes them from violence, or other criminal acts as per the rest of the population. And yes, I have a lot of sympathy for incarcerated women who find themselves in that situation. And for the trans women attacked in male prisons.

        I don't know what the solution is, that doesn't involve some extra money that no government will ever fork out (even though they have a bottomless pit to fork out to build more prisons).

        I will take your word for it about toilets not being single sex. Are you referring to those that are a stand-alone single cubicle only, or a bigger block of stalls (eg like at an airport) I've used plenty of the former, which pose no threat to anyone, but I've yet to encounter the latter anywhere. Maybe some workplaces have them? No, I would not be happy with men and women sharing non self-contained toilets, and I can't think of many women who would be.

        I'm happy to be challenged on this Weka, and hear what the concerns are, it really is a difficult situation. Personally, I'd be more freaked out by having to share toilet facilities with a straight male than I would a trans women. I'm also well aware that many trans people don't go out, or keep themselves dehydrated if they do, to avoid toilets altogether, which is no way to live.

        • weka 1.4.1.1
          1 April 2024 at 3:56 pm

          I'm not sure the prison one is that hard to solve. Firstly, TW are male and should never be housed with women. Possibly exemptions for post-op TW, but there are still serious problems with this.

          TW aren't the only males who are at risk in male prisons. Gay men, effeminate men, weak men, men with disabilities. Male prisons are bastions of male violence. There is a prison in the US that is for gay men and trans identified males. Can we not create wings in prisons for them in other places?

          Self ID is a huge problem, as it is how rapists have accessed women's prisons. The default shouldn't be what convicted men are saying they want and people captured by an ideology agreeing against all sense.

          This is why we bang on about the ideology. It's not your friend's fault, it's a problem caused by lobby groups and backed by the liberal left. All those people could have spent the last ten years lobbying to change how men's prisons are run.

          Underlying that is that some TW have a great need to be affirmed as a woman, so even where there are no safety concerns, the push is to let males into women's spaces. This is just flat out wrong.

          I will take your word for it about toilets not being single sex. Are you referring to those that are a stand-alone single cubicle only, or a bigger block of stalls (eg like at an airport) I've used plenty of the former, which pose no threat to anyone, but I've yet to encounter the latter anywhere. Maybe some workplaces have them? No, I would not be happy with men and women sharing non self-contained toilets, and I can't think of many women who would be.

          I was meaning that women's toilets, which were female only, are now open to any man who says he is a woman. Those toilets are no longer single sex. You can google Planet Fitness for the latest iteration of that mess.

          People still seem to think that 'trans woman' = transsexuals like Georgina Beyer. But self-ID means that trans woman is a very broad category. There are AGP men as well as predatory men, both of whom pose a risk to women just like other men. The reason we have women's spaces is because women can't tell which of the men are the predatory ones. You know and trust your friend, but we can't apply that to women and men generally.

      • Robert Guyton 1.4.2
        1 April 2024 at 3:35 pm

        Yeah, prisons should be safe places for all concerned.

        Let's get that sorted immediately.

    • Descendant Of Smith 1.5
      1 April 2024 at 11:50 am

      I made some similar comments the other day and put some of my context around it.

      Fortunately while there is a whole lot of people arguing at the extremes there are another group just enjoying the diversity that human beings bring.

      This whole area is difficult. I know for instance a person who has dressed as a women for decades and used women's toilets all that time with no problems (as opposed to getting beaten up in men's toilets) who now barely goes out now because they get abused in women's toilets now as well. They would not harm a fly and never have.

      https://thestandard.org.nz/daily-review-25-03-2024/#comment-1994222

      • weka 1.5.1
        1 April 2024 at 1:10 pm

        and there are women who now self-exclude from places for similar reasons, along with the women who don’t have a choice eg women in prison where trans identified males who rapists are also housed. Women have been raped, some get pregnant, others live in stress or terror.

        There was a time when many GC women were saying fully transitioned TW weren’t an issue and that we could share some spaces like public toilets with them. Those GC women were pilloried, ostracised, deplatformed and fired. Those days are gone and now there are many more women involved and many don’t have progressive values, they’re just really angry at having their rights removed.

        All the people in this thread saying what about the transsexual women?, you had a chance to help us resolve the conflict of rights between transsexual males and women, but the liberal left either stood around and let women take the hits or actively joined in.

        My main thought reading the comments today is that the pro-genderists are making arguments from 5 years ago. Those arguments were lost when Stonewall UK and other lobby groups insisted that a TW is any man that says he is a woman at any time and we must treat him as one for all purposes. Talking about transsexuals in the face of that is like talking about BAU that just doesn’t exist any more. I do feel for those transsexuals and you can see in Visubversas post how they used to be more easily part of society. But anyone who thinks this is about TW like Georgina Beyer is just really really out of the loop as to what is going on.

        • Phillip ure 1.5.1.1
          1 April 2024 at 6:00 pm

          I supported kay in calls for tolerance in her initial comment..

          ..does this make me a 'pro-genderist'..?

          And what is a pro-genderist..?

          (And speaking to you in your role as moderator..

          Could you please tell me why my ability to comment is sporadic at best..thank you..)

          • weka 1.5.1.1.1
            1 April 2024 at 8:17 pm

            yes Phil, you seem pro-genderist in that you support gender identity ideology over women's rights.

          • weka 1.5.1.1.2
            1 April 2024 at 8:37 pm

            I don't know what is happening with your comments. Perhaps you could explain what is going on and then someone can look at it.

            • Phillip ure 1.5.1.1.2.1
              1 April 2024 at 8:47 pm

              It is random…the curser does not appear..

              Btw..I couldn't answer your pro-genderist comment here..so it is tacked on the end of 31/3..

              Now can’t comment on 31/3..

              And what is feminism..if it is not women’s rights..?

              • weka …
                1 April 2024 at 8:58 pm

                what device and OS are you using?

                • Phillip ure …
                  1 April 2024 at 9:03 pm

                  Oppo phone.. whatever OS that is..it has always worked fine..

                  I never used to get the full front page/comments..now I do..

                  And it is the random nature of it that is puzzling…

                  • weka …
                    1 April 2024 at 9:04 pm

                    are you using the mobile or desktop version on the phone? If you're not sure, describe the colour scheme for me.

                  • Grey Area …
                    2 April 2024 at 8:29 am

                    I also have an Oppo phone and have experienced the same thing.

                    Sometimes I try and comment and likewise the comment screen remains blank.

                    I use Opera and have shortcut to the Standard on the home screen. I don't use the desktop version.

                    • weka …
                      2 April 2024 at 3:11 pm

                      wait, you are using the mobile version on your phone? Is this the bug where the cursor won't appear? Or you can't type? Or what?

                    • lprent …
                      3 April 2024 at 12:31 am

                      Umm. With a Oppo phone check which browser it is using by default.

                      https://www.techbone.net/oppo/user-manual/default-browser

                      Most Oppo smartphones come with Google's Chrome browser pre-installed, but if you want to use a different browser, you will need to set it as your default browser after installation.

                      It could have a different browser installed or even be using an older version.

                      //—

                      This could also be due to a bug that I have done some work on recently. We were getting delays loading the javascript for the comment screen. The effect was a blank area where the comment box would have been. If it failed to load the some of the browsers failed to display it at all and timed out on the javascript.

                      This was most noticeable when doing the reply to someone elses comment. Because then it moved the box and attempted to rerun the javascript each time. It would often timeout fetching the uncached javascript.

                      I've pushed most of the site basics to preload to the CDN with much longer caching times – now 60 minutes rather than 10 minutes and that carries through to the browser cache.

                      This should reduce the issue. It has while I have been testing it.

        • Descendant Of Smith 1.5.1.2
          1 April 2024 at 6:01 pm

          If you read my comment from the other day I'm pretty clear that there is a whole group of men who should not be anywhere near women's spaces.

          At the same time I can clearly see that there are men who seem to have some sort of fetish / desire to abuse who are strident and violent in there misuse of the LGBT and transgender population and acceptance. I am also aware of one instance where a religious arse has deliberately done this to give transgender people a bad name – he is definitely a deliberate bad actor. Bit like this idiot.

          https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12467071/Trans-teacher-Kayla-Lemieux-MAN-no-breasts-scruffy-beard.html

          • Descendant Of Smith 1.5.1.2.1
            1 April 2024 at 6:33 pm

            Yet you seem to ignore people like Kim Workman who has long advocated for separate prisons for transgender inmates. I've never heard him suggest they should be in women's prisons.

            Here back in 2012.

            The director of the organisation Rethinking Crime and Punishment, Kim Workman, says that approach is wrong.

            "Certainly it's a breach of human rights and it just puts that prisoner at considerable risk but also they're going to probably be segregated which is not of their making, it's something that's imposed on them."

            Mr Workman says a facility that caters for transgender people is required.

            Prison reformer Peter Williams QC says the Department of Corrections is failing in its job of keeping prisoners safe as a big proportion of jails are now controlled by gangs.

            https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/123901/transgender-prison-decision-'a-breach-of-rights'

            Peter Williams mentioned here is another. The recently deceased Pat Magill another. Kiran Foster yet another.

            No Pride in Prisons is was an organisation that also called for this.

            It just isn't true that left wing men have absent from this fight.

            • weka 1.5.1.2.1.1
              1 April 2024 at 7:57 pm

              Sorry I didn't reply to your comment the other day. I did read it, but have been working on a couple of complicated posts and didn't feel I had the head space.

              I didn't know about Workman, so that was an interesting piece. That was 2012. As I said earlier, the liberal left could have been working on this issue for 12 years. Why didn't they? Because they think that TW are literal women and inmates should be in women's prisons.

              Btw, I'm not saying the left. I'm using the term liberal left deliberately, to talk about people that have lost track of class analysis and see social just predominantly through a neoliberal, identity lens. I wouldn't assume you are liberal left. There are lots of leftist people who are socially liberal who I wouldn't call liberal left.

            • weka 1.5.1.2.1.2
              1 April 2024 at 8:02 pm

              it sounds like No Pride in Prisons favours trans people being in the prison of their choice ie TW in women's prisons including those who haven't transitioned.

              https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/287712/are-trans-inmates-safe-in-prison

              • Descendant Of Smith …
                1 April 2024 at 8:39 pm

                That seems a shift from when they were first set up. But having a look at recent stuff it seems they have had a name change and it does seem they have dropped asking for separate prison services. Maybe they have given up, thinking it just won't happen.

                Kim Workman is great. Have heard him speak a few times. He was The Family Commissioner for a while as well. Well worth touching base. I deliberately used an old reference to show it is not just a recent push.

    • Patricia Bremner 1.6
      1 April 2024 at 4:04 pm

      Well put Kayyes. Many of us have family and friends in the rainbow community, and the outright or sneaky bigots do real harm.

      • weka 1.6.1
        1 April 2024 at 4:18 pm

        You know that gender critical feminists get assault, sacked, abused, threatened with rape and death, and called bigot nazi terfs and blamed for male violence against trans people, right?

        Some of us not only have family and friends but are under the rainbow umbrella.

    • BK 1.7
      1 April 2024 at 4:27 pm

      Best comment Ive ever seen on here, nice work Kay

    • Psycho Milt 1.8
      2 April 2024 at 12:27 pm

      "But I am always thinking of my friend, Alexandra. She's a wonderful human being, a very talented artist, and just happens to be a trans woman. And the latter to me is completely irrelevant to who she is as a person."

      Unfortunately, transwomen are adult male humans, and the category 'adult male human' includes a huge number of people who are very much not wonderful human beings. There are situations where it matters a lot whether someone is male or female: women's prisons, women's changing rooms, women's sports, basically any space, event or service with the words "women's" or "girls'" in the name.

      You might think it's irrelevant if your friend uses these services. He is a wonderful human being, after all. However, there are two problems:

      1. How do we distinguish between a "transwoman" and a "cis man?" Gender identity is a matter of belief, and there's no way to know if someone genuinely believes something they claim to believe. For example, we're now seeing a lot of "court-onset gender dysphoria," in which male sex offenders suddenly discover when facing a prison sentence that they've always been a woman inside themselves and so should serve their time in a women's prison.

      2. If we normalise the idea that a subset of adult male humans are allowed participation in female-only events, spaces etc, we trash the social contract. If a man walks into your changing room while you're getting undressed and the law says transwomen are women, can you challenge his presence there? Overseas experience says that if you do, it's you who'll be trespassed from the facility.

      TL/DR: there are situations where it matters a lot what sex we are, and in those situations it makes no difference whether we're a wonderful human being or a violent criminal. Our sex is what counts.

      • Molly 1.8.1
        3 April 2024 at 10:41 am

        Thanks, Psycho Milt.

        I only occasionally return to TS these days, and felt that Kay's comment deserved the discussion she was seeking, but realise it was belated and may have missed the open discussion boat.

        Yours was much briefer and to the point.

    • Molly 1.9
      3 April 2024 at 10:34 am

      "I have tried very hard to understand where certain commentators here have been coming from with their trans comments. I've read them, followed some links to see where it stems from."
      Try harder, Kay – because from this introduction to your comment, I suspect you are going to show how shallowly you have considered many of the concerns that have been brought up about the legislational and institutional capture of gender ideology and queer theory and the harms thereof…

      "But I am always thinking of my friend, Alexandra. "
      Suspicion correct.

      "She's a wonderful human being, a very talented artist, and just happens to be a trans woman. And the latter to me is completely irrelevant to who she is as a person. Alex takes so much crap and blatant bigotry and discrimination on a daily basis because of society in general, and it's being made a hell of a lot worse since it's become politicised via the 'culture wars.'"
      Alexandra can be a wonderful human being, without dispute. What he is not, is a woman. That is all. He is a man who is a wonderful human being, and a very talented artist. Sex is often irrelevant to people in regards to platonic relationships, but sometimes is relevant in terms of societal provisions, statistics, body changes, vulnerability, medical treatment etc. Be specific about the "crap and blatant bigotry and discrimination", else you may be using this to say – 'people consider him to be a man and I don't like it.'

      "She's survived suicide attempts- not because she's ashamed of who she is, but because of everyone else. Many of her peers didn't survive."
      This suicide narrative is one of the most coercive and damaging that I have ever come across, as a substitute for good faith engagement. It is a precarious state of being, to spend your life pretending to be what you are emphatically not. It takes only one dissenter – one truth teller – to expose the fallacy. However, unlike you, I will not assume to give a reason " because of everyone else" about his suicide attempts, because such simplistic answers are often wrong.

      "A question to all those who wish to continually rave on about how her existence is some sort of threat, and won't someone think of the children- have you ever met a trans person? Have you ever sat down with them and learned about their lives? "

      This sentence shows the level of thinking and research you have done on this topic. It is a familiar substitute offered for those who have avoided both. Most concerns are not about whether your friend is a threat, insofar as any male in a designated single-sex female space is a threat.

      It is about the legislative and institutional changes that are based on an incoherent gender ideology, which abandons safeguards in multiple areas, medical, prison estates, single-sex provisions, language, political recognition, education and children. Not only have multiple impacts been recognised, and identified they are dismissed as "bigotry".

      "Have you ever sat down with them and learned about their lives? If you haven't, then you have absolutely no right to define who you think is a 'woman', bathroom, pay rates, etc etc."
      How is this a logical conclusion?
      The only universal shared experience of women and girls is the physical inhabitance of a female body. This material reality will have an effect on the societal and cultural environment that females live in, which will have an influence on how they are treated. This leads to statistical differences in many aspects of lives: sexual violence, career choices, etc. However, the material reality of biological sex in itself has lifelong consequences, which affect physical strength differentials, the majority burden of reproduction and unplanned pregnancies, hormonal fluctuations, menopause, medical response to treatment, etc. These are not insignificant, and so, without bias or bigotry, provisions have been made to accommodate those specific differences after many years of advocacy and work.

      I can easily define a woman – an adult human who inhabits a body evolutionarily designed to develop along the Mullerian pathway to produce large gametes.
      That last sentence is not an earned right.

      It is a accurate definition of a woman.

      Your performative outrage, obscures the fact that you do not provide a coherent alternative.

      You just assume that the word woman now includes a group of men. Man, men and male are not derogatory terms. Man, men and male are also not bigoted or discriminatory terms, unless you have untethered your use from all connection to sex, which makes them meaningless.

      "This 'not allowed to have the conversation' thing is only because there is nothing to have a conversation about. These attempts to, and a lot of what I'm reading and hearing, are nothing more than prejudice and bigotry under the guise of 'discussion' and an attempt to be academic about it, rather than in your face, a la Destiny. At least they're open about it."
      Many examples of (mostly women) being shut down from speaking – even amongst themselves – of their concerns have been taking place in New Zealand, and you seem to be ignoring the prime example of Albert Park last year. However, it is not my job to educate you, it is your responsibility to ensure that what you state is not easily disproven, lest you seem spectacularly uninformed.

      "Once upon a time this same thing was happening to gay people, and also to disabled. Remember when parents didn't want disabled kids in schools, because their little darlings 'might catch something?' And remember when all gay men were automatically paedophiles? "
      Gay people wanted to be recognised for who they were. Disabled people required – and still – require adequate provision for their disabilities.

      The comparison is poor.

      Also, not all people with gender identities demand to be recognised as the sex they are not, nor demand for the use of opposite sex provisions.

      Those that accommodate such demands, do so without consideration for the impact it has on others – most particularly females. They consider the breaking of established boundaries progressive, and deliberately do not consider the failure of established safeguarding practices when they do so.

      "As for public toilets, it wouldn't bother me in the least if Alex or one of her peers were in the stall next to me. In my life, I've been harmed by straight males, never gay or trans. I've felt unsafe around other women in some public toilets. So your point is?"
      Provision of single-sex spaces are based on safeguarding risk assessments that use statistical data to REDUCE the likelihood of harm, uphold dignity and consent.

      Your personal judgement is a small data point, not conclusive evidence.

      Many of us know men that would not bother us personally in the least to have "in the stall next to me". However, we do not hold the arrogance or lack the capacity to know that not all women hold this personal knowledge, and cannot rely on our personal judgement to admit ANY man into a single-sex provision for women.

      I am beginning to think that those that make such poor statements regarding public facilities have a very regressive notion about men and women, and are unable to fully accept men that claim a gender identity within the variations of men, despite that being the case. It's an interesting phenomenon to witness from so-called progressives.

      "Alex is a person, she's a human being, yet there is a group of her fellow citizens who behave like she isn't, and are politicising her existence for their own agenda. And it's disgusting. I know you won't necessarily agree with anything I've said, but this site is for challenging ideas and opinions, so that's what I'm doing."
      Alex is a person, who happens to be a man.

      I have yet to read a comment on this site that says those with gender identities are not humans, but I read many – like yours – that put that statement out there without supporting evidence it has occurred.

      I find that disingenuous, however, apart from those misdirections – find little in your comment to disagree with because it actually doesn't make very many salient points.

      In a nutshell: You have a friend you love, and have concerns about how they navigate the world. Because of your care for this individual: men are women.

      No, they are not.

      • Robert Guyton 1.9.1
        3 April 2024 at 11:55 am

        "I can easily define a woman – an adult human who inhabits a body evolutionarily designed to develop along the Mullerian pathway to produce large gametes."

        Fair slips off the tongue, doesn't it!

        Every politician should memorise that pithy one-liner; the ol' "Mullerian pathway" will have the audience mesmerised.

        • Molly 1.9.1.1
          3 April 2024 at 12:18 pm

          Hi Robert – I just knew I'd find you here….wink

          Now, it's not because I "hate" you, but only because I don't rate you, that I will not often be responding directly to your replies to me.

          I've come to this decision due to a vast amount of previous experience, and personal experimentation involving drying paint.

          As this is a personal decision, which has been reached without consensus with you, you are – of course – free to continue to respond in any way you like.

          • Molly 1.9.1.1.1
            3 April 2024 at 1:21 pm

            "Fair slips off the tongue, doesn't it!

            Every politician should memorise that pithy one-liner; the ol' "Mullerian pathway" will have the audience mesmerised."

            Damn, in my reminiscing of previous conversations I recalled this TS conversation from last year where the more succinct – "Adult Human Female" became a time-vampire sucking the life out of a reasonable conversation on this very topic:

            https://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-04-04-2023/#comment-1943944

            In this case, I thought it worth pointing out the dedication with which some avoid brevity.

            Particularly when that thread involves pearlers such as this:

            "Thanks for your explanation, weka. Could you also explain to me, what would be the status of a girl who medically delayed or avoided permanently, menarche, yet went on to become an adult? Or of a girl who by some action of nature, matured but avoided menarche?

            Thanks."

            https://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-04-04-2023/#comment-1943989

            • Robert Guyton 1.9.1.1.1.1
              3 April 2024 at 2:01 pm

              You keep a file of my comments?

              blushes

              • Molly …
                3 April 2024 at 3:37 pm

                Search function.

                • Robert Guyton …
                  3 April 2024 at 4:34 pm

                  You search for my past comments?

                  blushes again

                  • Molly …
                    3 April 2024 at 4:57 pm

                    You probably would remain red in the face if you knew the search terms.

                    wink

                    On that topic – you've had a year- have you got a definition yet for woman that doesn't involve "young girls" and "menarche", or their "status"?

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      3 April 2024 at 5:41 pm

                      Copied and pasted yours – it'll do.

                    • weka …
                      3 April 2024 at 6:45 pm

                      Have you watched this yet? Time stamped to Boghossian's lead in to the question, but the whole thing is interesting. I haven't watched Dansky in video before.

  2. francesca 2
    1 April 2024 at 10:04 am

    Well I'm sick to death of the whole thing too.There seems to be a wilful refusal to understand the varied positions people are coming from .It all gets swept into a hold all bag for "bigots"

    For instance , if I have qualms about the damage done to young girls in particular, as laid out by the recent WPATH exposures, I'm a bigot .Shall we discuss the WPATH report?It seems not .The latest findings on puberty blockers? Ditto

    If I believe sex matters , medically and politically ,and trumps the ever changing slippery societal mores on gender, I'm a bigot .

    I believe that there have always been trans people, most of whom merged successfully, who knew that surgeries and hormones did not magically change them into functioning women , but allowed them to" pass," and feel more comfortable in their skins ,versus the latest iterations of trans who fully believe they experience periods and insist they are biological women who should have all the rights accorded to women (but possibly not the downsides).This is where I balk , and I will always balk.

    Paradoxically , because Georgina Beyer never claimed to be a woman , was always respectful, was utterly charming and honest , had no pretensions, knew exactly who she was and owned it,I have nothing but love for her and would have welcomed her into female spaces .But I do draw the line at entitled males who demand these rights, and even attempt to take away the language that is specific to biological women .I will not be neutered, and I'm done with appeasing men who won't take no for an answer, and who presume to tell me what a woman is.

    So I'm a bigot?

    OK , end of discussion.

    • weka 2.1
      1 April 2024 at 10:22 am

      Acecptance without exception said Stonewall UK. I will put up some photos when I get the chance, so people can see what gender identity ideology means in real terms.

      As always, the problem isn't trans people, it's the ideology and its activists.

    • SPC 2.2
      1 April 2024 at 10:58 am

      We had a 2018 WPATH position but there is now cognisance of Swedish research – and the UK Tavistock review …

      This guideline has been developed following the recognition that New Zealand’s previous good practice guide, Gender Reassignment Health Services for Trans People within New Zealand, which was based heavily on the World Professional Association of Transgender Health, Standards of Care, version 6 (WPATH SOC v6), requires updating to be in step with current practice and international guidelines.

      https://syhpanz.co.nz/gender-affirming-healthcare/

      Below shows developments since 2018

      2023

      https://www.health.govt.nz/system/files/documents/information-release/h2023031263_response.pdf

      2022

      https://www.rnz.co

      • weka 2.2.1
        1 April 2024 at 12:36 pm

        you know who called out the NZ MoH on its position on puberty blockers so that they eventually changed the statement on their website? Terfs. Women who have been treated heinously including by the liberal left. And now the liberal left is scratching its head over the support for removing rainbow crossings.

        • Robert Guyton 2.2.1.1
          1 April 2024 at 3:32 pm

          [deleted]

          • Robert Guyton 2.2.1.1.1
            1 April 2024 at 5:16 pm

            What was deleted??

            I can't see a problem??

            • Anne 2.2.1.1.1.1
              1 April 2024 at 5:42 pm

              I didn't see your deleted comment Robert so I can't pass judgement, but I must say that things are unpleasant at times on this site. A real pity.

              • Robert Guyton …
                1 April 2024 at 6:18 pm

                I'm at a loss. I'm as careful as possible, imo.

                • Anne …
                  1 April 2024 at 7:51 pm

                  It seems to me there is a level of 'misunderstanding of intention' occurring. We are allowed to have differing views because there is rarely any one view that is all encompassing.

                  I have the impression some regular commenters are leaving this site and that is what I mean when I say "a real pity."

                  • Robert Guyton …
                    1 April 2024 at 8:59 pm

                    I remembered, Anne. I made a joke about a hotel in my childhood hometown that was called "The Turf". It was an anodyne comment.

                    "Deleted" is a really wild response, imo.

                  • weka …
                    1 April 2024 at 9:03 pm

                    women have been leaving the site for years Anne. They stayed when there were feminists authors and conversations they could be involved with that weren't so much hard work.

  3. weka 3
    1 April 2024 at 10:35 am

    Post up about resilience planning and the aftermath of Gabrielle

    https://thestandard.org.nz/a-year-on-from-gabrielle-are-we-any-further-on/

  4. SPC 4
    1 April 2024 at 10:42 am

    Thames Water is a private water utility.

    No longer a safe place for the rowing race?

    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-68701486

  5. Phillip ure 5
    1 April 2024 at 10:54 am

    Product alert:

    A can of sprite contains 33 grams of sugar ..

    (Nearly one and one quarter ounces of sugar..)

    Imagine what that does to a child's brain…

    Setting maximum amounts of sugar allowed in food/drink..is the only effective way of tackling our serious obesity issues..

    Anything else is more an exercise in auto-eroticism..than actually addressing the problem..

    • SPC 5.1
      1 April 2024 at 11:08 am

      Stuff is being achieved

      https://www.fgc.org.nz/heart-foundation-supports-food-companies-to-remove-tonnes-of-sugar-from-staple-low-cost-foods/

      But there is still too much canned food high in salt and sugar (such as beans, other ready to eat meals and soups), often the cheaper ones with lack of flavour (spices etc).

      They should ban adding cane sugar to drinks – adding it to milk when flavouring with chocolate is an abomination. As is watering fruit juice and adding cane sugar to reduce cost (and yet maintain sugar content).

      • Phillip ure 5.1.1
        1 April 2024 at 11:52 am

        That is great that the heart foundation is on this case..

        My only issue is that reading the link shows success in getting some companies to reduce their sugar content by a bit (20%)..in some products..

        But I would submit that since the amounts of sugar prevalent in so much is so high..that 20% reductions from these levels are nowhere near enough…and could be viewed as an exercise in incrementalism…

        I really think that setting maximum levels will solve the problem in one fell swoop..

    • Belladonna 5.2
      1 April 2024 at 1:53 pm

      So what's your solution? Ban the sale of these highly sugared drinks in NZ? Because otherwise, you have no way of knowing that they aren't being given to children…

      Or ban them for everyone (good luck in getting that one through parliament – given the success that we’ve had with tobacco)

      As a parent – we were bombarded with this information 15-years ago when I had a pre-schooler. We all know what were healthy foods, and that the highly-sugared options were treats (certainly not every day, and probably not every week, but the occasional consumption wasn't going to kill off our kids).

      So all responsible parents know this.

      No primary school in NZ has soda in the school tuckshop (if, indeed they still have one). And many have teachers who write home judgy notes to parents if the lunchbox doesn't meet up to standards. Most of the lower decile schools (still using the old terminology) have free school lunches – which are all low sugar.

      So what does that leave? Irresponsible parents. Do you make soft-drinks illegal to buy on the food vouchers issued by WINZ? Do you have OT raid the homes of all kids who have a dental downcheck – to see what their parents are feeding them?

      Note: it's not really the high-sugar items that are contributing to the obesity epidemic. It's the combination of high-refined carb, high fat food, with lack of exercise. Lots of sugar isn't good for you – but lots of refined carbs and fat, is a lot worse.

      • Phillip ure 5.2.1
        1 April 2024 at 6:18 pm

        I would argue for setting limits..and putting the onus back on the manufacturers..

        A way to make this happen could be setting those limits..and then progressively taxing products that exceed those limits..

        And then watch how fast those manufacturers adjust their products to avoid being taxed..

        And something that must be enacted is honesty in advertising..and sugar content informed in a clear and open manner..

        I refer back to the 'nice'biscuits I profiled..they are a textbook example of doing just the opposite..calling a serving..two biscuits .and cramming a quarter of an ounce of sugar in those two biscuits..

        And what I would advocate is for compulsory warnings..nasty outcomes from consuming the product..much as has been done to cigarette packaging…

        So..take your pick from them…mix/match as you like..

        But what we can't afford to do…is nothing..

        The ballooning long-term health costs for both people and medical system from letting this obesity crisis continue to balloon..is something nobody needs..

        What would you argue for there..?..b.d..?

        And as for the fat/carbs you cite..go vegan..and go easy on the bread..eh..?

        And sugar kills the cellulose in the skin..it gives ya wrinkles..eh..?

        • Belladonna 5.2.1.1
          1 April 2024 at 11:12 pm

          And sugar kills the cellulose in the skin..it gives ya wrinkles..eh..?

          Which is why all those fat people have wrinkly skin? /sarc/

          There is such a thing as over-doing your argument.

          We already know (from tobacco) that health warnings don't affect most people. No one reads them….

          Mandatory prominent labelling of food products with % of sugar – might work – but only where shoppers are actively comparing products. Most people just buy their standard brand, and don't even look at the nutritional components. [I had a recent experience of this, when I was looking for a high protein yoghurt brand – and reading all of the nutritional panels – and realised what a rare experience this was – even for me, who's a fairly dedicated nutritional-value shopper] This might work better for 'hidden' sugar (in baked beans, for example) – rather than biscuits – which everyone expects to be high in sugar anyway.

          We could price sugar up (as we did with tobacco). But sugar tax was highly unpopular with most Kiwis: as soon as they realized that their morning breakfast jam, or packet of chocolate thins was affected – they quickly cooled on the idea. 'Tax is to punish those 'bad' people over there, not my reasonable consumption')

          And, to be clear, most of the people over-consuming sugar (to the point where it affects their health), are the low socio-economic groups in society. I don't know that we need to make their current grocery shop even more expensive…. And, any government doing so, is going to take a significant popularity strike (presumably why the previous government didn't pass a sugar tax)

          [NB: I'd be really interested in a study on the effects of sugar tax, which looks at what people spend their money on. Some of the studies show lower levels of purchasing – but don't show what those people not buying sugary drinks, are buying instead.]

          Which leaves 'mandatory' limits, on products. My prediction is that this would result in greater consumption of products. To use your packet of biscuits as an example. If the sugar level is cut in half, then people are more likely to eat 4 biscuits to get the same level of sugar hit. Consuming the same amount of sugar, but double the carbs and fat.

          Incentives to replace sugar with alternatives (e.g. stevia) is another option. People with a real sweet-tooth, find it hard to quit eating sweet things (even with dire medical warnings over their personal health from their own GP or Specialist).

          The whole 'obesity epidemic' is a very complex issue. Sugar is just one component. Over-consumption of highly processed carbs and fat are just as big a contributor. As is lack of exercise (with lots of factors: lifestyle, motivation, time-constraints, etc.) And, poverty, which makes people less able to choose highly nutritional foods (because they can't afford them, can't cook them, or can't store them).

          • SPC 5.2.1.1.1
            2 April 2024 at 8:44 am

            If one has a diet cognisant of the salt and sugar content of food, some foods are off limits (cheap and nasty – using salt and sugar for flavour, sustaining addictions to unhealthy food).

            It is standard for the nutritional content to be on labels. Once one assimilates the information it is easy to buy better.

            But there should be a minimum standards for products (salt and sugar maximums – and codes of practice for various food groups).

          • Phillip ure 5.2.1.1.2
            3 April 2024 at 2:49 pm

            @ b.d..

            Can I suggest you do some basic knowledge gathering on the subject of what sugar does to skin..

            A start could be asking google just that…

            It could well silence your scoffing..

            • Belladonna 5.2.1.1.2.1
              3 April 2024 at 3:02 pm

              PU. Suggest you look at some pictures of fat people – not a wrinkle in sight.

  6. Visubversa 6
    1 April 2024 at 10:55 am

    You have your story Kay, and I have mine. My story goes back some 50 years to Wellington in the 1970's. As a young lesbian, I was very much involved with the Gay community. I helped run a Lesbian Club which sublet premises from Carmen on a Sunday night. I would go to Carmen's Coffee Bar to pick up the key.

    In those days, the Trans people were very much part of the Gay community – they – like us were same sex attracted. They were mostly effeminate young men who were sexually attracted to men at a time when that was unlawful and had limited society approval. They internalised their homophobia and "transed away the Gay".

    However, there has always been another variety of men who liked to wear women's clothes. They were known then as transvestites. They were not sexually attracted to other men, they often had wives and children. They are now identified as autogynephiacs – men who are sexually aroused by the thought of themselves as women. For a long time, they denied that they had anything to do with Gay people. They were not homosexual.

    With more enlightened times of the 1980's and the response to the AIDS pandemic, Gay Liberation achieved a lot more legal and social rights and acceptance. The organisations which we had set up to support our struggle began to be more concerned with those who identified as Trans, and with Post Modernist philosophy – the concept of Gender Ideology has been developed. Belief in a "gendered soul" has now become as required as belief in an "immortal soul" was in the days before the separation of Church and State.

    This enables any person who opens their mouth and utters the magical incantation "I identify as" to immediately have the right to be treated as if they were actually that thing. It enables the men who get off on the idea that they are women to demand the validation that they seek from every organisation that involves women. They are particularly interested in groups that involve Lesbians.

    In Australia, Lesbian groups are back to meeting in secret like we were in the 1970's. We are not permitted to have dating sites that exclude "Transbians" and women only websites are under attack. Lesbian sports teams are bullied and blackmailed into accepting men who say that they are both women and lesbian.

    Carmen. Georgina, Jackie, Niccole etc were busy running a business or earning a living. They were not demanding admission into every women's organisation. They certainly were not interested in our Lesbian club. They were (and those living still are) sexually interested in men. They were homosexual – same sex attracted.

    These days, the very words "homosexual" and "same sex attracted" are described by Gender ideologists as "Transphobic dog whistles".

    There lies a lot of the difference between the Trans people of the past and the Trans people of the present. Trans is now a new belief system and it is just as homophobic and misogynistic as most of the other religious ideologies. They are all about male power and men's rights.

    • Descendant Of Smith 6.1
      1 April 2024 at 12:43 pm

      That is my understanding about why women are concerned (and many men) as well.

      There are a whole group of others getting caught up in the middle and a whole lot of teens at a sexually confusing time being pushed too hard in a particular direction at times aided and abetted by medical experts. This last part is in my view very concerning. Youth development doesn't fully finish to 24-25. I'm not sure we should be doing any gender reassignment before then (from a non-medical common-sense point of view.)

      The religious objections from biblical points of view adds to the confusion as well as does the manipulation of the whole issue through absolute deliberate disinformation as well.

    • Kay 6.2
      1 April 2024 at 2:08 pm

      Thank you, very interesting background.
      I’m trying to understand where my friend fits into all of this. She doesn’t give a damn about belief systems or politics she just wants to be who she is. Her biggest concern has been trying to save for reassignment surgery overseas, since it’ll never happen here. All I can see here is a small group of people ruining it for everyone else (as happens with just about every group you can think of).

      • Visubversa 6.2.1
        1 April 2024 at 3:32 pm

        Kay, your friend should have a good look at the complications rate for these sorts of surgeries. And also the more recent statistics about the satisfaction (or lack thereof) in the longer term, of those who have undertaken it.

    • AB 6.3
      1 April 2024 at 5:21 pm

      The goal has to be a world that contains no contradiction between your story and Kay's. Everyone should be safe no matter how they view and express their true selves – except for those who set out to control, demean and harm others.

    • UncookedSelachimorpha 6.4
      2 April 2024 at 12:56 am

      As someone fairly clueless about all this, I found that very interesting and helpful, thanks.

  7. Chess Player 7
    1 April 2024 at 10:59 am

    Man whose church was responsible for the Inquisition, Crusades and easing Hitler’s path to power by standing their political party aside, thereby causing millions of deaths, pontificates….

    https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/world/2024/04/pope-francis-calls-for-gaza-ceasefire-in-easter-address.html

    • SPC 7.1
      1 April 2024 at 11:23 am

      The church has never opposed replacing democracy with right wing government, if that means keeping the "secular" left out of power. Putin poses as Christian and is certainly a right wing authoritarian social conservative.

      It fits with Trump who has found no authoritarian on the right to oppose and who cares not for a democratic Ukraine, or Europe.

      He knows that this means they have to buy more weapons, sans a security guarantee.

      Similarly a stand off with China over Taiwan is GOP policy and is designed to ensure other nations spend more on defence – India, Japan and Oz to contain a "threat" with most of the cost offloaded.

      He showed no interest in a Korean peace (N Korea with missiles and warheads that can hit the US mainland) or resolving the Taiwan impasse. Or managing Ukraine-Russia (2014 issue) while POTUS.

    • Bearded Git 7.2
      1 April 2024 at 12:08 pm

      …plus the church that aided and abetted Franco's fascist regime in Spain and legitimised Pinochet’s fascist regime in Chile:

      “The Junta was offended by having the Allende regime placed on equal terms. In fact, it was being legitimated by the Church. The savages who had destroyed all of Chile’s most cherished institutions, killed thousands, expelled thousands, imprisoned thousands, driven hundreds of thousands from their jobs, were acknowledged to be as legitimate a government as the one the people had chosen for itself in free elections.”

      https://www.commonwealmagazine.org/chiles-silent-church

    • Belladonna 7.3
      1 April 2024 at 2:16 pm

      Just to be clear, you're not objecting to his message (in fact, you probably agree with him in his call for ceasefire in Gaza now) – you just don't think that he should be making it?

      Which political or religious leaders do you think should be making statements? Because the log in everyone's eye (in historical terms) is pretty substantial.

  8. joe90 8
    1 April 2024 at 11:08 am

    Of course MPI will be all over this…

    /

    The FDA is investigating the spread of "a highly contagious and often deadly" bird flu to dairy cows in Texas, Kansas and Michigan, the agency said on Friday.

    The big picture: The bird flu was detected in unpasteurized milk samples and swabs from two dairy herds in Texas and Kansas and one in Michigan, but federal authorities said in an online Q&A there is "no concern" about the safety of the U.S. milk supply.

    • Testing for the "highly pathogenic avian influenza," more commonly referred to as the bird flu, is also happening in cow herds in New Mexico and Idaho and two added herds in Texas.
    • Symptoms include decreased lactation and low appetite.

    https://www.axios.com/2024/03/30/cattle-bird-flu-texas-michigan-kansas

    https://www.farmersweekly.co.nz/politics/biosecurity-to-bear-brunt-of-mpi-job-cuts-psa/

  9. Graeme 9
    1 April 2024 at 12:22 pm

    Pedestrian bricks, an aid for pedestrian safety whilst crossing busy street. A Vancouver trial (maybe not that offical…)

    https://twitter.com/M_WrenchGang/status/1774501591254511956

    • Visubversa 9.1
      1 April 2024 at 12:48 pm

      Looking at the date – and knowing what we do about Vancouver drivers – it is certainly the crossing by the Granville Market – but probably not official – and definitely not needed.

      We found Vancouver drivers to be extremely courteous and considerate to pedestrians. The law seems to be that pedestrians have the right of way. Even where there is not a pedestrian crossing, drivers will give way to people who are crossing the road.

      We were waiting at an ordinary T junction wishing to cross by the "Give Way" sign. There was no traffic to which the driver was required to stop for, but the driver stopped for us. We found exactly the same thing on our return journey.

      In the CBD, there are a lot of service lanes which go behind buildings and have access from the main roads. The drivers of the trucks will wait for the pedestrians to all clear from the egress before they attempt to drive out.

      We had to cross the Granville Bridge and get across two slip lanes and the 4 lane main arterial route. They had pedestrian crossings, but not lights. We were quite hesitant as we approached the first slip lane, but the oncoming traffic just all stopped the minute we made our intention clear.

      So, it their is any city on the planet where pedestrians need the help of bricks to cross the road – it is certainly not Vancouver.

      • William 9.1.1
        1 April 2024 at 2:07 pm

        While I too found drivers in Canada very courteous to pedestrians, that is not the case everywhere. The bricks system is likely an ironic take on the flags made available in some places on that continent.

        Just a few years ago NZ consulted on a range of changes to our road rules that included giving pedestrians right of way at side street intersections. Sadly the resulting recommendations were shuffled endlessly within Waka Kotahi and will likely never be implemented, certainly not with the current minister.

    • Belladonna 9.2
      1 April 2024 at 2:10 pm

      Just waiting for the said bricks to be hefted through windows of cars by young hooligans… Or taken to smash the windows of parked cars, either for theft or wanton destruction.

      If you're so concerned about being seen on a pedestrian crossing – take your own flag (rainbow or otherwise)

  10. mac1 10
    1 April 2024 at 2:55 pm

    I see that today the government has announced that it is banning walking in most public places.

    https://www.greaterauckland.org.nz/2024/04/01/nz-government-announces-ban-on-walking/

    Part of the rationale is that it would do away with pedestrian crossings and therefore pedestrian crossing lights which Winston Peters sees as being 'woke' and I suggest are also virtue signalling would be not necessary.

    Moves are also afoot to change the colours of traffic lights. The GO colour is to be changed to Blue by National and flashing as a warning to gang members, and STOP will remain red. New Zealand First wanted the current yellow slow down signal to be a black light until it was pointed out that a black light would never be seen. ACT of course wanted there to be no lights at all and that truck drivers would rule supreme. The Greens wanted all traffic signals to be solar powered, even at night.

    Labour thought it was all foolish but would argue for the red light to be on top. The Christian parties did not want their churches located in a red light district, preferring star light above all.

    The rainbow community is yet to put in their/its/ his/her submissions.

  11. Mike the Lefty 11
    1 April 2024 at 8:55 pm

    Not a couple of weeks ago I predicted that the political right would start a campaign of propaganda supporting landlords who don't want to pass on their reduced costs to their tenants now the interest rebate has been reinstated.

    It has begun. This story was originally from the granny Herald.

    http://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/513142/landlords-1-point-3-million-out-of-pocket-in-unpaid-rent-for-first-two-months-of-2024

    It is a carefully constructed slab of propaganda, designed to make New Zealanders believe that landlords are entitled to the extra profits and it would be unreasonable to expect them to pass on the savings.

    • weka 11.1
      1 April 2024 at 9:06 pm

      "One Auckland tenant owed a whopping $33,000 for falling behind in rent over just 21 days…"

      I knew Auckland rents were high, but that's quite something.

      • aj 11.1.1
        1 April 2024 at 10:18 pm

        How dare a tenant do this?

        Another lay dead in their council flat and was discovered only when an agent for the landlord called in to find out why the rent payments had stopped.

        Despite efforts by the landlord to find next of kin, they "did not engage with the process", the Tenancy Tribunal said in its decision last December to terminate the tenancy.

        • weka 11.1.1.1
          1 April 2024 at 10:30 pm

          I can't believe they published that, not the way they did.

        • lprent 11.1.1.2
          3 April 2024 at 12:17 am

          Next of kin have no legal obligations to the debts of relatives. That bit of legal stupidity mostly died in commonwealth law by the end of the 19th century. It was the cause of so much misery as relatives were thrown in debtors prisons for the debts of family members, despite them not even knowing of the debt or having contracted to it. The latter is why you get very cautious about debt held jointly.

          The correct place would have been to make a claim on the estate of the deceased – which you usually find via the lawyers or executors or the estate. There you stand in line. Usually something like

          • funeral expenses
          • executor fees
          • medical expenses – usually just prior to death ones?
          • secured debtors – usually those having a lien against property.
          • unsecured debtors

          https://www.mactodd.co.nz/news-and-views/inherited-debt-what-if-your-parents-die-broke/

      • Belladonna 11.1.2
        1 April 2024 at 11:32 pm

        Grey Lynn villa on TradeMe for $6,995 per/week.

        Perhaps the Dotcom Mansion might attract $11K+ per/week!

        Well outside the experience of most Kiwis…..

      • lprent 11.1.3
        3 April 2024 at 12:04 am

        Yeah, I'd describe that as being a problem with the rate of rent (and the landlord not keeping on top of receiving it).

        If you were expecting to get $11k/week, then there should have been a bond to recover such losses. Clearly there was not.

        It reads like a really dumb landlord. Generally you'd demand security up-front (or a credit card or something). Usually a bond for rent. Hotels are different again.

        Probably the landlord didn't want to register one because they were trying to avoid or evade tax.