Pages

Saturday, May 2, 2026

Rodney Hide: Media’s Intersectionality Trap - Māori Wahine Trumps Gay White Man


TVNZ Political Editor Maiki Sherman — the first Māori women to hold the job — repeatedly shouted the homophobic slur “faggot” at openly gay journalist Lloyd Burr during a pre-Budget drinks event in Finance Minister Nicola Willis’s parliamentary office on 13 May 2025. Multiple witnesses, including parliamentary staff and journalists from rival outlets, confirm the exchange was loud, ugly and disruptive enough to shut the gathering down. Sherman claims it was retaliation for a racial slur; Burr denies it. The facts are clear enough: a senior state-funded journalist used a vile anti-gay epithet in a professional parliamentary setting.

For nearly a year the story stayed buried. No headlines. No breathless panels on Q+A. No demands for resignations or Press Gallery inquiries. Only rumours and whispers. Now that independent journalist Ani O’Brien has dragged it into daylight on Substack, the silence from the rest of the media is deafening.

This is not incompetence. It is intersectionality at work. In the progressive hierarchy of the oppressed, identity is destiny. A Māori woman sits near the top — indigenous, female, person of colour. A gay white man, however, occupies a lower rung: his sexuality earns him victim points, but his whiteness and maleness drag him down. When the two clash, the Māori woman remains the protected victim. Sherman can hurl a homophobic slur and the media class simply looks the other way. Individual behaviour does not matter. Group ranking does.

This is the same ideological virus that has infected Parliament, the universities and the state broadcaster. For years we have watched journalists lecture politicians about “standards,” “bullying” and “hate speech” while operating under their own two-tiered moral code. A National MP makes an awkward joke and it is front-page news for a week. A senior TVNZ editor drops a gay slur in the Beehive and it vanishes into the memory hole. Why? Because criticising Sherman would require the media to admit one of their own — elevated precisely because of her identity — behaved worse than the politicians they spend their days hounding.

Libertarians have warned for decades: once you sort citizens by group identity instead of individual conduct, you destroy accountability. Free speech, free markets and parliamentary democracy all rest on the same principle — judge the person, not the tribe. Intersectionality inverts that. It turns journalism into a protection racket for favoured groups and a weapon against everyone else. The Press Gallery protocol demanding journalists “not undermine the dignity of Parliament” suddenly becomes optional when the offender ticks the right identity boxes.

New Zealand’s media has spent years importing American campus nonsense about power-plus-prejudice. Now the nonsense is biting them. A Māori woman can call a gay colleague a faggot in the corridors of power and the commentariat shrugs because, in their hierarchy, she is still the victim. This is not journalism. It is ideological enforcement.

Taxpayers own the broadcaster. We shouldn’t. It’s bad enough their hypocritical moralising to the rest of us but to have to pay for it is altogether too much.

Ani’s substack is far better value.

Rodney Hide is former ACT Party leader, and Minister in the National-ACT Government from 2008 to 2011. This article was first published HERE

13 comments:

Anonymous said...

And did you hear about James Shaw getting beaten up in the Wellington CBD, and Ardern’s car getting run off the road? They didn’t bleat about it, they just got on with it. There was a time we had masculinity in our leaders, no complaining, just getting to work for kiwis. Some of these snowflakes in the current term are too wishy washy for this voter’s tastes.

People were up for the job in the old days.

Anonymous said...

And Ani O’Brien calls people “retard”. What’s your point?

Allen Heath said...

I make two comments Rodney: Sherman is only part-maori, an important distinction, and hardly a point of note as far as her job is concerned, and neither she, nor other part-maori are in any way indigenous. They are descendants of settlers from the eastern Pacific islands whose ancestors migrated there from somewhere east of China. If you think it is important to offer these descriptors of Sherman then it is important to get the facts straight.

Anonymous said...

Allen. Statistically, all so called " Maori " are only part Maori, as described in a previous BV article, the interbreeding with
" others" resulted in the last full Maori in the 1970s.

Allen Heath said...

Anon@9.10, statistically (and actually) that is so, and I was aware that no full maori exist today. My point is that by always referring to part-maori as maori, as they do themselves, only serves to obscure the important remainder of their genetic heritage and reinforces the divisive nature of that ethnic error.

Anonymous said...

Anon @ 8.13. Unsure if that is true or not. There is a massive difference tho, if that is true.
Firstly, Ani is not protected by her colour. Secondly, she is not protected by the system, because of her colour. Thirdly she is not protected by anything because she is a European woman. And lastly, and this is the point, everyone is happy to target ani, just not Maori Sherman. Those defending Sherman are promoting disgraceful hatred because of skin colour. These are the true evil racists in our society, although they will present as victims and claim hard done by - that's the left for you.

Anonymous said...

Anon 1025 likes the right slurs and dislikes the other slurs. It is a slur-by-slur situation for her.

Anon 1025 also disbelieves some slurs and believes other slurs. There is consistency in their approach to slurs even though they are inconsistent in her approach to slurs.

It is our civic duty to defend those who cast slurs on minorities and at the same time it is our duty to tear down the slur users.

Anonymous said...

Those abhorring the slurs used by one journalist must also abhor the slurs used by other people.

If they didn’t do that, they are a hypocrite.

If they are a hypocrite, their have no credibility.

People with no credibility say things all the time. It doesn’t mean we should pay heed to what they say.

In the days before the internet, there was a price on the printed word. How things have changed.

Looking forward to tracking Ani’s use of slurs to attack others over the course of the coming year. Keep it tight, Ani!

mudbayripper said...

In the post modern world, you can be anything you like.
Unless you happen to be a white straight male.

Anonymous said...

Anon 12.58 the pendulum is swinging hard against people like you. The hypocrisy of the left, time is limited.

Anonymous said...

Narcissists play the victim while making attacks on others the make into victims.

Anonymous said...

No one has had it tougher over the course of history than white men. Brothers in arms with musbayripper

Anonymous said...

I don’t mind Ani O’Brien’s hypocrisy. Anything to get the attention away from National’s failings is fine by me.

Post a Comment

Thank you for joining the discussion. Breaking Views welcomes respectful contributions that enrich the debate. Please ensure your comments are not defamatory, derogatory or disruptive. We appreciate your cooperation.