(Open Letter to the Prime Minister)
Dear Jacinda Ardern,
Rhetorical Questions
-
I am a Men's Rights activist, and my most hated enemy is a news
organisation, which is called "Stuff".
How can this be?
-
There was a
newpaper article about me, in which the term "Men's Rights
Activist" was put in quotation marks, whereas the term "Feminist"
is never put in quotation marks. How
can this be?
-
-
The media have apparently made no attempt to find out why they
hated the media. How can this be?
-
I also note that
the Government is funding news organisations, including Stuff,
and most of them are enemies of mine. How
can this be?
Answers
-
In its article, "Our
Truth, Ta Matou Pono: Stuff introduces new Treaty of Waitangi based
charter following historic apology," Stuff admits that
it is a powerful organisation in its own right and that it has "had
an enormous impact in shaping public thought in New Zealand and
societal norms, not just reflecting them."
However, it goes on to pretend -- ludicrously -- that it is capable
of examining itself, finding unconscious bias and then correcting
it. If bias is unconscious, then -- by definition -- you can't
find it! In fact, all that has happened is that the new owner
of Stuff has rejected some of the biases of the previous owners
and decided to promote a different set of biases. What Stuff
says the previous owners did to Maoris it now does to men, as the
previous owners did too; it promotes negative stereotypes
of men and marginalises pro-male attitudes. Media organisations
decide which issues and stories to report on and which to ignore,
which points of view to present in articles, which opinions to feature
in opinion articles and which actual campaigns to mount (if any).
All these decisions can be -- and are -- subject to the influence
of bias: anti-male bias. Moreover, it is against the
public interest for media organisations to publish opinion articles
or to mount particular campaigns. People
are duped into reading, watching, or listening to the media in order
to to be informed about the news -- and then find themselves ambushed
by whatever biases, opinions and campaigns that the media happen
to favour. Of course, the media are notoriously
Leftist and yours is a Leftist government, so you may be quite happy
about that. However, that is anti-democratic and sooner or
later the superficial, consitutional trappings of Democracy will
disappear, when enough people realise that the actual substance
of Democracy has disappeared.
-
The term "Men's Rights Activist" was put in quotation
marks, because the Feminist media do not accept the legitimacy of
the notion that men have rights. Only women have rights in
Feminist countries such as New Zealand.
-
The recent encampment
of protesters at Parliament hated the media because the media
are powerful and biased. The media create a cultural environment,
in which certain views -- the ones which the media promote -- are
regarded as fashionable, normal, common, standard and moderate.
This makes opposing views seem unfashionable, abnormal, uncommon,
deviant and/or extreme. This results
in the victimisation of people who hold views which are not publicised
by the media, as I have myself experienced repeatedly.
For example, the women's organisation, TV3, ran a text headline
on its AM Show on 8th March 2022 about prominent women mounting
some campaign about so-called "gender-based violence,"
which is unscientific, anti-male hate-speech and dog-whistle.
See: References Examining Assaults by
Women on their Spouses or Male Partners.
-
The media have apparently made no attempt to find out why the
protesters hated the media, because the media know that the media
are biased and don't care. They enjoy their power to promote
agendas which serve their own self-interest or increase their own
self-esteem as supposed "do-gooders", supporting women's
privileges against men's rights.
-
The Government is funding news organisations, because most of
the media favour Left-Wing policies, and the
Government is composed of Left-Wing parties. Government
propaganda states that "The $55 million Public Interest
Journalism Fund will support New Zealand’s media to continue
to produce stories that keep New Zealanders informed and engaged,
and support a healthy democracy." That is a lie.
It is mere propaganda to talk about a "healthy" democracy,
without explaining what that is supposed to mean. It is extremely
unhealthy for the biased media to dominate New Zealand politics
and the protest at Parliament was a symptom of how sick the New
Zealand political system is.
-
Here is yet another example of Stuff's anti-male bias. On
Jan 04 2022, Stuff ran the story, "Pensioner
describes nightmare living on same street as gang associate."
I sympathise with the pensioner, but I wnat to focus on the following
sentence:
"Neighbours said in recent months there had been many
parties attended by patched gang members, seen fighting among
themselves in the yard and assaulting women...."
Notice the sexist double standard.
The patched gang members (males) are described as "fighting
among themselves", whereas, if a female is fighting with a
male, the situation is described as males "assaulting women"!
Since you probably still don't understand the point, it is that,
if two people (male or female) are fighting, it must have started
with one of them assaulting the other. However, the biased
report does not talk about patched gang members being seen assaulting
each other or men and women fighting. It assumes that any
fight between a woman and a man starts with the man assaulting the
woman. There is research proving that that is not true.
See: Women Who Initiate Domestic Violence.
The article also contains the following sentence:
"The pensioner had woken one night to find a woman had
broken into her lounge through her locked front door,"
so only sexist female entitlement would cause the neighbours or
Stuff to assume that gang women are always victims and gang men
are always perpetrators.
-
Here is another example of Stuff's anti-male bias. Stuff
ran the article, "'Irresponsible':
Rape survivors' advocates Louise Nicholas and HELP slam TVNZ's Craig
McLachlan interview," which attempted to stop TVNZ
airing a (very rare) pro-male interview. Stuff itself interviewed
only advocates for the Feminist viewpoint. So Stuff not only
churns out Femnist propaganda -- it also actively tries to prevent
any other viewpoint receiving any publicity!
-
-
As a final example of Stuff's anti-male bias, there was
an "Opinion" article called "Do
not comment on your girlfriend's thong bikini". Stuff
has no democratic right to promote certain opinions over the opinions
of other people. What makes Facebook, Google and the rest
of the Internet so democratic is that there is much more equality
and less bias than there is in the mainstream media. Stuff
is basically a women's organisation, so -- in true Feminist-Matriarchal
style -- it runs an article where women give orders to men about
what to do in their private lives!
Official Information Request
Under the Official Information Act, please inform me what plans the
Government has to ban Stuff, or to force it to abandon its orgy of anti-male
propaganda.
Yours sincerely,
Peter Zohrab
|
