Home > Issues > Fake News > No Evidence from Feminist Lawyers and No Statistics from the Feminist Media -- when it comes to Core Propaganda Issues
The Black Ribbon Campaign

Empowering Men:

fighting feminist lies

No Evidence from Feminist Lawyers and No Statistics from the Feminist Media -- when it comes to Core Propaganda Issues

Peter Zohrab 2022

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


I have written about bias in the media and in academia -- see, for example, my book Sex Lies & Feminism.  There has also long been a feeling of angry mistrust (in many countries) about the legal system (and not just by men and fathers).  Franz Kafka, for example, once wrote a fairly paranoid novel about the legal system: The Trial.



There is a noticeable lack of evidence emanating from lawyers and a lack of statistics emanating from the media -- when it comes to their core propaganda issues, such as Feminism.  Of course, neither of these two sets of professionals should be allowed to disseminate propaganda, because Democracy depends on them operating the legal and media systems in an unbiased way.  The fact that they do disseminate Feminist propaganda is a key failure of Democracy.

  1. Here is an example from the TVNZ programme, Q+A, which screened a Feminist propaganda item called "The third wave of feminism".  This programme interviewed no males, apart from one teenaged Feminist male, and no Anti-Feminists, apart from one woman who disputed the statistics involved in the so-called "pay-gap".  In response to that woman, you can hear the former lawyer, Green Party Member of Parliament, Golriz Ghahraman, state (at 4 minutes and 30 seconds into the video), as follows:

    "It's almost like the fight is harder now, because we have to prove that the pay-gap exists."

Oh no!  Fancy lawyers, activists and politicians actually having to PROVE anything!!  What she means is that previously Feminists could simply rely on being well-organised, mounting demonstrations and having the media and the education system chock-full of Feminists, in order to get their anti-male proposals turned into laws. In fact, that is still largely the case.  Bear in mind that she was once a lawyer involved in war-crimes trials.  There is nothing wrong with her having done that job; every accused person deserves a lawyer and you can't just assume that every accused person is guilty or that they deserve the maximum sentence!  However, if she doesn't believe in proving things, no accused person would want her as their lawyer!

  1. Here is another example, involving Law lecturer, Dr. Grant Morris:  In one lecture that I attended as a student, he stated that Domestic Violence was a "women's issue". This, of course, is a Feminist way of claiming that men do not suffer Domestic Violence at the hands of women. I asked him what evidence he had for this claim, and he was so taken aback that I had time to repeat the word "evidence" and even to spell it out: "E-V-I-D-E-N-C-E" ! He looked for help -- in vain -- at a group of Feminist bimbos in the audience. I then referred to Professor Martin Fiebert's annotated Domestic Violence bibliography, which shows that women are at least as violent towards men as vice-versa.  This is a typical example of the Ms-information which dominates our media and education system. 

  2. Here is another example, involving Lianne Dalziel, a Feminist politician at both central and local government level.  She was also once a lawyer.  I once presented a submission at a Parliamentary committee which she was a member of.  The issue was the ability of pregnant women to keep on working until close to the expected time of their babies' birth.  I said that pregnancy had a negative effect on women's performance at work, but Dalziel disagreed strongly.  I offered to give her the details of research evidence to this effect (see, for example: '"Pregnancy Brain" or Forgetfulness During Pregnancy'), but she refused to look at the evidence!  In fact, she got so angry at my wanting to discuss the evidence that she glared at me when we next met (in the Law Library of Victoria University of Wellington)!

    I once saw a pregnant television presenter being suddenly affected, while speaking, by a movement made by her baby.  I have also met a pregnant woman, whose job required her to drive a car and walk to various places.  She complained that her pregnancy made her "waddle" and slowed her down.  It did not seem to occur to her that she was being paid the same amount of money to perform her work inefficiently as others were being paid to perform the work efficiently!  Since she was a woman, she felt entitled to perform her work inefficiently and still get paid the same as previously!


The Media

As I have pointed out previously, the Black Lives Matter movement is sexist and racist.  Statistically, the discrepancy between the US police shooting rates for males and females is VASTLY greater than the discrepancy between the rates for Blacks and Whites.  So, statistically, it should be a Men's Lives Matter Movement, rather than a Black Lives Matter movement!  However, US Blacks are a powerful pressure-group, whereas men (as a group) just lie down and let women walk all over them.  And the media are basically a political coalition of Feminists, ethnic groups (especially Maoris) and Non-Heterosexuals.  So the media almost never refer to the statistics.  Instead of that, they just report individual cases, implying that those cases are typical.  This usually means that they report the case of an individual Black man and then report on the Black Lives Matter demonstrations which often follow police shootings of a Black man.  In other words, the media are supporting the Black Lives Matter movement.

However, I once saw a news article entitled "How a young Kiwi making heart signs was shot dead by US police".  He was a White male, but the media still reported his fate!!  How can that be?  The answer is obviously that this was a case of a New Zealand media organisation reporting the fate of a New Zealander in the USA.  So, from the media's point of view, he was "one of us."  Otherwise they would not have reported the event.

On TV One, on the Midday News on 5th August 2022, Chinese female presenter, Jenny Suo, reported that a Black woman in the USA had been shot by police.  Apparently, the police had been trying to shoot her boyfriend.  Why did Jenny Suo report this event?  She is not particularly attractive, so she is probably a Feminist, and reported on this event in order to show that Black women, as well as Black men, are shot by US police.  Jenny Suo is a woman and the person who was shot was also a woman.  From her point of view, then, the woman was "one of us"!

The New Zealand media are a political coalition of Feminists, ethnic groups (especially Maoris) and Non-Heterosexuals.  So they present propaganda that serves the interests of Feminists, ethnic groups (especially Maoris) and Non-Heterosexuals. 

The next day (6th August 2022), a female reporter on Al Jazeera presented an item about the Ukranian army, emphasising that the soldiers were volunteers.  Maybe so, but men of fighting age are not allowed to leave the country, so there is obviously pressure on them to "volunteer".  Why would they be prevented from leaving the country, if there was no pressure on them to become soldiers?  Again, a female journalist was presenting propaganda in favour of her fellow-women, downplaying the deaths and suffering and oppression of men.


See also:


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




Peter Douglas Zohrab

Latest Update

29 October 2022