From “naïve” to “dictator” — and what that contradiction reveals
By Wonder Out Loud. (From my substack feed)
In January it will be three years since Jacinda Ardern stood in front of the country and announced she was resigning as Prime Minister.
It’s one of those moments I can still locate precisely in time and place. A road trip. A van. A group of people — not all of them sharing my appreciation for her. I was shocked, but not really surprised. After reading Julia Gillard’s Not Now, Not Ever, her resignation felt less like an unexpected event and more like a grimly familiar pattern.
Three years on, we are still subjected to an endless stream of reckons. Columns. LinkedIn essays. Substack posts. Mostly written by men. Many of them seething. Increasingly unmoored from evidence. Repeating the same arguments with rising intensity, as if saying them often enough might finally settle something unresolved.
Recently, one such LinkedIn post tipped from critique into something closer to farce — a collection of exaggerations, insinuations, and moral absolutism dressed up as “empirical analysis”. It wasn’t original. It wasn’t persuasive. But it was revealing.
Not because of what it said about Ardern — but because of the emotional force still driving the need to say it.
Which brings me to the question that now matters more than any post-mortem:
Why, three years later, are so many men still so triggered by Jacinda Ardern?
Let’s start by being clear about something.
I am not suggesting that legitimate criticism of Ardern’s government is out of bounds. Progress on housing could have been faster. Productivity may not have shifted in the way many hoped. For some, crisis governance concentrated power and stretched democratic norms. These are real issues, and they deserve sober, proportionate analysis.
But context matters.
Ardern governed for six years. Half of that time was dominated by COVID — a once-in-a-century global crisis that forced governments everywhere into emergency trade-offs. Before that, her first term included a terrorist attack that reshaped national security and social cohesion overnight, followed by a fatal volcanic eruption. This was not a normal governing environment.
No government would have emerged from it without scars, compromises, and unfinished agendas.
Acknowledging that does not explain everything. It simply places decisions back into reality, rather than fantasy governance conducted in calm conditions that never existed.
What we are seeing now, however, goes well beyond proportional critique.
What stands out is the disproportionate intensity, the moralisation, the fixation. Not just “she made mistakes”, but “she was illegitimate”. Not just “policies failed”, but “this must never happen again”. Not disagreement, but delegitimisation.
The focus of the hostility is not the Labour government. It is not a cabinet, a caucus, or even a governing programme. It is her.
Not “Labour did this”.
Not “the government failed there”.
But Jacinda Ardern — personalised, singular, endlessly re-litigated.
That is unusual. That pattern has a name.
It is called misogyny.
Not casual sexism. Not name-calling. But status-threat misogyny — the hostility that emerges when a woman exercises authority in a way that disrupts deeply held expectations about who should lead and how power should look.
Ardern still triggers some men because she:
- didn’t need their approval
- didn’t perform submission or masculine hardness
- exited power on her own terms
- remains respected internationally
That combination violates a persistent, largely unspoken rule:
Women are allowed power only if it is provisional, apologetic, or punishing.
She was none of those.
She did not perform dominance or posture toughness. She governed from a care-based position, using relational authority, moral language, and collective responsibility — with dignity and humility — and became widely respected, at home and abroad.
For some men it seems, that is not just uncomfortable — it is intolerable.
In many neoliberal and libertarian frameworks, economic power is treated as the most legitimate form of authority. Wealth, markets, and ownership are framed as rational, earned, and morally neutral — the great meritocracy. Social and positional power, by contrast, is flattened or denied. Everyone is “just an individual”, and any reference to gender or structural advantage is dismissed as emotional or ideological.
Ardern’s authority did not come from economic dominance. It came from democratic mandate, persuasion, coordination, and care. That kind of power is harder to recognise if you are trained to see legitimacy only through markets and hierarchy.
So the reaction is not simply policy disagreement. It is a threat response. And when that threat is not consciously acknowledged, it leaks out as anger dressed up as objectivity. “This isn’t emotional.” “This is just the facts.” “This is empirical.”
But ordinary policy critique does not behave like this. It does not require repetition, escalation, and moral panic three years aftere after the person has left office.
In the end, Ardern did not fail in the way women are often expected to fail. She was not exposed. She was not disgraced. She was not forced out. She named exhaustion — something women are rarely permitted to do in positions of power — and stepped away. And then she left the country.
For some men, that remains an unresolved ending. A woman who was not punished. Who did not apologise for existing. Who remains visible and respected. So the reckoning continues, long after the office has been vacated.
So yes — critique the policies. Debate the trade-offs. Learn from what worked and what didn’t.
But let’s stop pretending that what we are witnessing, three years on, is simply rational analysis.
What is interesting, three years later, is why some people still need her to be the villain — and why that need is so emotionally charged, so persistent, and so gendered. What does that tell us about how power, gender, and legitimacy are still understood in Aotearoa?
That, to me, is a conversation worth having. Because until we name this dynamic honestly, high-stakes leadership will remain conditional — and women will keep paying the price.
It’s quite simple
Read the comments here but take a bucket to spew up your breakfast
https://wonderoutloud.substack.com/p/why-are-so-many-men-still-so-triggered/comments
I was wondering how long before the author went to the non-argument and screeched “MISOGYNY!”
So, the author could have done us all a favour and simply said “MISOGYNYNYNY” rather than wasting further atoms on her word salad.
I’m sure the author can find some “men” that were and are misogynists and also disliked Ardern, thus, she can erect her strawwoman argument. The actual reasons are longer and more varied.
She was a dictator in all but name. Her “Captain’s Calls” were dictates by another name. The only thing against this argument is she ran away. I’m sure had she remained popular in 2022, she’d have ruled with an iron fist while pretending she was kind and caring.
Hypocrisy. Ardern was a hypocrite. She was neither kind nor caring.
She wasted a huge sum of public money.
She pandered to the international audience.
She was a Marxist trying to implement Marxism.
Hipkins, her fixit man, was a disaster. So, no, not everything was Ardern’s fault. Hipkins can shoulder a large chunk of the blame.
I go enter Ardern into more depth here: https://nominister.wordpress.com/2025/09/27/jacinda-ardern-new-zealands-marxist-saint-and-soft-fisted-dictator/
Oddly, no one has mentioned the arch bully Mallard. He was right there with those tw,o and then of course we had Cossy Coster failing to up hold peoples rights. Thank goodness he is gone. another Marxis,t along with his mate, the State Services commissioner.
if the hatred towards ardern is all cuz misogyny then that must mean all the hatred toward trump is all cuz misandry.
Hipkins was a stupid fool perched on her shoulder, living off her fame.
Because he has no charisma of his own, he is what ever you want him to be.
Because he is th ultimate nowhere man. He a shape shifter, morphs into what you want.
“He a shape shifter, morphs into what you want.”
Only the ones dumb enough not to see Chippie’s perpetual lies.
Chippie’s not clever enough to be politically savvy so dodges, weaves and lies to impress the unwary. Shit floats and he’s full of it, plus Labour doesn’t have any competition.
Was exactly the same conditions for the toothy kwean of suicidal empathy to rise as dear leader.
That’s even more depressing for what it says about Luxon…if Hipkins has no charisma.
I did document his shift from Fabian to Marxist Socialism, for what’s it is worth here:
https://nominister.wordpress.com/2025/09/14/chris-hipkins-wearing-fabian-cloak-wielding-critical-hammer/
Exactly. If Chippy can be polling as good as Nudenut, it’s not saying much about nudenut
It also doesn’t say much for the people who were polled.
Running out of time for a change!
How many notional mp’s want to return to the unemployment line?
“This was not a normal governing environment.”
Covid – engineered crisis. And up to the point she needlessly introduced mandates and vaccine passes, I was merely pissed off with the bint and her woeful “leadership”. After that, and her two classes, “Yip,, yip, that’s what it is”, I was risible.
Mosque attack – an opportunity for her, not a disaster. Someone can correct me here, but wasn’t it her changes to gun licence screening that allowed it to happen?
White Island – a relatively minor natural disaster with horrific consequences for a limited number of people.
“It is called misogyny.” No. No Prime Minister, male or female, had ever up to that point cost me my livelihood, a relationship with my child, prevented me from seeing my mother in her declining years or humiliated me by making me too unclean to even set foot in a fucking Hell’s Pizza because they had seating.
No, it’s not misogyny. It’s a visceral and primal hatred for an utterly vile person; a fraud who conned gulls like the piece’s author.
And that’s where I’ll stop, because I resent myself for wasting any more of my life even thinking about her.
”visceral and primal hatred for an utterly vile person”
I’m with you – yep, that’s what it is.
Hmm, you said it better that I did. May I use that phrase?
Ah, I came across that individual’s posts during my brief time on X.
Thought at the time that “Wonder in Silence” would have been a blessing upon us all.
I agree!
‘She did not perform dominance or posture toughness. She governed from a care-based position…’
Oh, bollocks!
I am assuming Wonder Out Loud is female with blue hair and an almighty chip on her shoulder about the unfairness of the ‘gender wage gap’ – I bet she’s a delight at parties.
To be fair, l would have disliked her just as much if she was a bloke.
^ this
how long ago was muldoon ffs, mention that name and it still triggers the same reaction as ardern.
It seems the person behind Wonder Out Loud is clueless on how to make a point, not just on Ardern (MISOGYNY!), but in general.
I thought I’d take a gander at her take on Fascism: So… I Listened to How Fascism Works – Wonder Out Loud
She literally says nothing. It’s about a book she’s read (sorry, “listened to”). Does she quote anything? No. Does she say how the NZ government uses “fascist tactics”? No.
It’s bereft of anything. About the only skill she has is typing words without making an argument.
She’s a completely vacuous person.
what drives the anger is leftarded fuckwits who praise her and say she was driven by kindness, care and empathy without acknowledging/realising it was all fakevand just part of an act to push her brand.
had it been actually genuine i dont think there wouldve been anywhere near the backlash… oh and massively dividing society, wasted billions and giving away the country to maori dosent fucking help either.
FUCK JACINDA ARDERN!!!
Why, three years later, are so many men still so triggered by Jacinda Ardern?
[1] Not just men, but women too. The writer left that out so that criticism of Ardern can be labelled “Sexist” and “status-threat misogyny“. I know plenty of women who think Ardern should be behind bars, and they often get triggered more than their husbands when talking about her.
[2] Women tend to be more emotional. especially because of the unique child birth bond they have with their children, and rightly so. If there was no emotional bond, they would not look after their children. So when a mother sees people dropping dead from the vaccine, especially young children or any adult in a similar age range to their grown children, it fires up their emotional protection instinct.
You get conversations like: “That young chap, we know him, and he dropped dead on the football pitch and he is 2 years younger than my oldest.” Or: “We have been to 5 funerals in as many months for friends far younger than my husband and I.”
Knowing that your death is dictated by some nasty game of Russian Roulette, with no way out, and knowing your turn may be next, will put most people into a state of fear. So it would be a normal reaction to be triggered by the person who loaded the bullets, forced people to play, and wandered off, “Scott-free”, and tens of millions wealthier in dirt money,
If the writer or her friends had been viciously and repeatedly gang raped, would she be calm and collected, if said gang were wandering around free as if nothing happened?
[3] And emotional protection instinct clearly lacking in Ardern which makes you wonder whether her own offspring is hers. Any mother with a mother child bond, would instinctively recoil with the thought of injecting children with an unknown substance, especially given from OIAs that she knew early on about the side effects from Pfizer’s own data, and data that Bloomfield had.
[4] So this title of this article demonstrates the writer is either infatuated with Ardern, or is being paid to write this article.
No government would have emerged from it without scars, compromises, and unfinished agendas.
[5] Any Govt that saw the Covid / Vaccine agenda for what it was i.e. a global scam, emerged without scars, compromises, and unfinished agendas, except where trade and finance was was impacted by counties that drank the Koolaid.
[6] Apart from the targeted Covid Bio-weapon release sites in various countries, most countries were simply experiencing the flu. NZ is touted as “having the best response and outcomes with Covid.” Horseshit. We are $200 Billion in debt, and we never had Covid. The testing was all theatre. Massive sting operation, While the country was locked down, Ardern and her lot stole the silverware.
[7] The majority of people I interact with in the health system, now acknowledge the carnage from the Vaccines, and that new diseases, turbo cancers, and other side effects from the vaccines are putting enormous pressure on the health. Especially as many health professionals who saw through the scam, have moved overseas, shifted occupations away from health entirely, stayed in health but exited front line services, moved from public to private practice, or taken early retirement. And most will no go public, because they know that whistle blowers get fired, de-registered, hounded, vilified, fined or even imprisoned.
[8] The retirement part is significant, Like many professionals it is a vocation as much as a job. For many in health from the older generation, it is also a calling. Most experienced health professionals don’t call it a day on their 65th birthday. Many want to still contribute and it is not unusual to find experienced health professionals working well into their 70’s. When the mandates were enforced and people stared dropping like flies from the vaccines, huge numbers over 65 simply stopped working.
Women are allowed power only if it is provisional, apologetic, or punishing.
[9] Anyone is allowed power that earns it through honesty, integrity, and truth. Three qualities which Ardern does not possess. Expecting a communist/fascist dictator to be honest and sincere is like expecting the Scorpion to not sting the frog; or Billy Bunter not to eat the cream buns.
Didn’t read the whole article as its written by a twat. Nor the comments. But the reason I fucking hate that bitch with every fiber of my being has got nothing to do with the fact that I have a penis. It is quite simply because of what she said, what she did, and what she continues to do. I hate Hipkins with the same intensity. For the same reason. She divided the country, became a dictator with sole access to “truth”. She destroyed the economy. I could write screeds on her tyranny. I won’t as many have already done so. So as to the stupid woke seemingly erudite twat that wrote the drivel above, go and interview people like me, and many of my female (real woman, no penises), friends who feel exactly the same way.
“We are your single source of truth,”
The sheer arrogance implicit in that statement turned my dislike for the Arch Bitch into loathing.
“yep, yep, that is what it is” followed by that toothed smirk was a big one aswell, then at her presser explaining the relaxation of covid rules when she urged kiwis to respect others personal choices when it came to mask wearing (meaning dont mock the covidiots that still chose to wear them) how fucking fucked was that when her and her karen and ken covid nazis had just spent 2 fucking years doing anything but respect the personal choices made by us dissidents.
once again, and it cant be said enough… FUCK JACINDA ARDERN
That statement is so anti-science, anti-truth, anti-logic, anti-research that the entire country should have just said “Bollocks.”
Totally agree & “bollocks” was the reaction at Chez Nasska.
But the Mad Queen held influence at an emotional level rather than one grounded in science or facts. Ardern’s support from younger females was unassailable.
“Women are allowed power only if it is provisional, apologetic, or punishing.”
I have said many times that although I disliked Helen Clark, I respected her as a capable Prime Minister and as a leader in general.
So I’ll fix the sentence:
“Women should only be allowed power if they aren’t incompetent, narcissistic, cunts.”
yeah what ever
( but it still fucked the cunT tree because its a silly cow… eh !
…maybe put bag on it and do the bizO
got be worth hand job..while the pet gimp does another nanny
oh and in future you’ll refer to it with full accepted title “Comrade Dame..”
(he he ..yep…still use the bag …and get a hand job…then do the nanny after the gimp..
wouldn’t be the first porridge stir…for the day
me being so proud and all ..eh
Best sak Mr Hunty on the procedure of doing the ugly ones!
Wouldn’t touch it with yours Mr Sooty
Don’t ever, ever comeback!
We don’t like you
Unfortunately..I truly hope she dies a painful death for what she inflicted on a country and its people.