Home > Issues > General Theoretical Issues > Pretence and Reality in the Ministry for Women |
||||||||||
|
Empowering Men:fighting feminist lies |
|||||||||
Pretence and Reality in the Ministry for Women (updated)(slightly edited) (also published as: Irrationality, Sexism & the Ministry for Women)Peter Zohrab 2017 |
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
On 1 September 2016, I sent the following letter to the Minister for Women:
|
||||||||||
Re: Irrationality, Sexism & the Ministry for WomenDear Louise Upston,Under the Official Information Act, could you please supply me with a copy of each of the following documents:
Yours sincerely,Peter D. Zohrab |
||||||||||
In due course, I received the following reply from the Minister. I had used an old letterhead on my letter, which is why I did not receive her reply punctually.
|
||||||||||
 |
||||||||||
In view of the totally unsatisfactory nature of the above response, I sent the following letter to the new Minister for Women on 14 January 2017:
|
||||||||||
Re: Irrationality, Sexism & the Ministry for Women
Dear Paula Bennett,
On 1 September 2016, I wrote to your predecessor as Minister for Women as follows:Under the Official Information Act, could you please supply me with a copy of each of the following documents:
As you will be able to see from your files, her reply was totally inadequate, supplying only a reference to “the document that bests responds” to my request. That document was CEDAW, which is totally one-sided, and simply assumes (without proving) that women are disadvantaged, relative to men. She also suggested I read part of an annual report of the Ministry for Women, which is also totally one-sided, and simply assumes (without proving) that women are disadvantaged, relative to men. Moreover, the latter document even shows that men lag behind women in various areas (especially in education, health, life expectancy and child custody), without dropping the slightest hint that men might need a Ministry for Men to cater to their needs.Having a Ministry for Women not only wastes taxpayers’ money, it uses taxpayers’ money to pay Feminists to lobby for laws and policies that disadvantage men, while the pro-men lobby is not taxpayer-funded. Not only that, but employees of the Ministry for Women go around the place throwing their weight about.When I was studying "Institutions & the Policy Process" at Victoria University of Wellington in 2011, a strongly-built woman in long, black boots from the Ministry for Women was in my tutorial. She said something about men holding women back, at which point I reminded her that men had given women the vote! This struck her dumb for a moment. Then she said, “Change the subject!” It was an order! I said that I was not going to be told to change the subject.The lecturer (who obviously had never heard of Academic Freedom, Democracy or Freedom of Speech) more or less asked me why. I replied that he was in charge of the tutorial – not that woman! Then he said that he would change the subject, since the other students didn’t seem to agree with me! In fact, only one other student had said anything on this topic and, in a Democracy, you would have expected a university lecturer to foster discussion on controversial topics – but, obviously, Feminism is sacrosanct!I realize that New Zealand women are a bunch of man-haters and are prepared to lie and conspire to ensure their domination over men in all possible fields and at any cost, but could you please inform me, under the Official Information Act, what your plans are to abolish the Ministry for Women after the next election?Yours sincerely,Peter D. ZohrabPS I apologise for using an old header when writing to your predecessor, which no doubt caused her office to send her reply to my old address.
|
||||||||||
In due course, I received the following reply:
|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
See also:
|
||||||||||
