Home > Issues > Human Rights for Men > Making New Zealand Democratic by Removing a Bill of Rights Loophole

The Black Ribbon Campaign

Empowering Men:

fighting feminist lies

Making New Zealand Democratic by Removing a Bill of Rights Loophole

(twice updated and slightly edited)

Peter Zohrab 2024

Home Page Articles about Issues 1000 links
alt.mens-rights FAQ Sex, Lies & Feminism Quotations
Male-Friendly Lawyers, Psychologists & Paralegals Email us ! Site-map

 

Letter to Minister

Reply from Minister

Reply to Minister

 

(Open Letter to the Minister of Justice)

 

Dear Mr. Goldsmith,

 

Introduction

 

The Novel, "Animal Farm", which is a satire on Communism, contains the famous sentence:

"All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others."

Countries such as New Zealand formally adhere to Human Rights laws, but get around them by creating Communist-style loopholes and making lists of favourites, in order to make sure that some (human) animals are more equal than others.

What I am talking about here is exemplified by section 19 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990.

 

Section 19 of NZBORA reads:

19 Freedom from discrimination
(1)
Everyone has the right to freedom from discrimination on the grounds of discrimination in the Human Rights Act 1993.
(2)
Measures taken in good faith for the purpose of assisting or advancing persons or groups of persons disadvantaged because of discrimination that is unlawful by virtue of Part 2 of the Human Rights Act 1993 do not constitute discrimination.

(Although I am not up to date on this matter, I assume that this section is still in force.)

 

I propose that the phrase "in good faith" be deleted and replaced with the phrase "on the basis of objective evidence", because it is a very low bar to require only that someone have an ideological or religious faith or belief that something is true, in what purports to be Human Rights legislation.

The reason for this proposal is that New Zealand lacks both a democratic media sector and a democratic education sector.  Instead of these sectors examining both sides of every issue, they are full of activists who concentrate on furthering particular political agendas (especially Feminism) and blocking the expression of views or publication of evidence that contradict these agendas.  This totalitarian approach has the effect of brainwashing both decision-makers and the public about exactly who fits the description "persons or groups of persons disadvantaged because of discrimination."  This instills in the minds of decision-makers and the public a quasi-religious faith about such matters.  This is what makes Feminism the State Ideology of countries such as New Zealand.

This presumed "good faith" then leads to so-called "positive" discrimination (affirmative action), which discriminates negatively against other groups of people (especially men), making women more equal than men.

 

Some Examples

Here is a particularly glaring example of the Feminist bias of the media.  In my article, "TV3's Primitive Religion", I wrote:

"On the 19th of September 2013, Simon Shepherd, on TV3's "Firstline" programme, used the occasion of Suffrage Day to dish out some one-sided Feminist propaganda about employment issues. He actually stated that he was spewing out this propaganda because it was Suffrage Day.

Now, Simon Shepherd is clearly fairly stupid. He did not spell out the connection between Suffrage Day and women's employment issues, because there is none. (And this is quite apart from the fact that he did not invite me, or anyone else, to advocate for men on this issue).

The only way one could possibly think that there was a connection between Suffrage Day and women's employment issues was if one believed in a Feminist religion which taught that women were always and everywhere oppressed, and that it was the job of journalists to expose this oppression, which once denied women the vote and now denied them jobs.

In fact, of course, men used to be conscripted into the armed forces in wartime, in return for having the vote, but women got the vote without having to be conscripted. And women are allowed entry to the Police at lower physical standards than men are, whereas men are never allowed entry to professions at lower standards than women -- even when the professions are female-dominated (e.g. teaching and nursing)."

The media also disseminate blatant Feminist lies, which is why it has become famously acceptable for certain US politicians to retaliate by telling their own lies.  For example, TV One's "Breakfast" programme recently mentioned the fact that a woman had started  a petition against the wearing of g-string bikinis at her local swimming-pool.  According to Radio New Zealand, "Her campaign started after her eight-year-old son was exposed to some g-string wearers while he was at a swimming lesson.".  However, TV One explained the issue as being about the sexualisation of women's bodies -- as if women were (as always) the victims of men in this case.  In fact, the issue was that some women gave themselves the right to be exhibitionist, and subjected young males to non-consensual titillation, for the benefit of the women's own feelings of sexual power and domination.

The media also train men to think and behave in a Feminist manner.  On 15 July 2024, at 8:15 AM1, TV One's "Breakfast" programme took it upon themselves to interview  a self-styled "expert" on what they called "Healthy Masculinity."  That is extremely sexist, arrogant and discriminatory.  They should interview me about "healthy Femininity", so that I can tell the media how they (since they all are -- or think like -- women) should think and behave!

 

And here is a particularly glaring example of the Feminist bias of the education system.  In my article, "New Zealand, the Nazi Germany of the South Pacific" I wrote:

"When I was enrolled in a course on Moral and Political Philosophy at Victoria University of Wellington, I remember one particular class discussion. The lecturer, Simon Keller, put a definition of Feminism onto a screen or whiteboard at the front of the class. The definition stated something about Feminism being about equality.

I disagreed with that definition and asked if we could define Feminism, instead, as "the application of the 'Victim of Oppression' model to women." Keller asked if I thought that the 'Victim of Oppression' model did not properly apply to women, and I agreed that I meant that it did not apply to them. Keller thought for a moment and then declined to accept my definition, without giving reasons.

If that university believed in intellectual freedom, he should have given reasons, which we could then have discussed. Keller obviously had no idea what Men's Issues are and couldn't care less about them. He used his position of power in the university to prevent students from having a free and fair discussion of Feminism. I was in the position of having to suck up to him, because that low-life was the one who handed out the marks on the course!"

It is a factual matter, dependent on evidence, whether women are oppressed more than men are, or men are oppressed more than women are, or both are oppressed equally, or neither are oppressed.  But these factual matters are never debated transparently in the media or education system.  Instead, the Feminist doctrine that women are oppressed (and men are not) is taken for granted.  There is a mass of evidence that men are discriminated against more than women are.  See, for example, this Manifesto.

 

Official Information Act Requests

I refer to section 5 of NZBORA, which uses the phrase "a free and democratic society". 

  1. Under the Official Information Act 1982, could you please inform me whether it is Government policy that the media and education system -- without fair and transparent debate -- should determine, teach and instruct the New Zealand public who the "persons or groups of persons disadvantaged because of discrimination" are, as per section 19 of NZBORA?

  2. Under the Official Information Act 1982, could you please inform me whether it is Government policy to ensure that New Zealand is a free and democratic society?

 

Yours sincerely,

Peter Zohrab

 

NOTE: I could have been watching on Channel 11, which shows programmes with one hour's delay.

 

 

In due course, I received the following reply:

 

 

Letter from Minister dated 24.8.24, page 1

 

 

Letter from Minister dated 24.8.24, page 2

 

 

I replied as follows:

 

 

Reply to Minister 24.8.2024

 

 

See also:

 

Someone has let women out of the kitchen -- and they have been telling lies ever since!

 

FAQ

Webmaster

Peter Douglas Zohrab

Latest Update

25 August 2024

Top