NZ women's refuge CEO says KJK "inflamed people with her rhetoric"

[JacquelinePot]

The Platform NZ has been doing excellent coverage all week on KJK's trip to NZ and the violence of so-called activists meted out against women.

This interview is with Ang Jury, CEO of NZ "women's" refuge. They have 40 refuges across NZ each with 6-15 staff. C1000 referrals p/w. They are 75% gov funded.

Angry says at 7 mins 30 thebjost asks about "transwomen" in refuges. Ang says yes, "transgender women" are part of the vulnerable population ie women do are welcome. Apparently there have been "no issues".

At 13 mins he says "Auckland was VAW". Ang concedes it was "ugly" but "she [Ang never says KJK's name] had inflamed people with her rhetoric" and "there's a whole lot now blame that can be attached", both sides etc.

Of all the people who should be standing up for women. Ffs.

Oh FFS - KJK and women who just wanted to speak or listen are partly responsible for the violence perpetrated against them. Does she realise how ridiculous that is?! Let’s hope that’s a view she doesn’t take into work with her.

On the ‘no issues’ with TW in the refuges (taking that at face value), I guess there is no measure of the number of women who self-exclude - so they don’t count. Will be really interesting to see how Beira’s Place is able to meet women’s needs once it gets up and running, and how big the need is for a women only refuge

If that woman had kept her mouth shut and not stood up for women's rights, then violent men wouldn't have had to break a woman's foot and another woman's skull and behaved like animals.

Yeah yeah, we've all read Lundy Bancroft, we know about abusive woman-battering men and their warped thinking.

Actually, if said men weren't assaulting women's rights and oppressing them, they wouldn't have to say things that made men cross. But that would involve logic and equality of thinking, and that isn't really in the abuser script.

And yes: how exactly in the numbers of women who die weekly from domestic abuse are we going to identify the ones who would have lived if they'd been able to go to a refuge?

But couldn't because men wouldn't permit them an accessible space because ego.

This is so disturbing - does she also think that victims of domestic violence are to blame for their abuse?

Yeah, it sounds very much like "she caused them to do it" which is an abuser's line.

Attention, women! Your safety is in your own hands. Don’t ever say anything that might hurt men’s feelings … and then perhaps they won’t physically attack you. See how easy it is?

So, head of woman’s refuge says “She asked for it” when asked about violence against a woman.

I have no words.

Which is just as well, as apparently women are only allowed to speak if they do so to agree with men.

Sounds like Ang Jury is making KJK's case for her. If misoynists - or men, or people, or bullies, or whatever she's alleging - in New Zealand cannot control themselves when inflamed, then isn't additional protection indeed needed? Or is this brand new news - and if so, should NZ police be instructed to do their jobs next time women want to speak?

Not sure if Ang mentioned it or not but (victim-blaming aside), it would be interesting to compare the levels of "inflammatory" language from KJK vs from the NZ media. The latter were extremely high, and often involved outright lies (the blurred "touch-your-zip for white-supremacy" incident).

Given that there's also a crossover between the rioters and the "NZ media" - e.g., Shaneel Lal, the exemplary "Young New Zealander of the Year" who ripped down the barricades and tweeted telling people women were unprotected in Arthur Park and to come join - writes a column for the NZ Herald, which is the same paper who published the 'Trojan horse' and "let's pretend Georgina Beyer was a misogynist" cartoons. Lal's columns have also included takes that might very reasonably be considered inflammatory. I hope whatever blame is being dished out is being fairly shared.

This

This is where gender lies gets women

I’d vote on this issue any day. No chance do I want to ho the same way

Fucking hell. Thanks Aunt Lydia.

She says

52,000 referrals. Stock standard. A wee bit of an increase year on year is expected, financial problems will drive this up.

This is what she's saying.

One woman goes in to let women speak and a public display of violence is the response.

No group of men get a pass.

I'm glad everyone else is horrified, too. I had to watch it twice because I couldn't believe my ears

Oh yeah refuge and that woman deserted their duty to help women escape male violence a long time ago. Like I’ve been saying, NZ is a bad place to be a woman. It’s hard to speak up in a small country, it happens way too slow and meanwhile a lot of women and girls will suffer.

By that I mean that refuge isn’t just for females so how is it safe for women? It’s not.

Christ, she sounds like an MRA.

'Woman inflames men by being present'.

@Whaeanui yes, it's awful. "Women's" anything is not when includes men. The dishonesty of it makes me want to puke.

So she asked for it?

Fuck me 2023 and still blaming women when men put their hands on them.

Woman says things men don’t agree with and ‘inflames’ them!

Gosh! I wonder if she realises what she has said?

The "she was asking for it" defence. How nice. Hope she's fired for that. Don't say that lightly.

So an actual specialist in the field of domestic violence - a woman with decades of direct experience helping vulnerable women and their families - is directly stating that one of the commonly used arguments against the transgender community is in fact a load of old shite.

This is another example pf the unhinged and insane rhetoric of GC ideology being undermined by reality.

Ah I see the NZ women’s refuges are not for women then but for women and men with womanly feels. I’ve no doubt any woman who had the temerity to complain about a TW in their refuge would be told to reframe their trauma. Can’t have the men upset can we?

i Would bet my mortgage that accepting men (TW) is a condition of funding in NZ

So you think that attacking someone physically who doesn't agree with you is justified? If I went out and attacked trans people for saying things I didn't agree with would that be ok to you too?

This woman works in the field of domestic violence and is excusing violence - she's an embarrassment. As for unhinged and insane - look in your own back yard.

She’s said after a woman is assaulted that she inflamed the situation? And this is a person whose opinion on the safety of women we should listen to? Who should be in charge of protecting women who seek help from refuge? Who thinks that they’ve had no problems, so what, all the women must be ok with it? We’ve seen what happen to women who say that men are not women and they don’t want to share spaces with them, they get assaulted. Punched. Demonised by media. Piled on by politicians. As if any women escaping abuse wants to speak out if she sees a male in refuge in this climate

Woman who is attacked for holding a rally where local NZ women speak of their concerns and experiences = they deserved it = Fred Sargeant deserved to be severely beaten because he peacefully protested that an event he was instrumental in started has changed and he doesn’t agree with the new guiding principles.

Yes. We do see where some posters are coming from.