I sat down face to face with my local federal member and confronted him with the shocking suicide statistics and our governments-both Labor and Liberal's complete indifference to the suffering and death of men.
I asked him what we should call the deaths of over 2000 men a year if 60 or so women lost in DV incidents is branded an epidemic. He shook his head and made appropriate noises before talking about the pendulum swinging too far.
I said I'd heard that rubbish before. What pendulum? When were the deaths of hundreds or thousands of women ever treated with such indifference or not regarded as worthy of discussion let alone steps to stop the deaths ?
I said in spite of any complaints women may have had about life in the 1950's or earlier, they were treated with respect. Men stood when a woman entered a room. Men removed their hats in a woman's presence. Men adjusted their language in the presence of women. Men gave their coats to women on cold nights and ensured they were safe and protected. And of course, men died for women in war, during disasters and protecting them during moments of threat. Men worked their fingers to the bone in often back breaking work to provide for the women in their lives.
This revisionist view of how women were treated is sickening. Women and girls have never been treated in the manner boys and men have been treated these past six decades. Never.
Anyway, He had a female personal assistant who sat in on our chat. When I spoke about male suicide, workplace deaths, homelessness and domestic violence stats being twisted and manipulated to ignore female abuse and neglect as well as murder she was twitching in her seat.
Just before I left, I asked the Minister if he could define the term "gendered violence". I said it seemed to me it just meant any form of violence perpetrated on a woman for whatever reason.
The PA jumped in when the Minister struggled to explain the term and told me she could explain what gendered violence is. She said with great venom, "it's what happened to all those women on October 7th who were raped and murdered." I asked her what term was used to describe the beheadings, stabbings and burning alive of the young and old men. She stared at me in rage but failed to give me one.
It's hopeless. This minister told me if I was a member of his party and spoke the way I was- in other words, demanding we advocate for men who are suffering and spent time focusing on men's issues too, I would be sacked within a month.
We laughed sadly at his honest observation but I told him it was a sick reflection on politics that gendered bigotry ( the hatred of men and boys) is enacted simply because it wins more votes.
I don't have your energy Betinna. I've been fighting my own personal battle against feminists and feminism for nigh on thirty years with the same result time and again.
Good for you, Mark. Thanks for your insights into the dreadful process of lobbying politicians. I have had some similar experiences but I know there are politicians willing to help. The more we lean on them, the more likely that some will have the courage to take a stronger stance.
He encountered me a few days later at a public function and actually approached me and apologized for his PA's behaviour. He said it was unprofessional and he told her it was unacceptable. But I've no doubt he didn't find her views objectionable-just the fact that she injected herself into our conversation.
I didn't say one negative word about women, yet that piece of work was in a lather over my demand for attention on saving the lives of thousands of men lost to suicide, workplace deaths and homelessness. This was only days after that good man had placed shoes and boots on the lawns of Parliament in a bid to garner some attention on the issue. Of course, the mainstream media ignored it.
And I did write him a follow up letter saying I had high hopes when I entered his office for he is a young man and had a kind face-yes I wrote that! I said it is sad to think he is happy to remain silent about injustice and bigotry simply because such an attitude ensures more votes. I told him I wondered how he will lay his head on his pillow in years to come if he plays the same dirty game most of his peers have engaged in for decades and lies or deflects when in his heart he knows the truth.
I wonder what he did with it. He told me he had read it when I bumped into him a few days after that meeting.
Your MP is trying to avoid the issues you raised ,he needs to be pushed a bit more and reminded that his job is to listen to and act for the people in his electorate . But party politics rule and his first loyalty is to his party. A better system is needed where the parliamentary representative of an electorate is not affiliated with any political party but is there to speak for the people .
Cheers to you for such an effort, even if it was a futile effort. I have also been at this for three decades and my body is no longer in any condition to visit politicians and their fembot assistants, even if I lived in America, Britain, or Australia. . . which I do not. I live in Central America where the day-to-day treatment of males essentially is normal. As opposed to the feminist totalitarianism that goes on in the anglo nations.
"This minister told me if I was a member of his party and spoke the way I was- in other words, demanding we advocate for men who are suffering and spent time focusing on men's issues too, I would be sacked within a month."
Can I be so bold as to suggest a new term ? You'd be "Moira Deeminged".
Good comment , was this MP a Labor or Liberal? It seems there’s no difference now ,we have the “uniparty” . Only way is to vote for small parties and preference both the majors last , a hung parliament is predicted and chaos will result , but this is what’s needed for the shake up of politics and a better system maybe.
He was a Liberal. I would not have wasted my time with a labor minister. But you are right-the liberals are just silently acquiescing to feminist demands while the labor party openly celebrates their bigotry.
The Liberals have been heavily influenced by feminism just like Labor/ Greens, there are many women in politics now so we can expect feminist policies to dominate .
The woman assistant you mentioned seems like a nasty piece of work but so typical of young women, full of attitude and brainwashed from years of anti -male education.
But the MP you say was a young man and you could have expected him to be at least a bit sympathetic to the tragic male suicide rate , but he’s probably been through the same “mill” as his female contemporaries ,is he a university graduate? as many MPs are now .
He might have a different point of view if he’d come up through the ranks of the working classes as an apprentice or similar , but I suppose the days when a humble train driver could become the Prime Minister are gone .
He's basically too gutless to draw attention to men's issues because it isn't considered a vote winner- so men can just keep on killing themselves in their thousands each decade and not even get a mention when either government is in power.
On the rare occasion the issue of suicide is raised it is always presented in gender neutral terms- Suicide of young Australians, people or just Australians. They do the same with other issues which are overwhelmingly impacting men- like homelessness and workplace deaths. They refer to Australian or Victorian workers in all advertising around these issues.
And on ANZAC Day, a day once meant to commemorate the ultimate sacrifice of men in the many wars they have fought, women get to share centre stage in spite of the enormous disparity in deaths. One hundred thousand men and around 15-20 women. And women who have never served a day in a combat zone are still the focus of the crowd and cameras for helping to distribute aid in natural disaster zones or giving medical care. This year's ANZAC Day clash was dominated by women with the anthems sung by females, the medal after the game presented by a female, and as many female soldiers on the ground as men. It's an utter disgrace. There is no place where men are permitted to receive a modicum of praise or thanks without women having to be included.
Yet when we speak of domestic violence, we don't hear of Australians or people being killed or affected- suddenly the mentioning of the gender of the victims is of paramount importance- it is women, women, women and nothing but women in spite of the fact that a third of all victims are male! This is the only societal scourge branded a gendered problem. What they mean by that is it affects more women.
I am so sick of this vile game which nobody else seems to notice.
Good comment, the feminists even want to take ANZAC day from men , ignoring the fact that only men fought and died on the battle fields .This is an attempt to rewrite history ,as all totalitarian governments do.
The message is that men are not permitted to have anything which is exclusively theirs , women must be involved in all things . Now there is womens football and rugby ,but no one goes to the matches , spectator stands are all but empty, so the revenue is low , so then the women players complain that the men are paid more, and that’s about all women are good for these days ,complaining .
This has become the pattern over time. I've always been well known by state and federal MPs wherever I've lived. Previously you would always get at least an acknowledgement. Now they're completely non-responsive more often than not. I've had staff admit they miss-filed documents deliberately. I've been told "it's too hard" more than once. Take on the federal Treasury on your own!
For decades our political classes have been acting to distance themselves from responsibility and obligation as much as possible.
What a weak piece of work. They don't give a stuff about men. They are scum in my view- just as reprehensible as any KKK member in the deep south in the 1920's.
Feminists have political clout because they are perceived to represent the views of ALL women. If a politician disagrees with a feminist there is the idea it may lose you female voters ie. the "women's vote". Men (unlike women), as a group don't have political power as we are not organised in sufficient numbers. This allows politicians to ignore those few who do raise issues as it will not cost the politician votes. So much for the (mythical) patriarchy.
PS. I note that recently in the US the Democrats, due to troubling polling results, have felt the need to appeal directly to male voters after decades of indifference and at least a decade of disdain for anything male. Maybe it's a sign of change? Maybe men as a voting block are becoming more influential? Though in the case of the Democrats I suspect this is just a temporary act of political opportunism.
Good points , women have a ‘ Minister for Women’ but men don’t . The double standard is always there but as you say times might be changing . The next Federal election will be interesting , Albo is toast and Dutton must see a good opportunity to get votes of working class men who would normally be Labor voters.
Dutton was at Bathurst rubbing shoulders with the working class , he is not a motor enthusiast it was just a PR exercise ,but shows that he can see which way the wind is blowing. How far he is prepared to go is the question, will he promise sweeping reforms of the Family Court ? , I doubt it .
It is the same around the world, Mark. But there is one thing that does have an effect, and without it nothing - not a single thing - ever gets done. Perseverance.
I congratulate you on your perseverance. And don't be so sure that your efforts have done nothing. Without people like us talking straight to our politicians, those politicians will rightly conclude that nobody cares. Every politician knows that for everyone who expresses an 'adverse' view, there are thousands (they have an approximate number, down to the last digit) who feel the same. Knowing that even one constituent cares tells them that it is something they have to think about. If enough people get to the politician with a similar message, things really do happen: there is proof in the German men's movement; in the groups fighting against male circumcision in Africa (even though some have lost their lives in that fight); in the father's rights campaigns in Kazakhstan; and many others.
We can all feel disheartened from time to time (I know I do!) but there is great truism in the saying that the only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.
I listened to that thanks Mark , the impression I got was that Mr. Violi will do little if anything to help the situation regarding mens suicide or any other mens issues . He attended university and it’s safe to assume he would have been affected by the strong feminist influence of most universities .
He is an example of the new generation of politicians , sycophants , yes men , afraid to rock the boat . Career politicians who will toe the party line just to keep their job.
The interview was interesting but , and I wonder how many times Violi says “community” this is the feel good phrase for politicians on the campaign trail, he appeared at charity events , volunteer fire fighting , sporting clubs , making a big man of himself .
But these are local government or state governments areas of control , a Federal MP should be concerned with the big issues, ie . the economy, immigration , defence , etc. what’s going on? The liberal party was once the business party , they got MPs from commerce and industry, successful business people, not lefty university dropouts, Mr Violi has more in common with Anthony Albenese .
I had a "Boris" situation a few years ago and may have posted it on this site back then. I was not on an aircraft, but a children's playground.
Whilst I was pushing my then 3 year old granddaughter on a swing, a little girl of similar same age was looking at me intently for a push on the parallel swing beside. I suggested that she instead asked her mum who was with a group of women, who also had kids in tow, and seated nearby. The mother after some time approached me and said something like, "you look like her own grandpa who gives her swings and "wizzies" and she would not have minded if I gave her a push". I did give my reasons and she told me that she understood and isn't it sad that we are paranoid with stranger danger. I did say to her though that it could be more sad for me if she had been someone who had otherwise complained and I ended up on a Register that may have even prevented me from being in the park in future, even with my own granddaughter! It was also one of those swings that require the child to be lifted up and placed in the seat with a safety chain secured.
I've already written to MPs to oppose the misinformation bill. Now onto the suicide & airline rackets. Thanks for all your good work Bettina! Your voice must continue to be heard.
Suicide of males does have some research, however there does seem to be some resistance to equate it with Family Court determinations, or otherwise separation of dads, or indeed mothers, from the children, at least on a very much reduced contact with their children after any separation. The fact is though that it is dads moreover that vacate the former family home and then live "elsewhere".
Any alienation from important "others" no matter in what circumstances does have a proven catalyst to produce behaviours that can lead to suicidal ideation from all concerned in family breakdowns.
Yes Vivian, there does need to be more research into this and for it to be front and centre with the Family Court and the "experts" who guide the mandated and binding determinations of their Worships.
Unfortunately if that happened, and we did have our own segregated seating, rabid feminists would cry discrimination and invade that space as well. Look what happened with men only clubs and men's sheds!
Right on , but why stop there? Let’s have separation of the sexes for everything, where practical at least . It is here that the so called primitive people of the world might know better.
I agree with what you are worried about Bettina, how brave people like you speaking out about the issues affecting men across the spectrum could maybe fall foul of revised internet posting laws (ie the misinformation bill). I was previously a prolific UK poster myself mainly around false rape accusations as I was falsely accused of rape myself almost 20 years ago and I have seen first hand how the police / courts / government etc support criminal false rape accusers by calling them "victims" when there is ZERO proof they are (I was never charged in the end, but my false accusation was pre-metoo# so I am under no illusion I may have been lucky). I took a break from social media about 2 years ago but feel the need to return soon as things are not getting any better for us men!! How I approach it now is along the lines "how can I say what I want to say, but in a way such that it could never be seen as harmful, misinformation etc" and I do believe it is possible especially if you go back to the raw data to try and find the truth of the matter. Example - in the UK we hear there are supposedly about 60,000 rapes per year. I used to say "there are not 60,000 rapes per year" this is absolutely true, but now after researching it and understanding more about how the rape accusations are recorded, counted etc I express it slightly different - I would now say something like "there may be 60,000 rape accusations made per year BUT this is because in 2002 the UK Government changed how rape complaints were recorded, the UK Home Office mandated that all rape accusations would be recorded as crimes at the point they were made unless there is evidence to the contrary (this being obviously the presumption of guilt). However less than 3% of these accusations result in a court case, the number of convictions will be smaller even still. Therefore how can the claim there are 60,000 rapes per year ever be justified when the VAST MAJORITY of these claims are never tested in court" etc etc etc I am not trying to be clever, I am just playing the propgandists at their own game. I would stand by what I have wrote above because I have researched the issue for the last ~ 20 years so I know what I am talking about, and when people question me saying "there must be some proof a rape occured if it is in the statistics" I can point to the guidance on UK Home Office Crime Recording where they say "all accusations treated as crimes unless evidence to the contrary". I have the reciepts! I work with statistics and I know EVERYTHING the government says is rape propganda, It would be just as accurate to say there are 60,000 false rape accusations rather than say there are 60,000 rapes. If they are he said she said untested in court, how can what I say be disproven???? IT CANT BE. Just as it cannot be proven there are 60,000 rapes per year in the UK. I am just saying now I am playing them at their own game. it is all about lies, damned lies and statistics - but the "statistics" such as they are, are so basically meaningless it is possible to put any spin on them you want. *** I should say here, some rape cases are proven in court obviously, and I follow as many as I can and some convictions are just in my opinion, but he-said she-said uncorroborated rape accusations do not prove rape in my opinion, never did and never will. So any convictions occuring in cases where there is no corroboration - I have no confidence in them. So to be fair & honest I do accept some of those 60,000 rape accusations are genuine, but only if proved in court and with corroboration - anything else where a defendant is acquited or an accusation does not make it to court could be FALSE in my opinion. I keep meaning to raise this issue with the UK Office of National Statistics. I have seen them recently time and time again call out government claims on funding, climate change, COVID deaths etc as misleading and they state this in the national media, yet they continue to present rape ACCUSATIONS as actual rapes when all I have said above still stands. It is utter propaganda and they need called out for their double standards. As I say I think the reason I am so passionate about all this is 1) I was falsely accused of rape and, 2) I work with statistics and I can hand them their statistical asses and I would stand behind every word I say even on risk of prosecution as I know what I am talking about and can never be proven wrong - just as those propagandists can never be proven right. I plan to get more involved in these issues and the wider MRA soon so hopefully we will chat again at some point. BEST WISHES FROM THE UK - DOUGIE (a victim of a false rape accusation and someone who knows statistics)
We need more men like you, Doug, who are good with statistics and willing to do the homework to know how to challenge the lies that are promoted every day in our media. Maybe you should do a substack, publishing the info people can use to refute the misinformation. That would be a worthy public service! If you have time to help me, please contact me by email.
If you start with the "esafety" website it is a good beginning:
On that site there are 10 tabs:
1.Key topics
2.Educators
3.Parents
4.Young people
5..Kids,
6.Women,
7.Seniors,
8.First Nations,
9.Communities,
10.Industry.
I guess that a Tab that excludes "Males" is a testament to the good work that the lassies who created it have achieved. Apart from that it is not a very good web creation.
Your research is also related to Bettina's 'Movember is Fake' article and by that I mean, I related this to looking at websites to see what is in the Content.. in this case there is no 'Male tab' so you knew instantly that they do not recognise Men and therefore any such websites alert me to not donate money to them. One sometimes has to dig deeper.
A political party here in Switzerland, new Socialist something, has a banner with someone carrying a placard that says 'down with patriarchy' or something.. to me that now means 'we hate men'.. therefore I will not vote for them...
Law's have to be "fair" I think there is even something in basic Human Rights legislation the concept of "equality of arms". I dont think an uncorroborated accusation of any crime proves anything not just rape, but obviously there could be more false rape accusations than any other type of crime because there are 2 parties (at least) involved. My view is an uncorroborated rape accusation does not prove rape BUT if it does, then an uncorroborated accusation of having a false rape accusation made against you should be enough to prove a false accusation was made, what is the difference?? All the arguments of why rape is hard to prove apply equally to false accusations. So either give the jury the power to find either the rape complainant or the rape defendant guilty on uncorroborated accusations, or prosecute neither offence without corroborating evidence. It has to be fair but it is not fair at the moment. rape and false accusations are the 2 sides of the same coin, you cannot talk about one without talking about the other.
Bettina, may I suggest one correction? You say "That’s from over 800 million domestic flights!” but I believe you mean “over 800 million passengers” rather than flights. I just searched for this data myself and saw the number was about 819.3 million passengers across all domestic US flights in 2023.
Hillary Clinton currently is backing the U.S. version of the 'Misinformation Bill', so clearly this is a concerted Aussie/American effort to finish-off the last of our civil liberties under the usual cover of Total Safety for Women. You're not AGAINST women being safe, are you, Mr. Pre-criminal? Aaaand etc.
At least the Aussie measure is correctly named: Miss Information. That, in truth, is the society the anglo nations now have. All our institutions and all our public modes of information are radically feminist, and the juggernaut just keeps on rolling.
Feminism is totalitarianism. We are there, already.
Australia is broken! and as for India, pity the young straight girl sat next to an older dike! (ya can't make this stuff up!)...Keep fighting the good fight Bettina...
So now the rabid feminists/man haters are claiming groping is rife on airlines! What's next for us men? mandatory wing seats for all men (on the actual wings) goggles provided for free to ensure our comfort! Aircraft seats are packed in like sardines in a tin. How often have men had to endure a women's breasts pushed into his face when a big woman taking a window seat gets up to go the loo? I have never ever inappropriately and unwelcomely groped a women/girl in all my life. After my divorce, at singles dances, I was covertly groped at least 3 times each event by women. Flattering maybe, no big deal definitely, cheeky absolutely!
A few years ago I was flying Melbourne to London on Qantas with my 81yo mother. She had mild Altzheimer’s. A woman on the other side of the aisle was rocking her baby, side to side, to stop it crying. It didn’t work: clearly the child’s ears were causing the problem, due to reduced cabin air pressure. The 5 month old shouldn’t even have been on a plane.
After a couple of hours, the woman scowled at me, complained to a flight attendantess that I was ogling her breast, & she was consequently upgraded to business ckass. Having kept us awake for hours, it’s we who should have been upgraded, or at least moved.
It is appalling that she wrongly assumed & stated that I wished to ‘ogle’ her fat body.
"We saw this with the eSafety Commissioner’s claims that women are “almost always” the major victims of online abuse; ignoring the risks to men and boys of sexual exploitation".
On the surface this is an outright lie from the commissioner. All online data - including from Google Inc (which is very DEI), shows that the split between online abuse is 55% men and 45% women. And further that 50% of the abuse women get is from other women.
I don't know the original quote but the term 'major victim' is slippery. Should a man receive 2 abuses for a woman's 1 is she still the 'major victim' because her abuse was 'nastier'? I'd love to see the reasoning that supports this commisioner's statement.
Pink rows on planes will have the same effect as women-only gyms. They'll exploit the privilege, then still sit in mixed rows and claim on tik tok that they're being harassed. Joey Swole has some fixes for this approach already...
"“Unless you are prepared to press your arm against the man’s — which will allow you to feel the rise and fall of his breath and is, I feel, too intimate a connection with a stranger — then you have lost two inches of your seat."
What happened to a stoic acceptance of some inconvenience and forced intimacy as part of the nature and responsibility of using any sort of shared public amenity?
I was once flew to the US (from London) on a business trip in economy with two colleagues. Unfortunately it was a full flight and I was seated next to a truly massive gentleman in the middle of a row of seats. He overflowed the arm rest and pushed me sideways against the opposite arm rest and my colleague. Both my colleagues were extremely amused and took the piss during and after the flight. I endured firm physical contact with this individual for the entire flight. The flight was full and I therefore endured the contact without complaint as being just part of life. I would have welcomed contact with just his arm. This was contact all along my shoulder and down the side of my body from rolls of fat. It would have been just as unpleasant whether the overweight passenger was a woman or a man but in the real world we sometimes have to accept discomfort as being part of the price of society and getting along with other people, or at least that is what I believe.
A concern about the risk of sexual assault on a flight is bizarre. An aircraft is certainly a crowded environment in which strangers are necessarily packed cheek by jowl but its an exceptionally public space with readily accessible assistance. Its therefore far safer than most environments with assistance no more than feet away. The incredibly oversensitive and inaccurate perception of risk by women in society is very depilating to women and society as a whole. Women are far less likely than men to suffer a physical attack, Most men under most circumstances (rightly) do not let the worry of being attacked constrain their activities yet women who are far safer perceive the risk as being so high as to preclude everyday activities such as walking, running or cycling alone. Less than one woman in a million is murdered by a stranger in the UK each year. The chance of falling down the stairs and dying at home is more than 100 times greater yet which fear do women alter their behavior to avoid?
I’d love you all to get active on the misinformation bill, plus the very important suicide policies - plus the airline issue! Lots of homework for everyone.
I would much prefer to sit next to a male and breath in his after shave, than a female who has bathed in perfume. What I do not understand is that we are being indoctrinated with "diversity" and "inclusivity" and yet males are being almost excluded from being part of society. I for one will not be sitting in a pink row and, heaven forbid, the airlines go to the extent of a rainbow row!
Long story short: as a gay man I was recently excluded at my own dinner table because some people refused to continually speak the language I need to obtain citizenship with (German) but they kept reverting back to Local Dialect. All guests were part of the acronym LGBT......... a week later I was deep in the awareness and understanding of what was/has/had been going on, I was furious... the next party I requested that people speak so that I was included.. the responses were mixed.. I wasn't asking for their Blood...
I sat down face to face with my local federal member and confronted him with the shocking suicide statistics and our governments-both Labor and Liberal's complete indifference to the suffering and death of men.
I asked him what we should call the deaths of over 2000 men a year if 60 or so women lost in DV incidents is branded an epidemic. He shook his head and made appropriate noises before talking about the pendulum swinging too far.
I said I'd heard that rubbish before. What pendulum? When were the deaths of hundreds or thousands of women ever treated with such indifference or not regarded as worthy of discussion let alone steps to stop the deaths ?
I said in spite of any complaints women may have had about life in the 1950's or earlier, they were treated with respect. Men stood when a woman entered a room. Men removed their hats in a woman's presence. Men adjusted their language in the presence of women. Men gave their coats to women on cold nights and ensured they were safe and protected. And of course, men died for women in war, during disasters and protecting them during moments of threat. Men worked their fingers to the bone in often back breaking work to provide for the women in their lives.
This revisionist view of how women were treated is sickening. Women and girls have never been treated in the manner boys and men have been treated these past six decades. Never.
Anyway, He had a female personal assistant who sat in on our chat. When I spoke about male suicide, workplace deaths, homelessness and domestic violence stats being twisted and manipulated to ignore female abuse and neglect as well as murder she was twitching in her seat.
Just before I left, I asked the Minister if he could define the term "gendered violence". I said it seemed to me it just meant any form of violence perpetrated on a woman for whatever reason.
The PA jumped in when the Minister struggled to explain the term and told me she could explain what gendered violence is. She said with great venom, "it's what happened to all those women on October 7th who were raped and murdered." I asked her what term was used to describe the beheadings, stabbings and burning alive of the young and old men. She stared at me in rage but failed to give me one.
It's hopeless. This minister told me if I was a member of his party and spoke the way I was- in other words, demanding we advocate for men who are suffering and spent time focusing on men's issues too, I would be sacked within a month.
We laughed sadly at his honest observation but I told him it was a sick reflection on politics that gendered bigotry ( the hatred of men and boys) is enacted simply because it wins more votes.
I don't have your energy Betinna. I've been fighting my own personal battle against feminists and feminism for nigh on thirty years with the same result time and again.
1.Stonewalling.
2. Admission I am right, but nothing will change.
3. Outright hatred and abuse directed at me.
Good for you, Mark. Thanks for your insights into the dreadful process of lobbying politicians. I have had some similar experiences but I know there are politicians willing to help. The more we lean on them, the more likely that some will have the courage to take a stronger stance.
Thanks Bettina,
He encountered me a few days later at a public function and actually approached me and apologized for his PA's behaviour. He said it was unprofessional and he told her it was unacceptable. But I've no doubt he didn't find her views objectionable-just the fact that she injected herself into our conversation.
I didn't say one negative word about women, yet that piece of work was in a lather over my demand for attention on saving the lives of thousands of men lost to suicide, workplace deaths and homelessness. This was only days after that good man had placed shoes and boots on the lawns of Parliament in a bid to garner some attention on the issue. Of course, the mainstream media ignored it.
And I did write him a follow up letter saying I had high hopes when I entered his office for he is a young man and had a kind face-yes I wrote that! I said it is sad to think he is happy to remain silent about injustice and bigotry simply because such an attitude ensures more votes. I told him I wondered how he will lay his head on his pillow in years to come if he plays the same dirty game most of his peers have engaged in for decades and lies or deflects when in his heart he knows the truth.
I wonder what he did with it. He told me he had read it when I bumped into him a few days after that meeting.
Your MP is trying to avoid the issues you raised ,he needs to be pushed a bit more and reminded that his job is to listen to and act for the people in his electorate . But party politics rule and his first loyalty is to his party. A better system is needed where the parliamentary representative of an electorate is not affiliated with any political party but is there to speak for the people .
Cheers to you for such an effort, even if it was a futile effort. I have also been at this for three decades and my body is no longer in any condition to visit politicians and their fembot assistants, even if I lived in America, Britain, or Australia. . . which I do not. I live in Central America where the day-to-day treatment of males essentially is normal. As opposed to the feminist totalitarianism that goes on in the anglo nations.
"This minister told me if I was a member of his party and spoke the way I was- in other words, demanding we advocate for men who are suffering and spent time focusing on men's issues too, I would be sacked within a month."
Can I be so bold as to suggest a new term ? You'd be "Moira Deeminged".
Good comment , was this MP a Labor or Liberal? It seems there’s no difference now ,we have the “uniparty” . Only way is to vote for small parties and preference both the majors last , a hung parliament is predicted and chaos will result , but this is what’s needed for the shake up of politics and a better system maybe.
He was a Liberal. I would not have wasted my time with a labor minister. But you are right-the liberals are just silently acquiescing to feminist demands while the labor party openly celebrates their bigotry.
The Liberals have been heavily influenced by feminism just like Labor/ Greens, there are many women in politics now so we can expect feminist policies to dominate .
The woman assistant you mentioned seems like a nasty piece of work but so typical of young women, full of attitude and brainwashed from years of anti -male education.
But the MP you say was a young man and you could have expected him to be at least a bit sympathetic to the tragic male suicide rate , but he’s probably been through the same “mill” as his female contemporaries ,is he a university graduate? as many MPs are now .
He might have a different point of view if he’d come up through the ranks of the working classes as an apprentice or similar , but I suppose the days when a humble train driver could become the Prime Minister are gone .
He's basically too gutless to draw attention to men's issues because it isn't considered a vote winner- so men can just keep on killing themselves in their thousands each decade and not even get a mention when either government is in power.
On the rare occasion the issue of suicide is raised it is always presented in gender neutral terms- Suicide of young Australians, people or just Australians. They do the same with other issues which are overwhelmingly impacting men- like homelessness and workplace deaths. They refer to Australian or Victorian workers in all advertising around these issues.
And on ANZAC Day, a day once meant to commemorate the ultimate sacrifice of men in the many wars they have fought, women get to share centre stage in spite of the enormous disparity in deaths. One hundred thousand men and around 15-20 women. And women who have never served a day in a combat zone are still the focus of the crowd and cameras for helping to distribute aid in natural disaster zones or giving medical care. This year's ANZAC Day clash was dominated by women with the anthems sung by females, the medal after the game presented by a female, and as many female soldiers on the ground as men. It's an utter disgrace. There is no place where men are permitted to receive a modicum of praise or thanks without women having to be included.
Yet when we speak of domestic violence, we don't hear of Australians or people being killed or affected- suddenly the mentioning of the gender of the victims is of paramount importance- it is women, women, women and nothing but women in spite of the fact that a third of all victims are male! This is the only societal scourge branded a gendered problem. What they mean by that is it affects more women.
I am so sick of this vile game which nobody else seems to notice.
Good comment, the feminists even want to take ANZAC day from men , ignoring the fact that only men fought and died on the battle fields .This is an attempt to rewrite history ,as all totalitarian governments do.
The message is that men are not permitted to have anything which is exclusively theirs , women must be involved in all things . Now there is womens football and rugby ,but no one goes to the matches , spectator stands are all but empty, so the revenue is low , so then the women players complain that the men are paid more, and that’s about all women are good for these days ,complaining .
We should all thank our lucky stars we did not get sucked in and hooked up with a certain female Greens Senator! Now that would be pure hell!
I wrote to Shane Neuwmann Labor MP about my opposition to Family Court Legislation. Did not get a response.
This has become the pattern over time. I've always been well known by state and federal MPs wherever I've lived. Previously you would always get at least an acknowledgement. Now they're completely non-responsive more often than not. I've had staff admit they miss-filed documents deliberately. I've been told "it's too hard" more than once. Take on the federal Treasury on your own!
For decades our political classes have been acting to distance themselves from responsibility and obligation as much as possible.
Colour me shocked!
What a weak piece of work. They don't give a stuff about men. They are scum in my view- just as reprehensible as any KKK member in the deep south in the 1920's.
Feminists have political clout because they are perceived to represent the views of ALL women. If a politician disagrees with a feminist there is the idea it may lose you female voters ie. the "women's vote". Men (unlike women), as a group don't have political power as we are not organised in sufficient numbers. This allows politicians to ignore those few who do raise issues as it will not cost the politician votes. So much for the (mythical) patriarchy.
PS. I note that recently in the US the Democrats, due to troubling polling results, have felt the need to appeal directly to male voters after decades of indifference and at least a decade of disdain for anything male. Maybe it's a sign of change? Maybe men as a voting block are becoming more influential? Though in the case of the Democrats I suspect this is just a temporary act of political opportunism.
Good points , women have a ‘ Minister for Women’ but men don’t . The double standard is always there but as you say times might be changing . The next Federal election will be interesting , Albo is toast and Dutton must see a good opportunity to get votes of working class men who would normally be Labor voters.
Dutton was at Bathurst rubbing shoulders with the working class , he is not a motor enthusiast it was just a PR exercise ,but shows that he can see which way the wind is blowing. How far he is prepared to go is the question, will he promise sweeping reforms of the Family Court ? , I doubt it .
It is the same around the world, Mark. But there is one thing that does have an effect, and without it nothing - not a single thing - ever gets done. Perseverance.
I congratulate you on your perseverance. And don't be so sure that your efforts have done nothing. Without people like us talking straight to our politicians, those politicians will rightly conclude that nobody cares. Every politician knows that for everyone who expresses an 'adverse' view, there are thousands (they have an approximate number, down to the last digit) who feel the same. Knowing that even one constituent cares tells them that it is something they have to think about. If enough people get to the politician with a similar message, things really do happen: there is proof in the German men's movement; in the groups fighting against male circumcision in Africa (even though some have lost their lives in that fight); in the father's rights campaigns in Kazakhstan; and many others.
We can all feel disheartened from time to time (I know I do!) but there is great truism in the saying that the only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.
Who was the local federal member?
Aaron Violi. Here's a local radio interview with him about his background.
https://podcasts.yarravalleyfm.org.au/ep/718
I listened to that thanks Mark , the impression I got was that Mr. Violi will do little if anything to help the situation regarding mens suicide or any other mens issues . He attended university and it’s safe to assume he would have been affected by the strong feminist influence of most universities .
He is an example of the new generation of politicians , sycophants , yes men , afraid to rock the boat . Career politicians who will toe the party line just to keep their job.
The interview was interesting but , and I wonder how many times Violi says “community” this is the feel good phrase for politicians on the campaign trail, he appeared at charity events , volunteer fire fighting , sporting clubs , making a big man of himself .
But these are local government or state governments areas of control , a Federal MP should be concerned with the big issues, ie . the economy, immigration , defence , etc. what’s going on? The liberal party was once the business party , they got MPs from commerce and industry, successful business people, not lefty university dropouts, Mr Violi has more in common with Anthony Albenese .
I had a "Boris" situation a few years ago and may have posted it on this site back then. I was not on an aircraft, but a children's playground.
Whilst I was pushing my then 3 year old granddaughter on a swing, a little girl of similar same age was looking at me intently for a push on the parallel swing beside. I suggested that she instead asked her mum who was with a group of women, who also had kids in tow, and seated nearby. The mother after some time approached me and said something like, "you look like her own grandpa who gives her swings and "wizzies" and she would not have minded if I gave her a push". I did give my reasons and she told me that she understood and isn't it sad that we are paranoid with stranger danger. I did say to her though that it could be more sad for me if she had been someone who had otherwise complained and I ended up on a Register that may have even prevented me from being in the park in future, even with my own granddaughter! It was also one of those swings that require the child to be lifted up and placed in the seat with a safety chain secured.
I've already written to MPs to oppose the misinformation bill. Now onto the suicide & airline rackets. Thanks for all your good work Bettina! Your voice must continue to be heard.
Vivian,
Suicide of males does have some research, however there does seem to be some resistance to equate it with Family Court determinations, or otherwise separation of dads, or indeed mothers, from the children, at least on a very much reduced contact with their children after any separation. The fact is though that it is dads moreover that vacate the former family home and then live "elsewhere".
Any alienation from important "others" no matter in what circumstances does have a proven catalyst to produce behaviours that can lead to suicidal ideation from all concerned in family breakdowns.
Yes Vivian, there does need to be more research into this and for it to be front and centre with the Family Court and the "experts" who guide the mandated and binding determinations of their Worships.
I believe men should have their own section on airplanes to keep them safe from false allegations.
Unfortunately if that happened, and we did have our own segregated seating, rabid feminists would cry discrimination and invade that space as well. Look what happened with men only clubs and men's sheds!
Right on , but why stop there? Let’s have separation of the sexes for everything, where practical at least . It is here that the so called primitive people of the world might know better.
I agree with what you are worried about Bettina, how brave people like you speaking out about the issues affecting men across the spectrum could maybe fall foul of revised internet posting laws (ie the misinformation bill). I was previously a prolific UK poster myself mainly around false rape accusations as I was falsely accused of rape myself almost 20 years ago and I have seen first hand how the police / courts / government etc support criminal false rape accusers by calling them "victims" when there is ZERO proof they are (I was never charged in the end, but my false accusation was pre-metoo# so I am under no illusion I may have been lucky). I took a break from social media about 2 years ago but feel the need to return soon as things are not getting any better for us men!! How I approach it now is along the lines "how can I say what I want to say, but in a way such that it could never be seen as harmful, misinformation etc" and I do believe it is possible especially if you go back to the raw data to try and find the truth of the matter. Example - in the UK we hear there are supposedly about 60,000 rapes per year. I used to say "there are not 60,000 rapes per year" this is absolutely true, but now after researching it and understanding more about how the rape accusations are recorded, counted etc I express it slightly different - I would now say something like "there may be 60,000 rape accusations made per year BUT this is because in 2002 the UK Government changed how rape complaints were recorded, the UK Home Office mandated that all rape accusations would be recorded as crimes at the point they were made unless there is evidence to the contrary (this being obviously the presumption of guilt). However less than 3% of these accusations result in a court case, the number of convictions will be smaller even still. Therefore how can the claim there are 60,000 rapes per year ever be justified when the VAST MAJORITY of these claims are never tested in court" etc etc etc I am not trying to be clever, I am just playing the propgandists at their own game. I would stand by what I have wrote above because I have researched the issue for the last ~ 20 years so I know what I am talking about, and when people question me saying "there must be some proof a rape occured if it is in the statistics" I can point to the guidance on UK Home Office Crime Recording where they say "all accusations treated as crimes unless evidence to the contrary". I have the reciepts! I work with statistics and I know EVERYTHING the government says is rape propganda, It would be just as accurate to say there are 60,000 false rape accusations rather than say there are 60,000 rapes. If they are he said she said untested in court, how can what I say be disproven???? IT CANT BE. Just as it cannot be proven there are 60,000 rapes per year in the UK. I am just saying now I am playing them at their own game. it is all about lies, damned lies and statistics - but the "statistics" such as they are, are so basically meaningless it is possible to put any spin on them you want. *** I should say here, some rape cases are proven in court obviously, and I follow as many as I can and some convictions are just in my opinion, but he-said she-said uncorroborated rape accusations do not prove rape in my opinion, never did and never will. So any convictions occuring in cases where there is no corroboration - I have no confidence in them. So to be fair & honest I do accept some of those 60,000 rape accusations are genuine, but only if proved in court and with corroboration - anything else where a defendant is acquited or an accusation does not make it to court could be FALSE in my opinion. I keep meaning to raise this issue with the UK Office of National Statistics. I have seen them recently time and time again call out government claims on funding, climate change, COVID deaths etc as misleading and they state this in the national media, yet they continue to present rape ACCUSATIONS as actual rapes when all I have said above still stands. It is utter propaganda and they need called out for their double standards. As I say I think the reason I am so passionate about all this is 1) I was falsely accused of rape and, 2) I work with statistics and I can hand them their statistical asses and I would stand behind every word I say even on risk of prosecution as I know what I am talking about and can never be proven wrong - just as those propagandists can never be proven right. I plan to get more involved in these issues and the wider MRA soon so hopefully we will chat again at some point. BEST WISHES FROM THE UK - DOUGIE (a victim of a false rape accusation and someone who knows statistics)
We need more men like you, Doug, who are good with statistics and willing to do the homework to know how to challenge the lies that are promoted every day in our media. Maybe you should do a substack, publishing the info people can use to refute the misinformation. That would be a worthy public service! If you have time to help me, please contact me by email.
Good point.
If you start with the "esafety" website it is a good beginning:
On that site there are 10 tabs:
1.Key topics
2.Educators
3.Parents
4.Young people
5..Kids,
6.Women,
7.Seniors,
8.First Nations,
9.Communities,
10.Industry.
I guess that a Tab that excludes "Males" is a testament to the good work that the lassies who created it have achieved. Apart from that it is not a very good web creation.
Your research is also related to Bettina's 'Movember is Fake' article and by that I mean, I related this to looking at websites to see what is in the Content.. in this case there is no 'Male tab' so you knew instantly that they do not recognise Men and therefore any such websites alert me to not donate money to them. One sometimes has to dig deeper.
A political party here in Switzerland, new Socialist something, has a banner with someone carrying a placard that says 'down with patriarchy' or something.. to me that now means 'we hate men'.. therefore I will not vote for them...
Love it. I have taken a note of your comment. Some good wording there and I've recorded your comment.
I like this: 'but he-said she-said uncorroborated rape accusations do not prove rape in my opinion'
Yes, yes, yes...
Being a reader of Ayn Rand, I love this:
Question:What do you think of the legal doctrine which holds that the law is whatever a judge says it is?
Ayn Rand: This is the formula for tyranny, because if the laws are whatever the judges interpret, I don't see the purpose of having any laws at all.
It would simply mean that whichever the judges or the authorities decide at any given moment will determine what happens to the citizens of a country.
It is not a formulation of law; it's the destruction, the negation of the concept of law.
Law's have to be "fair" I think there is even something in basic Human Rights legislation the concept of "equality of arms". I dont think an uncorroborated accusation of any crime proves anything not just rape, but obviously there could be more false rape accusations than any other type of crime because there are 2 parties (at least) involved. My view is an uncorroborated rape accusation does not prove rape BUT if it does, then an uncorroborated accusation of having a false rape accusation made against you should be enough to prove a false accusation was made, what is the difference?? All the arguments of why rape is hard to prove apply equally to false accusations. So either give the jury the power to find either the rape complainant or the rape defendant guilty on uncorroborated accusations, or prosecute neither offence without corroborating evidence. It has to be fair but it is not fair at the moment. rape and false accusations are the 2 sides of the same coin, you cannot talk about one without talking about the other.
Bettina, may I suggest one correction? You say "That’s from over 800 million domestic flights!” but I believe you mean “over 800 million passengers” rather than flights. I just searched for this data myself and saw the number was about 819.3 million passengers across all domestic US flights in 2023.
Whoops, my mistake. I have fixed that . Thanks for pointing it out .
Hillary Clinton currently is backing the U.S. version of the 'Misinformation Bill', so clearly this is a concerted Aussie/American effort to finish-off the last of our civil liberties under the usual cover of Total Safety for Women. You're not AGAINST women being safe, are you, Mr. Pre-criminal? Aaaand etc.
At least the Aussie measure is correctly named: Miss Information. That, in truth, is the society the anglo nations now have. All our institutions and all our public modes of information are radically feminist, and the juggernaut just keeps on rolling.
Feminism is totalitarianism. We are there, already.
Australia is broken! and as for India, pity the young straight girl sat next to an older dike! (ya can't make this stuff up!)...Keep fighting the good fight Bettina...
So now the rabid feminists/man haters are claiming groping is rife on airlines! What's next for us men? mandatory wing seats for all men (on the actual wings) goggles provided for free to ensure our comfort! Aircraft seats are packed in like sardines in a tin. How often have men had to endure a women's breasts pushed into his face when a big woman taking a window seat gets up to go the loo? I have never ever inappropriately and unwelcomely groped a women/girl in all my life. After my divorce, at singles dances, I was covertly groped at least 3 times each event by women. Flattering maybe, no big deal definitely, cheeky absolutely!
A few years ago I was flying Melbourne to London on Qantas with my 81yo mother. She had mild Altzheimer’s. A woman on the other side of the aisle was rocking her baby, side to side, to stop it crying. It didn’t work: clearly the child’s ears were causing the problem, due to reduced cabin air pressure. The 5 month old shouldn’t even have been on a plane.
After a couple of hours, the woman scowled at me, complained to a flight attendantess that I was ogling her breast, & she was consequently upgraded to business ckass. Having kept us awake for hours, it’s we who should have been upgraded, or at least moved.
It is appalling that she wrongly assumed & stated that I wished to ‘ogle’ her fat body.
"We saw this with the eSafety Commissioner’s claims that women are “almost always” the major victims of online abuse; ignoring the risks to men and boys of sexual exploitation".
On the surface this is an outright lie from the commissioner. All online data - including from Google Inc (which is very DEI), shows that the split between online abuse is 55% men and 45% women. And further that 50% of the abuse women get is from other women.
I don't know the original quote but the term 'major victim' is slippery. Should a man receive 2 abuses for a woman's 1 is she still the 'major victim' because her abuse was 'nastier'? I'd love to see the reasoning that supports this commisioner's statement.
" I'd love to see the reasoning that supports this commisioner's statement."
I immediately spoke out loud: insanity and power grab.
Pink rows on planes will have the same effect as women-only gyms. They'll exploit the privilege, then still sit in mixed rows and claim on tik tok that they're being harassed. Joey Swole has some fixes for this approach already...
Thanks Bettina for raising awareness on this important issue.
"“Unless you are prepared to press your arm against the man’s — which will allow you to feel the rise and fall of his breath and is, I feel, too intimate a connection with a stranger — then you have lost two inches of your seat."
What happened to a stoic acceptance of some inconvenience and forced intimacy as part of the nature and responsibility of using any sort of shared public amenity?
I was once flew to the US (from London) on a business trip in economy with two colleagues. Unfortunately it was a full flight and I was seated next to a truly massive gentleman in the middle of a row of seats. He overflowed the arm rest and pushed me sideways against the opposite arm rest and my colleague. Both my colleagues were extremely amused and took the piss during and after the flight. I endured firm physical contact with this individual for the entire flight. The flight was full and I therefore endured the contact without complaint as being just part of life. I would have welcomed contact with just his arm. This was contact all along my shoulder and down the side of my body from rolls of fat. It would have been just as unpleasant whether the overweight passenger was a woman or a man but in the real world we sometimes have to accept discomfort as being part of the price of society and getting along with other people, or at least that is what I believe.
A concern about the risk of sexual assault on a flight is bizarre. An aircraft is certainly a crowded environment in which strangers are necessarily packed cheek by jowl but its an exceptionally public space with readily accessible assistance. Its therefore far safer than most environments with assistance no more than feet away. The incredibly oversensitive and inaccurate perception of risk by women in society is very depilating to women and society as a whole. Women are far less likely than men to suffer a physical attack, Most men under most circumstances (rightly) do not let the worry of being attacked constrain their activities yet women who are far safer perceive the risk as being so high as to preclude everyday activities such as walking, running or cycling alone. Less than one woman in a million is murdered by a stranger in the UK each year. The chance of falling down the stairs and dying at home is more than 100 times greater yet which fear do women alter their behavior to avoid?
This whole situation is quite concerning. We do need to respond/take action
I’d love you all to get active on the misinformation bill, plus the very important suicide policies - plus the airline issue! Lots of homework for everyone.
I would much prefer to sit next to a male and breath in his after shave, than a female who has bathed in perfume. What I do not understand is that we are being indoctrinated with "diversity" and "inclusivity" and yet males are being almost excluded from being part of society. I for one will not be sitting in a pink row and, heaven forbid, the airlines go to the extent of a rainbow row!
"I would much prefer to sit next to a male and breath in his after shave, than a female who has bathed in perfume."
Makes you wonder what they're trying to hide.
Long story short: as a gay man I was recently excluded at my own dinner table because some people refused to continually speak the language I need to obtain citizenship with (German) but they kept reverting back to Local Dialect. All guests were part of the acronym LGBT......... a week later I was deep in the awareness and understanding of what was/has/had been going on, I was furious... the next party I requested that people speak so that I was included.. the responses were mixed.. I wasn't asking for their Blood...