Male Politicians and Female Policies

[zohrab]

(This message can also be seen at http://blackribboncampaign.comoj.com/datedpol.html )


If you look at the ministerial positions and opposition spokespeople of male, as compared to female politicians, a pattern emerges -- in New Zealand, at least. I expect it applies in many other countries, as well.

See the table at: http://equality.coolpage.biz/datedpol.html#table1


The above policy areas have to do with benefitting the whole population economically -- both male and female -- and the spokespeople and Ministers are overwhelmingly male (19 males to 2 females). The Green Party is the exception, accounting for the only female spokespeople in the whole table.

Now, compare that with some policy areas where there is more scope for treating men and women differently:


See the table at: http://equality.coolpage.biz/datedpol.html#table2


In these areas, the females outnumber the males (7 males to 10 females). Here the Labour Party is the exception, with the male spokespeople (only just) outnumbering the female ones.

Another instructive thing to do is to search the party websites for the words "men" and "women". Here are the results (as at 22 October 2013):


See the table at: http://equality.coolpage.biz/datedpol.html#table3


Now, the fact that the word "men" occurs does not necessarily imply that the relevant document is about men. Since all these parties have spokespeople for Women's Affairs, but none for Men's Affairs, it is likely that many of the documents are really about women, and just include men for the purposes of comparison.

The point here is that all these parties have more or less Feminist agendas, by which I mean that they are more or less conscious of a perceived need to increase the number of female Members of Parliament (MPs), but they have no apparent inclination to promote policies that benefit men, unless they also benefit women.

You might think that, when/if parties equalise the number of male and female MPs or of male and female spokespeople, then they will finally turn their attention to balancing their pro-female policies with an equal number of pro-male policies. However, the example of the Green Party proves the opposite. The Greens have eight female MPs and only six male MPs, and, in the areas mentioned above, they have more female spokespeople than male spokespeople. However, the table on searches of policy documents (above) shows that the Greens are much more anti-male in their policies than are the parties with proportionately more male MPs and spokespeople.

Since the dominant ideology (a form of software that runs on people's brains) in New Zealand -- and elsewhere -- is Feminism:



There is an emphasis on equality of numbers of men and women in leadership roles, but the issue of having equal numbers of pro-male policies and pro-female policies is ignored, because policies are already overwhelmingly pro-female, which is what the Feminists want;

Equalising the numbers of men and women in leadership roles (e.g. MPs and Parliamentary spokespeople) does not result in an equalising of the numbers of pro-male and pro-female policies, as the example of the Green Party shows us. It results in Female Supremacism as regards policies;

Therefore, men should concentrate on preventing male-female equality as to leadership roles, because it just results in Female Supremacism as far as policies are concerned;

Once Feminism dies out, this issue can be revisited. However, the MUC (Media-University Complex) is the engine which imposes Feminism on people's minds, so the media and the education system must be reformed, before Feminism can be eradicated.


Peter Zohrab
--
http://blackribboncampaign.comoj.com/
http://newmalestudies.com/OJS/index.php/nms

[&]

truth comes out you dont really want equality for men so everything
you say is double talk real agenda is save white middle class from nz
niggers . im right