Speaker by Various Artists

Read Post

Speaker: Not even a statistic

146 Responses

First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Newer→ Last

  • Russell Brown, in reply to Paul Campbell,

    (hats off to the ODT for both giving us the search terms and telling us it is legal to use them).

    Indeed.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 22007 posts Report Reply

  • Rosemary McDonald, in reply to Paul Campbell,

    (hats off to the ODT for both giving us the search terms and telling us it is legal to use them).

    I have always had a soft spot for the ODT.

    At the risk of the sky falling and a plague upon my house I did....I went there...and, minor surprise... but not.

    This is what they mean by Rape Culture.

    Waikato, or on the road • Since Apr 2014 • 1256 posts Report Reply

  • steven crawford, in reply to Rosemary McDonald,

    This is what they mean by Rape Culture.

    And This spot the difference.

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 3682 posts Report Reply

  • Emma Hart, in reply to Rosemary McDonald,

    And if anyone suggests the LINE is an artificial contruct….that, say a 15 year old CAN give consent to sexual activity…..then where would YOU put the LINE?

    There's a long and thoughtful discussion about problems with the age of consent here. I don't really want to get into it on this thread, because this thread is about rape. The case we've been discussing would be rape regardless of the age of the victim.

    Christchurch • Since Nov 2006 • 4589 posts Report Reply

  • steven crawford,

    I had a quick flick thru a ministry of social development study, that actually asks children about there own experience of disciplining techniques in the home. The way it was. There is now no legal defense against using violence to force your own children to do what you want them to. That is a blow to rape culture, right there.

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 3682 posts Report Reply

  • Sofie Bribiesca, in reply to steven crawford,

    Well that made me feel sick. I actually stopped short of reading the whole thing. Whats up with people?

    here and there. • Since Nov 2007 • 6796 posts Report Reply

  • Rosemary McDonald, in reply to steven crawford,

    Most abused children know the difference between a smack as part of the disiplinary process and abuse.

    No, edit.

    All abused children know the difference.

    Just ask an abused child.

    Waikato, or on the road • Since Apr 2014 • 1256 posts Report Reply

  • Sofie Bribiesca, in reply to Paul Campbell,

    so close to an election I bet as soon as Rodney made his suggestion she got a call from NP head office.

    YUk yuk and yuk. The head office will only be soiling their name if they would do that. It makes a mockery of anything she says now.

    here and there. • Since Nov 2007 • 6796 posts Report Reply

  • Craig Ranapia, in reply to Paul Campbell,

    I can see why Maggie Barry seems unlikely to use her parliamentary privilege here, so close to an election I bet as soon as Rodney made his suggestion she got a call from NP head office.

    Oh, go away Paul. Perhaps Barry doesn’t take ethical advice from that particular corner (who would?), especially in the form of a pretty obnoxious attempt to co-opt her harassment in one hell of a patronising concern troll of a column? Which, when you get down to it, is just dick privilege in action.

    And perhaps, Paul, #notallmen can pay #yesallwomen the baseline respect of not denying them agency over their own actions.

    YUk yuk and yuk. The head office will only be soiling their name if they would do that. It makes a mockery of anything she says now.

    I’m going to regret asking this, but why? If Rodders knew who this guy was when he was in Parliament why didn’t he do the naming and shaming? Why doesn’t he do it now – apart from the simple reality that The Herald on Sunday wouldn’t publish it, and his column would be dumped like a hot turd if he did it anywhere else and was convicted of breaching name suppression?

    North Shore, Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 12328 posts Report Reply

  • DeepRed, in reply to Craig Ranapia,

    Google pretty much does all the explaining in this case. There seems to be a pattern with these 'prominent public figures' - that they can effectively buy their name suppression with a fat chequebook.

    The southernmost capital … • Since Nov 2006 • 5261 posts Report Reply

  • Craig Ranapia, in reply to DeepRed,

    There seems to be a pattern with these ‘prominent public figures’ – that they can effectively buy their name suppression with a fat chequebook.

    Well, let’s have that discussion without buying into bullshit like this:

    Forget Rolf Harris, Maggie. He’s behind bars. Do the right thing and name this self-confessed offender in Parliament. Do what Parliamentary privilege allows: make right what our justice system got wrong.

    Name the sexual predator under privilege and enable other possible victims to come forward. Some of your colleagues know who he is. Ask them. Or me.

    You, Maggie, can do what no other New Zealander can do: you can name him.

    Where the fuck does Rodney Hide get off telling any harassment/abuse victim to shut up about their own experience, and move on to taking about what HE deems important in a manner HE dictates?

    The ODT described that column as “goading” Barry. I’d just call it “trolling” and guys, we’ve just got to stop it. To coin a phrase, it’s not OK to put the responsibility for jamming abuse culture on victims. It's not OK for us to be telling #yesallwomen what they should talk about, and when and how. It's not OK for anyone to co-opt people brave enough to talk about their experience of abuse and harassment into their own political agendas. Not ever. Not even a little bit.

    North Shore, Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 12328 posts Report Reply

  • Rosemary McDonald,

    So, if a person is convicted of rape/sexual assault, and the victim demands that the rapist lose any right to name suppression, then name suppression should be automatically lifted.

    Regardless of what the wriggly arsed, slimy, bottom- feeding, scum- sucking lawyers demand, or what the Judge (who was formerly a lawyer) decides?

    That would go a wee bit towards changing the culture.

    Waikato, or on the road • Since Apr 2014 • 1256 posts Report Reply

  • DeepRed, in reply to Craig Ranapia,

    The perk-buster turned perk-feeder doesn't seem to realise that parliamentary privilege might not actually trump contempt of court.

    All the same, it wasn’t all that long ago that Martin Devlin was in court for various misdemeanours. Before his name was revealed, John Campbell, Simon Dallow, and Mike McRoberts were all rumoured to be the “46-year-old in court”.

    The southernmost capital … • Since Nov 2006 • 5261 posts Report Reply

  • Sofie Bribiesca, in reply to Craig Ranapia,

    If Rodders knew who this guy was when he was in Parliament why didn’t he do the naming and shaming?

    Oh yes I agree, my point being without naming the dickwad was if National gave her direction if she wanted to name under priviledge it would make mockery of the whole thing. I'm disgusted he got away with not being named for so long.

    here and there. • Since Nov 2007 • 6796 posts Report Reply

  • Craig Ranapia, in reply to Sofie Bribiesca,

    Ah, thanks for the clarification Sofie! Makes a lot more sense than my initial read.

    North Shore, Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 12328 posts Report Reply

  • Jason Kemp, in reply to Craig Ranapia,

    Rodney Hide left parliament in 2011 before the results of the Court of Appeal and the other legal actions were complete.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 319 posts Report Reply

  • Sofie Bribiesca,

    Ah, thanks for the clarification Sofie! Makes a lot more sense than my initial read.

    I just don't understand why people will sit amongst others knowing their history and carry on like it isn't important to address. If it's condoned with prominent people its condoned, period.
    I asked my friend at our local dairy/cafe one day if he had noticed the customer because he was outside talking to us. He said yes and carried on the conversation. I then heard him say to said person, "I know you are there I'm busy". After he had finished our conversation (taking some minutes) he went and served the man begrudgingly . As a manager I would advise to serve customers first and so when he returned I asked why he didn't want to serve him, it was blatantly obvious. He said the man had recently returned from jail. He called him a kiddy fuker.He felt only disgust which was why he didn't want to serve him. I then understood. It needs to be discussed at every level.

    here and there. • Since Nov 2007 • 6796 posts Report Reply

  • Sofie Bribiesca, in reply to Jason Kemp,

    This was obviously not a one off incident ,if you read between the lines.

    here and there. • Since Nov 2007 • 6796 posts Report Reply

  • Jason Kemp,

    Thanks to Katrina, Emma and the other brave women here who have shared their stories. It is distressing to hear their experiences of the legal system. As a law graduate(a very long time ago) I am mortified that the legal system and the wider culture is still so obviously hostile to victims.

    The prominent Otago man case referred to earlier is an example of a privileged person buying name suppression. Very few people have the resources to overturn a conviction by going to the Court of Appeal and then getting referred back to District Court for a discharge without conviction AND permanent name suppression.

    I’m shocked and dismayed that conversations I had at university in the 70’s and 80’s are being repeated 40 years later. I thought we had moved on as a society.

    I hope we are not giving up on the idea of changing culture for the better. Surely there are some standards of behaviour that we as a society can aspire to.

    I’m also thinking of a recent example of sexism in the media. I also don’t want to sidetrack the conversation but it seems to me that these topics are part of a larger continuum.

    In that example viewers seem to be letting Paul Henry “off the hook” because they expect a lower standard of behaviour from him. I don’t think that is OK.

    If rape culture is about entitlement then Paul Henry needs to be called out too.

    I looked up the code of ethics for Media Works and it is all about business dealings none of it is about respecting other people.

    The Broadcasting Standards Authority programme allows for complaints on several grounds for example but it does seem very vague.

    Good taste and decency.
    Fairness
    Discrimination and denigration

    And a number of other elements but the difficulty is that Joe Public seems most of these items as a matter of opinion.

    Has there been any research on the “Its not OK” campaign in whether it has been successful in changing community attitudes towards family violence ?

    I hope so and I hope that all of us can change NZ culture for the better.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 319 posts Report Reply

  • Rosemary McDonald, in reply to Sofie Bribiesca,

    My kids were outside playing on our fenced suburban section. The dog barked...passerby alert. And bugger me, there's Fred (not his real name) strolling on past. Now I knew Fred...in the professional sense, when he was under strict parole conditions after being convicted of raping a nine year old girl...who of course had asked for it.

    The last I had heard of Fred( about three years earlier) was a newspaper report of him being convicted of raping a three year old boy. Fred's MO was to befriend a solo mother and get into the kids.

    So, I phoned the local constabulary...bless them... gave Fred's name and suggested the officer looked him up on the database. " What would you do if he was walking down your street.", I asked. " find out where he is hanging out and warn them!"..."Errr...you're the cop, you warn them".

    You can see where this is going.

    So I did. And he moved on....to the local dump/recycing depot. More kids...again I intervened.....busy body me...told the site manager, fended off his attack on my character by telling him if ANYTHING happened to a child after me warning him...then I would make damn sure everyone knew he had been warned.

    Next time, he was chatting with kids in the local shopping centre. More of Rosemary sticking her beak in...but you know what????

    I don't give a shit what anyone thinks.

    Predators like him must be kept off the streets, or have a sign on their foreheads...something...because once we know who these people are....we can at least have a chance of keeping children safe.

    Rest easy.

    Fred's dead.

    Waikato, or on the road • Since Apr 2014 • 1256 posts Report Reply

  • Paul Campbell, in reply to Craig Ranapia,

    Oh, go away Paul. Perhaps Barry doesn’t take ethical advice from that particular corner (who would?), especially in the form of a pretty obnoxious attempt to co-opt her harassment in one hell of a patronising concern troll of a column? Which, when you get down to it, is just dick privilege in action.

    Craig - this is an interesting case in that it's hard to talk about the subtlety of what Rodney's doing here - especially so close to an election - you're right, he's trying to goad Maggie to do something, something that IMHO she might want to do personally but her party likely doesn't want her to do (for reasons that we can't talk about here because of the past history of the person who's identity is being suppressed) - it's a particularly interesting game to play so close to an election - of course he could equally ask any opposition MP to do the same thing, but he hasn't.

    I'm not naive enough to think that think Rodney has pure motives here (is it revenge for past slights? an attempt to remain relevant? his need to get on the radio every so often? who knows)

    The real story though isn't Rodney - it's that the system has conspired to protect this horrible man - and that's rape culture handed down from the highest parts of our judiciary to protect the good old boys

    Dunedin • Since Nov 2006 • 2524 posts Report Reply

  • steven crawford, in reply to Rosemary McDonald,

    So, if a person is convicted of rape/sexual assault, and the victim demands that the rapist lose any right to name suppression, then name suppression should be automatically lifted.

    I suspect that the prominent Otago man, was not convicted, in which case you can’t just demand he be named because you are pissed off. It could be that he is guilty of the crime, but was discharged without conviction. It is within sentencing law, that reparations are able to be claimed by the court, as the punishment, without needing to record a conviction. That part of the sentencing law is there for situations when a conviction will be more punishing than the normal penalty for the crime. IE,when the offender trades on celebrity status, and the gravity of the offense is concided, by the court, to be less than the fall out after a conviction.

    Another time this section of law might be used is when someone commits a minor crime , such as careless driving ( fender bender) when they have a clean slate from previous crimes. And that if a conviction is entered, the clean slate would automatically unlock, and the reformed criminal might lose there job.

    More than that I don’t know, because I have know idea what actually happened. And despite my own personal experiences driving some very strong emotions around sexual violence discussions, I resolve to, to best of my ability keep a cool head, and not pic up a pitch fork. Vigilantly justice has no place in civilized society. Nether does the rape of women.

    PS: please don’t just react.

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 3682 posts Report Reply

  • Rosemary McDonald, in reply to steven crawford,

    I think I failed to make myself clear....

    What I mean't to say was, "** if a person is convicted** of rape/sexual assault, and the victim demands that the rapist lose any right to name suppression, then name suppression should be automatically lifted."

    I was not speaking about some scrote from Central Otago.

    I was making a rather pathetic attempt to get back to the topic of Rape Culture in NZ, and ways of perhaps shifting the balance so that at least some of the _power_ is in the hands of the victim.

    Rather than a pitch fork.

    Waikato, or on the road • Since Apr 2014 • 1256 posts Report Reply

  • steven crawford,

    I think I failed to make myself clear….

    Sorry, that was my bad.

    There is however, something that you said, up thread, that I really don’t understand. Did you read the study about child discipline? And do you think it is relevant to this discussion?

    Its hard to know when I’m getting out of whack sometimes.

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 3682 posts Report Reply

  • Rob Stowell,

    Thank you Katarina. And Emma, Jackie – everyone who is opening the door on this national skeleton-in-the-closet.
    There are some nasty elements in our kiwi "blokiness". “Man up” people say. And “don’t be a blouse.” “Whadarrya!”
    There’s arrogance and entitlement. And there’s fear, too. Being singled out for group contempt -especially as a teen – can be terrifying. And fear is surely a big part of rape culture.
    We’ve got a long way to go. Big thanks for starting these conversations which are surely steps in the right direction.

    Whakaraupo • Since Nov 2006 • 2003 posts Report Reply

First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Newer→ Last

Post your response…

Please sign in using your Public Address credentials…

Login

You may also create an account or retrieve your password.