(Open Letter to Justice Minister Judith Collins)

 

Dear Mrs. Collins,

I have read a news article – which says that you are looking into the matter-- about a woman who had borne the child of an eleven-year-old boy (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10890674).  Obviously, the main issue here -- apart from the welfare of the couple's child -- is the fact that this woman has had a sexual encounter with a boy who was below the age of consent -- in fact, even below 12.  As far as I am aware, the relevant legislation treats male and female offenders in the same way. 

(See http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1961/0043/latest/DLM329203.html?search=ta_act_C_ac%40ainf%40anif_an%40bn%40rn_25_a&p=6). 

A) However, the article raises the issue of whether enough attention is paid to women as offenders of this kind.  In this connection, I refer you to the following webpages:

1. Sexual Abuse by Women and

2. Males Suffer Horrific Rate of Psychological Abuse.

   Because of the way that Feminists dominate the media, the universities and even the National Party (with Prime Minister John Key acting as a de facto woman, and supporting the anti-male White Ribbon campaign), men are type-cast as offenders and women as victims.  This means that few, if any, resources are devoted to seeing what sexual abuse women get up to in the home, during all the woman-hours that they spend looking after children. Then, because such offenders are not found, they receive no publicity, and women continue to be type-cast as victims, and men as offenders.

   This is not a matter of law, but a matter of policy, and I hope that you will get together with the Minister of Police and see what can be done about it.

B) According to the above-mentioned news article, this event also raises the issue that women cannot be charged with rape.  That is a totally separate issue.  As I pointed out in a Submission on the Crimes Amendment Bill (No. 2) (in 2004), which was ignored:

... there is no reason -- other than Feminist sexism and deliberate discrimination
against men -- to retain a separate male-against-female offence called "rape" (or, indeed, under any
other separate name). Either you understand the word "equality" (under which banner Feminists have
persuaded vast numbers of men almost all over the World to institute changes to legislation), or you
do not understand the word "equality". ...the above planned exception for rape
indicates that the (then Labour-led) Government does not, in fact, understand the word "equality", that it is
therefore incompetent to be politically active in a country that is purportedly "free and
democratic" (section 5 of the Bill of Rights Act 1990), and should resign forthwith from Government
and from Parliament en masse.

 

C) However, there are other such examples, which show that the legal system over which you preside is rife with anti-male discrimination, and that you are therefore, by implication, more than happy to pretend that women are oppressed oppressed (by having a Ministry of Women’s Affairs, but no Ministry of Men’s Affairs), while in fact oppressing men.  One example is the separate offence of "Male assaults female", which carries a higher maximum penalty than does "Common assault" (the Law Commission has recommended that this discriminatory provision be abolished), and another example is the fact that female circumcision is illegal but male circumcision is legal.