Home > Issues > False Allegations > Feminist Religion Outranks Science

The Black Ribbon Campaign

Empowering Men:

fighting feminist lies

Feminist Religion Outranks Science

Peter Zohrab 2021

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


(Open Letter to the Prime Minister)


Dear Jacinda Ardern,


I am aware, of course, that Parliament is sovereign in New Zealand. However, as King Canute is popularly believed to have found out, there are limits even to sovereign power. One version of the King Canute story states that he tried (and failed) to stop the tide coming in. It appears that our Parliament is also trying to over-rule scientific fact by using Feminist doctrine.

I am writing to request that you consult your Chief Science Adviser with regard to whether it is appropriate -- or even sane -- for Parliament and/or judges to lay down the law about natural phenomena.

In a letter dated 21 June 2021, the Ministry of Justice states that clause 16 of the Sexual Violence Legislation Bill would insert a new section 126A into the Evidence Act 2006, which would require the judge to give the jury any direction the judge considers necessary or desirable to address any misconception relating to sexual violence that is relevant to the case. The Ministry directs my attention to subsection (2), which includes a non-exhaustive list of misconceptions that may (but will not necessarily) be relevant.

Whatever is listed in subsection (2) if/when the Bill becomes Law, the problem is that there must be some authority which is deemed to know the "truth" about the particular aspect of sexual violence in question, so that the truth can be differentiated from misconceptions. I would think that the relevant authority would be Science -- specifically, Psychological Science. Judges are learned as regards the Law and Parliament has a lot of practical knowledge about politics, but neither judges nor Parliament are experts on sexual violence, as a naturally occurring human phenomenon.

The part of subsection (2) which concerns me particularly is the mention of the following type of "misconception":

(aa) about the prevalence or features of false complaints in sexual cases.

There has been a lot of research on false complaints in sexual cases. For example, Rumney ("False Allegations of Rape", Cambridge Law Journal, 65(1), March 2006) presents a selection of findings on the prevalence of false allegations, where the percentage of rape allegations determined to be false ranges from a low of 1.5% to a high of 90% (see my attachment, which is a cut-and-paste, because the table is split between two pages).

This is a complicated area of research and it seems to me to me absolutely obvious that neither Parliament nor any judge is competent to choose one of these research results (or any other research results), determine that it is the one true figure and decide that any other result constitutes a "misconception."

However, it is important to know where your Government stands on this King Canute-like issue. Under the Official Information Act, could you please state what the "correct" view of both the prevalence and the features of false complaints in sexual cases is, such that any other view constitutes a "misconception."


Prevalence of False Allegations (table)

See also:




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




Peter Douglas Zohrab

Latest Update

29 June 2021