(Open Letter to the Prime Minister of New Zealand. Slightly edited.)
Dear Mr. Key,
While your government is cutting spending all over
the place, you keep throwing money at the Ministry of Women’s
Affairs, a taxpayer-funded, anti-male research and lobbying group. This group
has been using men’s taxes to advocate placing more women on boards,
and this has resulted in a concrete proposal from NZX to the Financial Markets
On 10th July 2012, I sent the following email to email@example.com, with the
Subject: “Disclosure relating to Board Composition Proposal”:
Could you please immediately disclose to the New Zealand public:
the exact contents of your proposal to require companies to disclose
the sex composition of their boards;
the names of all the Men's Groups and Men's Rights Activists whom
you consulted in the course of reaching your decision;
the reasons that caused you to make your proposal;
the legal authority under which you make that proposal;
the number of your male Directors and male members of your Management
Team who discussed this issue with their female partners or wives -- potentially
making a de facto female majority on your Board, given that two of your
Directors and two of your Management Team are already female.
So far, I have received no reply from NZX, which is being hypocritical,
by demanding disclosure from others, while making no disclosure itself. This
is exactly the kind of hypocrisy that I am sure that many women will implement,
once placed on boards.
Since I had sent copies of my email to various people, I received an acknowledgement
from one of them. That one was your Minister of Women’s Affairs. Now
obviously her reply was a sort of warning that she would be taking action
to counter the effect (if any) of my email. On 17th July, an unknown woman
I passed in the street told me that I should read that day’s Dominion
Post (which I happened already to have a copy of). In it was an article by
a Women’s Affairs official entitled “What gets measured gets done.”
The obvious message was that, if you publicized the proportion of women on
each board, that would make it easier for feminists to press for an increase
in that proportion.
In that case, could you please send me a copy of every submission you have
received from the Ministry of Women’s Affairs that argued for the creation
of a Ministry of Men’s Affairs, so that men’s needs and rights
could be measured, so that men’s needs and rights could have something
done about them?
The point here is that Women’s Affairs is an example of what happens
when you give women power: they are hypocritical, they use one argument in
one context and the opposite argument in another context, and they act against
the interests of men.
Since you continue to fund the Ministry of Women's Affairs, you
are acting against the interests of men.
The Financial Markets Authority (to which NZX sent its proposal) is responsible
to one of your Ministers. I hope that your government makes sure that the
NZX proposal is thrown out by the Financial Markets Authority.
Apparently, NZX used the argument that women spend more money than men do,
therefore more women need to be on boards. That does not follow, necessarily.
Spending money is a form of power. It makes advertisers pander to you, and
the advertisers’ money controls the media. Why do feminists always complain
that men earn more than women, if it is women who are spending most of the
money? What power does it give men to earn most of the money if it is the
women who actually spend it?
To balance the spending power of women, their power over the media, their
power in the education system (which is fast becoming a male-free environment),
their power to harass anyone they don’t like from their domination of
the receptionist and service-worker sector, etc., men should keep some levers
of power. I could (and probably will) write a book about how women abuse whatever
positions of power they have to pursue anti-male, feminist agendas, while
mouthing the word “equality” from time to time.
Here is just one example, on the webpage: http://equality.coolpage.biz/pubenemy.html
which shows a female police officer using taxpayer money to buy an advertisement
which accuses men in general of various types of negative behaviours, while
treating women as without fault:
Many men use children to regain control over the relationship when
Family violence often stems from a belief that women and children
are the property of men;
Boys model their behaviour on that of their violent fathers;
It is often what is happening to the children that motivates a
women (sic) to seek help;
Girls can be withdrawn and fearful.
Personally, I think that all you understand is votes.
Therefore, if the NZX proposal goes ahead, I promise you that I will campaign
for men to abstain at the next general election. Since you are apparently
more popular amongst men than among women, if men abstain they can put you
out of office, and the National Party may elect as Leader someone who is prepared
to take men seriously. There is no point men voting for Act or the Conservatives,
because that will just put you back in power in a “coalition”
of some sort.