I happened to be home this afternoon and tuned into QT, which turned out not be QT, of course.
I saw the PM in full flight, accusing Tony Abbott of being sexist and misogynistic, while implicitly supporting the purveyor of clearly leud and inappropriate text messages, Peter Slipper. Not a good look, especially given the fact that Slipper was never going to return to full Speaker duties and now he has resigned.
According to Julia Gillard, “I will not be lectured about sexism and misogyny by this man, I will not. Not now, not ever.”
Note the term “this man”, which many would see as offensive when delivered in the chamber. Where was his title, Leader of the Opposition?
Sadly, no one has ever given Gillard a lecture about sexism and misogyny, because she clearly does not understand their meaning. And the examples she trotted out were truly pathetic. Now Tony Abbott is also responsible for placards waved at demonstrations attended by him. And then there is his perfectly legimitate objection to abortion being thrown at him as an example of his hatred of women. Really? There are many man and women who do not support abortion but in no way hate women.
Julia’s pal, Peter Slipper, clearly does knows what it means to be misogynistic because he fits the definition only too well, judged by his text messages, which he noted were private. Good one, Pete.
I must have been watching another channel from Anthony Sharwood of The Punch who brazenly declared that “To use a modern phrase, Tony Abbott just got “owned”. He was utterly torn to shreds by the finest performance Julia Gillard has ever delivered on the floor of the House of Reps.”
Is he kidding? Owned, my arse. And torn to shreds? By shrill, inaccurate and misinformed comments?
The really troubling implication of this showdown is that Gillard will now mispresent any criticims of her peformance and the performance of her government as examples of sexism and misogyny. She will play this card, even if it is the lowest trick in the book, constantly portraying herself as a helpless victim. A sad day for feminism.
Come off it, Julia. I say just suck it up.
I often have criticisms levelled at me and I take these as indicative of the person’s opinion of my work. That’s fine. I am happy to fight back, but I do not regard what is said or written as sexist at all even if the comments are expressed in personally abusive terms, which is sometimes the case. If you put yourself out there, it is only reasonable to expect attacks and criticisms. So be it.
It is even more important in the case of elected officials. In a democracy, they must be held to be accountable and criticism is part of the processs. It is neither sexist or misogynistic just because the Prime Minister happens to be a female.
At least Paul Keating’s tirades were sometimes funny. Gillard shrieked and played the victim. Imagine any previous PM having a sook about placards at a political rally.
What was that Abbott quote she was banging on about? Something about women possibly not being able to be authoritative? Well, suffice to say, for the sake of women in Australian politics, we need less Gillards and more Thatchers.
Feral Abacus
9 Oct 12 at 9:35 pm
She has forever forfeited any right to accuse anyone of sexism or mysoginy.
The minute she does, her opponents merely have to trot out the references to her Waterloo today and it is game over.
I suspect she is Dead-PM-Walking already.
Leigh Lowe
9 Oct 12 at 9:51 pm
I want Abbot to do her slowly. No puns! Just shades of PJK.
.
9 Oct 12 at 9:53 pm
By the way, Judith, the most recent example I can think of of anybody being “owned” was a certain Mr John Butler on ABC last Friday on the matter of James Price Point Gas Plant.
He started out being quite patronising towards you (like you were his deaf forgetful aunt) but you subtly dis-assembled him and handed his arse back to him on a plate.
Excellent work …… and Julia could take notes in how to demolish an opponent’s arguments.
Leigh Lowe
9 Oct 12 at 9:56 pm
Didn’t this appalling woman once suggest that women who are housewives were prostitutes?
JC
9 Oct 12 at 9:58 pm
Emma having a good go at Tanya Pelagic on Lateline.
Pickles
9 Oct 12 at 9:58 pm
Julia Gillard passionately supports the robbery of female hospital workers, the sexual usage of women with stolen money, the destruction of other women’s marriages, sex slavery and torture for asylum seekers, the drowning of boat people and today she insisted that all women are c—nts. She also voted for a motion describing all wives as whores while at university.
And she was set up by Abbott precisely so she would be seen on the news raving and ranting about sexist sexism again.
C.L.
9 Oct 12 at 9:59 pm
All her working life she has been protected and her mistakes glossed over by the party and the unions. Elected to the honor of first female PM we were all told how brilliant she would be. The reality is that she is not very bright, has no concept of strategy and is not even a particularly clever politician. Now her flaws are visible to all of us.
The good thing is that she has destroyed the idea that women is politics are kinder and gentler. Perhaps looking for the best person for the job will come into fashion. One can only hope.
Megan
9 Oct 12 at 10:01 pm
Gillard spokesman Phil Coorey:
Please – please continue. LOL.
C.L.
9 Oct 12 at 10:03 pm
…women in politics. It’s late.
Megan
9 Oct 12 at 10:03 pm
I have always thought Labor had no choice than to go to the next election with Gillard. They couldn’t spike two first term Prime Minister’s and ask the electorate to return them again. Now I’m not so sure.
Gillard’s poll numbers haven’t moved for 2 years and she is too damaged to try and sell to the electorate.
With the MYEFO due that will blow a complete hole in their laughable Budget numbers Labor is rapidly running out of time to do something.
H B Bear
9 Oct 12 at 10:05 pm
Coorey is the most hopeless mussel in the stenographer’s guild.
Infidel tiger
9 Oct 12 at 10:06 pm
When you think you can’t fit another clown in the Volkswagen out pops Fabulous Phil.
Fairfax personified.
H B Bear
9 Oct 12 at 10:08 pm
Jeez,
I’ve been forgetting to mention bald idiot Fabulous Phil of late. I recently gave an undertaking that he would score a mention from me each day.
I’m sorry, I let the side down.
JC
9 Oct 12 at 10:10 pm
????
This is the role of the freaking Commonwealth?
.
9 Oct 12 at 10:10 pm
,
Facts that somehow scape the gaze of our impartial media.
nic
9 Oct 12 at 10:12 pm
Yes and that all males over the age of thirteen were rapists. How’s that for being sexist?
Gab
9 Oct 12 at 10:19 pm
We’ll forgive you. Could happen to anyone.
Megan
9 Oct 12 at 10:22 pm
Well, it worked a treat with the slush fund / trust fund retraction demand…
ar
9 Oct 12 at 10:22 pm
Sexism? Misogyny? It’s whatever Gillard, Roxon and co. want it to be, just as 2 + 2 = 5*.
* In Room 101.
perturbed
9 Oct 12 at 10:23 pm
Corey says that Oakeshott and Windsor told SLipper to resign, even after voting for him. That sounds very odd. Why would they do that? Wouldn’t that make them look like charlies for supporting the Government in the vote but still wanting Slipper to go? Wouldn’t they see that they compunded Tony Abbott’s stunning victory.
As for Corey what a twat he is.
The government’s mysoginist meme has now been completely scotched by Gillard’s arsehattery. If a man is sexist every time he criticises a woman, then sexism is obvoiusly not something that we should worry about. Anyway sexism has been used by lefties for too long as a nanny-puritan shutdown word to stop debate. It will be good if the kerfuffles over the last week finally see the death of certain women proving their inferiority by palying the sex card.
Rococo Liberal
9 Oct 12 at 10:26 pm
Anna Burke, by the way, is a moron and quite the weirdo. The way she eye-rolls and squirms as she pretends to be the reluctant arbiter of sidelining the Opposition is not confidence-inspiring.
Another affirmative action appointment in the great ALP tradition of Kirner, Nixon, Keneally, Bligh, Lawrence, Bryce, Roxon, Plibersek and Gillard.
C.L.
9 Oct 12 at 10:31 pm
No, makes sense RL. Abbott, cleverly, sprung the trap in parliament this afternoon. This forced Gillard and the independents to defend the indefensible. But there is no way the independents could defend Slipper in public. They had to let it be known that this was a threshold issue for their support for Gillard. Hence the resignation. (Plus Oakshott was hoping to land the Chair)
Lazlo
9 Oct 12 at 10:34 pm
If they wanted Slipper to resign they could’ve told him they wouldn’t vote for him.
Slipper would’ve resigned & Gillard wouldn’t look like a complete moron.
Token
9 Oct 12 at 10:34 pm
It happened very quickly Token. Dramatic.
Lazlo
9 Oct 12 at 10:38 pm
Most kids will probably tell you mum does more of the ironing than dad (just as dad might do more of the DIY repairs than mum). The PM wants the children of Australia to think there is something offensive about this.
Not every family has a fruity hairdresser to do the ironing, Julia.
Feral Abacus
9 Oct 12 at 10:39 pm
She’s like some dull, bored, frumpy teenage girl sitting in dads chair at the office.
http://resources1.news.com.au/images/2012/06/01/1226350/024749-120508-deputy-speaker-anna-burke.jpg
twostix
9 Oct 12 at 10:44 pm
The sad thing is Gillard has mocked any legitimate claims regarding sexism that may exist. She’s not helping women at all.
nic
9 Oct 12 at 10:46 pm
“Mr Slipper’s resignation clears the way for the government to renew its attacks on Mr Abbott as a misogynist”.
Yes, because it really came up trumps today…
What a pratt Coorey is.
cynical1
9 Oct 12 at 10:47 pm
Julia Gillard believes all married women are whores.
Which is quite an indictment coming from her.
C.L.
9 Oct 12 at 10:49 pm
Most? Might?
Don’t be a sook call reality as it is, in the vast, vast majority of homes dad mows and mum usually cooks dinner and does the bulk of the house work.
This is suburban reality.
Gillard of course wouldn’t know anything about any of this – being a 40 something childless communist who rejected marriage as “prostitution” and spent her youth sleeping with other womens husbands.
twostix
9 Oct 12 at 10:52 pm
Can you imagine the hysteria if it was Abbott who had made the comments below and referred to Gillard as ‘this woman’. Or how churlish if he made reference to looking at her watch!
It is Gillard who is sexist. She has lowered and denigrated the Parliament.
“I say to the Leader of the Opposition I will not be lectured about sexism and misogyny by this man ” said Prime Minister Gillard.
“I will not. And the Government will not be lectured about sexism and misogyny by this man. Not now, not ever.”
?
And at one point she sneered at Mr Abbott, saying he was “now looking at his watch because apparently a woman’s spoken too long”.
She finally has plumbed to the level of the minister for sewer and minister for gutter but at least she is doing the dirty work herself rather than Albanese or Swan.
Maurice
9 Oct 12 at 10:55 pm
Peter Hartcher in The Age…
[Yes, this is a real, actual headline]:
We expected more of Gillard.
No.
No we didn’t.
Having said that, Hartcher is scathing.
C.L.
9 Oct 12 at 11:06 pm
… Comrades Kate Carnell, Clare Martin and Personality Plus Wong. Every one of them has been a fabulous failure in the job for which they’ve been handsomely paid.
I’ve never understood the childlike preoccupation here with “first woman” leader of anything political.
Corazon Aquino did it 25 years ago in the Philippines, for 6 years, and Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo for 9 years from 2000-ish, at about the same time as Megawati Sukarnoputri took office in Indonesia. It’s been 35 years since Margaret Thatcher’s time and I was a third of my age now when the magnificent Golda Meir took office. Indira Gandhi commenced the first of her several terms when I was about 16 years old – she was at it for about 15 years.
I say the self absorbed local girls need to get over themselves and grow up, substantially better performers have done it all long before now and in countries they would turn their noses up at for being third world. Unlike these bimbos they got there on their merits.
Mick Gold Coast QLD
9 Oct 12 at 11:11 pm
Yes, even Sales and Alberici have deserted the narrative this evening. What’s going on? Seeing the writing on the wall?
Lazlo
9 Oct 12 at 11:13 pm
I think the ALPBC has decided it’s all to hard today.
Normal service will resume tomorrow.
H B Bear
9 Oct 12 at 11:19 pm
Oops …too hard…
Don’t want people to infer I’m stoopid.
H B Bear
9 Oct 12 at 11:20 pm
Are you implying people here are so mean that they’d think you stooopid? Not true, Bear.
Gab
9 Oct 12 at 11:23 pm
Come on Mick, Carnell’s problem is she was in charge of a local council pretending to be a state government. In a community that is so left wing they make her look like atilla the hun.
And poor Keneally was given a hospital pass. She did quite well considering……
entropy
9 Oct 12 at 11:26 pm
Pigs! She wanted to be famous, she grabbed the opportunity with both hands, revelled in it and was found out as the deceitful incompetent she always promised to be.
None of ‘em have it thrust upon them – they court and connive and con their way to the best possible position, just in case the pass is thrown.
Mick Gold Coast QLD
9 Oct 12 at 11:35 pm
Janet Albrechsten on the almost unbelievable incompetence and dishonesty of Nicola Roxon.
C.L.
9 Oct 12 at 11:37 pm
Good God! They spent $1 million on Slipper to defend him and his misogynistic texts!
Gab
9 Oct 12 at 11:40 pm
Isn’t this corrupt and illegal?
twostix
9 Oct 12 at 11:51 pm
The personal attacks are getting downright sickening. This is beyond a joke.
wreckage
9 Oct 12 at 11:52 pm
PVO revives Lathamesque conga-line:
Embarrassing finale of a lost cause.
C.L.
9 Oct 12 at 11:52 pm
Roxon’s conduct as Attorney-General should be the next point of attack.
Nanny Roxon’s “handbag hit squad” have just done themselves out of a job and she has a few questions to answer.
H B Bear
10 Oct 12 at 12:06 am
I’ve been saying it for a while. The unbelievably incompetent and borderline corrupt Roxon should resign.
CC
10 Oct 12 at 12:08 am
Keneally may have been a poor performer but the NSW ALP is an equal opportunity employer.
There are many people in the late Carr to final Keneally ministries who should have never of been in charge of putting the bins out.
.
10 Oct 12 at 12:13 am
The phrase scraping the barrel comes to mind. See The Age are reporting on Gillard’s S&G union troubles from way back today, nothing new there, just decided to drag it up today out of the blue (?). ABC are into them too. They’re on a hiding to nothing and the delusionaries are calling it Abbott ownage.
(grammar: “legimitate ” “many man”)
Harold
10 Oct 12 at 12:57 am
What would you call
Judith?
Misogny is not the only smear used by those on the right. Abbott used the same meme in his speech – are we expected to believe that was accidental?
Childish spite added to misogny.
1735099
10 Oct 12 at 5:07 am
From now on no one is allowed to mention “die” and “shame” in the same sentence. It’ll be one of the first instructions from our glorious leader to the new Press Council…….there’ll be more to follow no doubt….
I loved the recitation of women saints names from the left …..what an astonishing array of mediocrity ……. And then you look at Julie Bishop ….now she is a clever person
Gerry
10 Oct 12 at 5:35 am
We need a new dictionary Gerry,I can’t keep up with all the new meanings
Tal
10 Oct 12 at 5:49 am
Nice try numbers, but Abbott said nothing about the PM’s father dying of shame.
Or are we not allowed to use the phrase “dying of shame” in politics anymore at all?
Quentin George
10 Oct 12 at 6:00 am
Hopeless. Her examples of sexism were like the song “Ironic” by Alanis Morrisette, where all the examples of irony were not. Almost ironic.
anonandon
10 Oct 12 at 6:04 am
The really troubling implication of this showdown is that Gillard will now mispresent any criticims of her peformance and the performance of her government as examples of sexism and misogyny.
There’s something in that, though I think Gillard was quite careful in her speech to avoid the implication that she personally was attacked. (That’s to be left up to her more excitable supporters.)
Considering the day ended with Peter slipper resigning anyway, you’ve got to think this was all designed to be a big distraction.
TimT
10 Oct 12 at 6:17 am
She murdered the misogynist. Anyone who can’t see Abbott for what he is, is simply blind.
Yes, writer – he is responsible for placards calling her a bitch if he chooses to stand next to them and if he doesn’t do anything about their existence.
Slartibartfast
10 Oct 12 at 6:20 am
Judith seems to be quite agitated, judging by the bold type uased in her piece. The typing equivalent of yelling.
hammygar
10 Oct 12 at 6:26 am
Hammy at it again.
TYPING IN CAPITALS IS YELLING! not bold.
John A
10 Oct 12 at 6:34 am
Heaven forbid we should highlight any of our points.
Ellen of Tasmania
10 Oct 12 at 6:56 am
Is Rudd advising McTernan?
murph
10 Oct 12 at 6:58 am
Hammy, don’t be a numpty. THIS IS SHOUTING!
This is emphasising my point.
nilk
10 Oct 12 at 7:02 am
It’s alright, folks. As a young man, the Hamster had to shout to be heard over the sound of battle in the 1917 Russian Revolution.
Tom
10 Oct 12 at 7:05 am
Numbers, why on earth is it misogynistic to claim that Gillard’s father died of shame because of her behaviour as PM and before?
One of the things that enabled me to handle my father’s death was that out disagreements were resolved, he understood decisions I’d made that were previously bones of contention, and therefore I had no unfinished business, so to speak.
Look at the Red Dalek’s behaviour. Relationships with married men, lying to her employer and her clients. Presiding over a parliament responsible for the deaths of near a thousand people.
My dad would have disowned me if I’d even considered doing half of those things.
If my brother had behaved like that, then he would likewise have been disowned.
It’s got nothing to do with sex and everything to do with decent behaviour.
nilk
10 Oct 12 at 7:09 am
‘Carnell’s problem is she was in charge of a local council pretending to be a state government. In a community that is so left wing they make her look like atilla the hun’
Carnell portrayed herself as a caring sharing multiculturalist feminist and that sucked in a lot of the more soppy-minded lefties in Canbera. The Canberra Times, for example, used to fawn over her like it was the Pyongyang Trumpet!
But entropy is right, in the end it became too obvious that she was just another incompetent municipal-quality politician.
Des Deskperson
10 Oct 12 at 7:24 am
John A, never accept any lessons on good manners from Hammy.
Hammy has posted intolerant and especially racist remarks on this blog in the past. He is a guest who has abused the hospitality of his hosts.
Please treat him with all the disdain you like and I repeat never allow him to dictate on good manners.
Token
10 Oct 12 at 7:27 am
Numbers, when are you going to apologise for the Homophobic remarks you made about Alan Jones?
Token
10 Oct 12 at 7:28 am
Numbers, Gillard actually bought up her father during her tirade. Abbott only ever referred to a (non-existent) sense of shame that really, if you think about it, should haunt every one of those numpties that voted to keep Slipper in the chair.
The best thing about yesterday is that 70 members of the House of Representatives had their shame recorded in Hansard in perpetuity.
It is possible that Abbott did it deliberately in order to goad such a reaction out of Gillard. If so, more fool her…
As an aside, the old lezzo has come out today saying he and Oakey ‘agreed’ not to vote to sack Slipper because he was ‘ill’. He had to say something , I suppose, because otherwise, people might think they were played like fiddles…
Skuter
10 Oct 12 at 7:35 am
How is criticism of this lying, incompetent PM sexist?
Only for those who wish to distract from genuine criticism.
The Useful Idiots are truly coming home to roost.
derFRED
10 Oct 12 at 7:36 am
@ Nilk
I’d call that spite. (Alan Jones, September 22, 2012)
I’d call that misogyny. (Tony Abbott, February 9, 2010)
There – fixed it for you.
1735099
10 Oct 12 at 7:37 am
Just to be a bit clearer…they (i.e. oakey and the lezzo) were played like fiddles by Abbott.
Skuter
10 Oct 12 at 7:39 am
Nilk, don’t expect a troll as staggeringly stupid as the spud peeler to come up with anything other than the standard lobotomised leftist shouty points (as demonstrated in his latest fatuous bollocks above).
He’s as dumb as dogshit and no doubt stinks even worse.
Rabz
10 Oct 12 at 7:40 am
Numbers, can’t you read? Gillard bought up her father. Abbott only ever referred to (the absence of) a sense of shame in the government.
Skuter
10 Oct 12 at 7:43 am
Skute – give it a miss, you might as well talk to a brick.
Rabz
10 Oct 12 at 7:45 am
Nilk, don’t be lectured at by a man who has the shame to make homophobic remarks.
His statements and refusal to apologise disqualifies his judgements.
Token
10 Oct 12 at 7:46 am
Rabz, when this war is over (which week now?), you and I will have to be the acting dog catchers who have to go around the smoking battlefield knocking all the diseased old trolls on the head.
Tom
10 Oct 12 at 7:48 am
Tom – with pleasure.
Rabz
10 Oct 12 at 7:50 am
Why is anyone arguing with the racist (Hammy) and the homophobe (Numbers) over this matter?
Both have debased themselves to a point where they have not credibility.
Yesterday, Gillard cynically exploited the death of her father in a crass tactic when expressing confidence in a mysoginist to be Speaker of the house.
She will be remembered for years to come for what she did yesterday, when the pathetic excuses of the trolls are proven to be just p*** and wind.
Token
10 Oct 12 at 7:50 am
Oh my God…….ironing!!!! That’s it?
Tal
10 Oct 12 at 7:51 am
PS: I’m bolding specifically in response to the racist’s attempt of lefty faux outrage above.
Token
10 Oct 12 at 7:51 am
Hammy is living in the past. He’s worried that bold type will exhaust the annual budget of ink. The mindset of the glorious USSR lives on, and hammy is the keeper of the flame. If you don’t mind hammy, just keep it to yourself.
Slarti,
Bob Brown has stood under truther signs. Has he made amends ? Sarah Hanson-Young has stood beside anti-Semitic signs. Has she made amends ?
Keith
10 Oct 12 at 7:53 am
Just don’t get all shouty, Tokes.
They might faint…
Rabz
10 Oct 12 at 7:54 am
Most housewives do the ironing,no need to get the vapors
Tal
10 Oct 12 at 7:57 am
I’m accusing hummygar of being sexist and misogynistic. So there.
My point, precisely.
Judith Sloan
10 Oct 12 at 7:58 am
Why is it misogynistic to say that housewives iron? Don’t they?
It seems much more hateful to suggest there is something belittling about the task, or the choice to do it.
Ellen of Tasmania
10 Oct 12 at 7:58 am
True, the same lefties who have the mouth of a sewer when speaking to us do seem to be prone to get the vapours when spoken to.
To paraphrase Judith
Come off it, Hammy & Numbers. I say just suck it up.
Token
10 Oct 12 at 7:58 am
And don’t forget – that disgusting ol’ stalinist Lee Rhiannon has appeared at anti Israel rallies next to that notorious misogynist and racist, ol’ Catmeat al Hillbilly himself.
Hypocrites, but that’s merely stating the bleeding obvious.
Rabz
10 Oct 12 at 7:59 am
Oh and I don’t do the ironing. Tony does!
Judith Sloan
10 Oct 12 at 8:00 am
Just imagine if Tony Abbott had said “I will not be lectured to by this woman”, all hell would have broken out.
Judith Sloan
10 Oct 12 at 8:01 am
But not misogynistic to say that they’re all prostitutes?
This is just too bloody easy…
Rabz
10 Oct 12 at 8:01 am
Numbers: I’d buy the Jones boy’s comment as spite. But where do you see contempt, or hatred in:
I guess you must be an early adopter of ‘misogyny’ as the new shut down word – another step on the path to political Newspeak.
Dr Faustus
10 Oct 12 at 8:07 am
@ Tal
You wouldn’t recognise sexism if it bit you on the arse.
@ Skuter
Well there you go – all the time I’ve been thinking it was Alan Jones at a Liberal nosh-up.
@ Rabz
I don’t take offence at being called a spud peeler – my posting was riflemen. Having said that, you use of this kind of abuse reveals two things -
1. You don’t have a point to make.
2. You’re about as low as a snake’s belly. Anyone who uses abuse of ex service personnel whilst hiding behind a keyboard is a waste of space. I’m glad you weren’t in my rifle section.
1735099
10 Oct 12 at 8:10 am
Now boys and girls, there’s been a lot said written and texted recently about the many virtues of shellfish.
Let’s begin our lessons today with a little song from a Great Australian that shows us the virtue of a balanced diet.
Are you ready Mr Music Man?
Pickles
10 Oct 12 at 8:10 am
You’re attempting to divert and it’s poor – oh and in case you’ve forgotten, you were a conscript, you fucking dildo – hence all the sanctimony. There’s no way you would have willingly served in this country’s armed forces.
My father was a Captain in the Australian Army in WW2. He’s a trillion times the ‘man’ you are, you stupid fucking commie loser.
Rabz
10 Oct 12 at 8:16 am
What does the charge of sexism and misogyny as applied to Tony Abbott really mean?
In his spare time he’s a lifeguard and bush fire brigade member.
Do those who charge him with sexism and misogyny mean that when he sees someone drowning or at risk from bushfire he doesn’t save them because they’re female? If he swims out and discovers that it’s Julia Gillard then does he not save her? If it’s someone he knows is a lesbian, communist, vegan, Code Pink loopy the bloody loopy loo then does he not save her? If there are two people drowning and one is a man and one is a woman then does he save the man?
The charge of sexism and misogyny against Tony Abbott is deeply immoral and made by people who lack his manners, courtesy, achievement and intellect.
Jack Lacton
10 Oct 12 at 8:17 am
It is, of course, easy to define “sexism and misogyny”: it is Catallaxy threads regarding Sandra Fluke.
What does Judith think about those?
steve from brisbane
10 Oct 12 at 8:20 am
23 women voted for Slipper to remain as Speaker of Parliament.
Where were their feminist principles ?
Where was their self-respect ?
The “men” of the ALP have added to their female colleague’s sense of self-hate by emphasizing what must be the common internal labor view of women : mere tokens in the game of political correctness.
ALP – the party of woman-hatred.
Keith
10 Oct 12 at 8:22 am
Yes but the distraction did prevent the opposition from further attacking this government’s policies in Parliament.
Gab
10 Oct 12 at 8:23 am
So how many millions of dollars did you sponge off us over your military service, you gutless old yellow belly? You still think this country owes you a living. Parasite.
Tom
10 Oct 12 at 8:26 am
@ Rabz
Most Australians dropped this abuse years ago. It says a great deal about you that you’re prepared to abuse me (and by inference all Nashos) because I did my duty as a conscript. It’s probably a complete waste of time reminding you that many Nashos were killed in Vietnam in the name of the freedoms you’re exercising here.
Your father is probably spinning in his grave.
Would you be prepared to accompany me to the next 7 RAR reunion and repeat those remarks in front of me and surviving members of 5 Platoon?
1735099
10 Oct 12 at 8:27 am
You think members of my family weren’t also conscripted, you stupid wanker?
Just fuck off you moron, you are not welcome here.
Rabz
10 Oct 12 at 8:29 am
@ Tom
As a Nasho in Vietnam I was paid considerably less than I was a s a teacher before call-up. Perhaps I should lodge a claim (with interest) for the short fall.
On my return from Vietnam I went back to teaching, and retired in 2005 as Principal of a special school. I continue to work part time in the field of disabilities as a bush consultant. I have been earning and paying taxes since 1968, and at 65 continue to do so.
You have made a complete fool of yourself.
1735099
10 Oct 12 at 8:32 am
News Ltd is spinning this in favor of Gillard:
GILLARD’S SMACKDOWN GOES GLOBAL
JULIA Gillard’s dramatic 15-minute broadside against “mysoginist” Tony Abbott has hit the international headlines. The reviews are in for the political slam of the year:
‘An epic speech on sexism … (by a) badass motherf***er’ – Jezebel
‘A brilliant political pivot, defending the indefensible’ – The UK Telegraph
‘Best smackdown I’ve ever seen. Advance, Australia Fair!’ – Chris Addison
How pathetic. Double standards is an understatement. Could you imagine Abbott yelling and shouting at Gillard that she doesn’t understand misandry?
James X Leftie
10 Oct 12 at 8:33 am
Heh. I was just reading that, James X Leftie, and was pleased to see the comments were not supportive:
Have to laugh – she made “international news” on a blog. lol
Gab
10 Oct 12 at 8:37 am
Freedoms you would no doubt happily help remove, if you had half the chance, you loathsome grub.
You’re an apologist for the commies you supposedly risked your life fighting against all those decades ago.
Your kind sabotaged war materiel in this country’s struggle against the fascists back when my dad was serving.
That’s why I hate you with such a visceral passion, you stupid, sanctimonious piece of shit.
I am not going to engage with you again. You are in no doubt what I think of you.
You fucking lowlife.
Rabz
10 Oct 12 at 8:40 am
@ Gab
So the Telegraph and the Spectator are blogs now?
1735099
10 Oct 12 at 8:41 am
@ Rabz
You have a standing invitation to our next reunion. You would never turn up of course. Anonymous abuse is more your style…..
1735099
10 Oct 12 at 8:43 am
@ Rabz
My Dad also was serving in WW2 (RAAF – New Guinea).
He regarded Menzies as a spineless old lizard….
1735099
10 Oct 12 at 8:45 am
@ Rabz
Pwned……..:)
1735099
10 Oct 12 at 8:46 am
Principles get tossed out the window when it means keeping power.
Gab
10 Oct 12 at 8:47 am
Can we not make this thread about this silly ‘numbers’ character? Can we not reward his dumb comments with replies?
Gab
10 Oct 12 at 8:48 am
Great work Numbers, there is nothing better than being lectured on what it feels to be a women by a bitter old man.
When are you going to apologise for the homophobic remarks about Alan Jones?
Token
10 Oct 12 at 8:50 am
Apologies Gab.
I’ve banned responding to his stupid provocations. Of all the trolls here, he’s easily the most contemptible.
Rabz
10 Oct 12 at 8:50 am
You going to start singing some Helen Reddy to us Numbers?
Token
10 Oct 12 at 8:50 am
Perhaps Julia’s breathtaking performance defending and voting for Slipper yesterday is due to her being “biologically indisposed”.
The old Soviet Airforce long ago allowed its female aviators a few days reading a book away from machinery to let the judgement return etc, as required.
“Looking at his watch”?…. sounds like a menstrual crime to me, spare us Jules.
Alfonso
10 Oct 12 at 8:52 am
So you’ve sponged off me your entire working life. You’ve never had a job in the real economy. And now you’re trolling the blogs hiding behind an alias as a leftwing malcontent, demanding respect. Real military men don’t do that. You’re a disgrace to your unit.
Tom
10 Oct 12 at 8:53 am
You’ll be labelled a sexist for that remark, however true it may be.
Gab
10 Oct 12 at 8:55 am
Ms Sloan, how dare you introduce common sense and rationality into this? I am outraged. Umm, why are you blokes arguing with a troll about Vietnam?
Cath
10 Oct 12 at 8:58 am
Testosterone will do that to males.
Gab
10 Oct 12 at 9:01 am
OK numbers, let’s see if you can follow me from here…Jones made stupid and offensive remarks. Gillard was supposedly distraught and upset that her father’s death was used for political purposes. All of this so far is legitimate and quite normal behaviour from Gillard. I’d even say she was justified in not taking Jones’ call to deliver her an apology. But when she sent out Albanese and her other goons to deliberately prolong the episode and THEN she brings it up in Parliament herself yesterday, one can rightly start accusing her of using her own father’s death for political gain. Utterly contemptible, leaving aside everything else that happened yesterday. The fact that you are defending her shows what a contemptible fool you are. I will take the high ground and refuse to respond to anything else you say. Like others have said, you’re not welcome here.
Skuter
10 Oct 12 at 9:07 am
Julia Gillard hates women too remember.
Yet I don’t see her today as another tragic suicide statistic.
You have to remember, slartibartfast, you long time, rambling, Trotskyite loon, Gillard said that women who choose to get married (i.e, different to her) were whores.
At least when we call someone a slut, male or female, you’ve got to sleep around and emotionally hurt other people.
.
10 Oct 12 at 9:07 am
“Your father is probably spinning in his grave.”
Mr Numbers sounds like Alan Jones when he says that to Rabz.
It’s just an expression after all, who hasn’t said something like that.
candy
10 Oct 12 at 9:08 am
That Sandra Fluke is a low-rent piece of leftist filth is a fact and facts aren’t sexist liar.
JamesK
10 Oct 12 at 9:12 am
Yes, you have been, in my comment at 8:40 and Tom’s at 8:53.
Now fuck off.
Rabz
10 Oct 12 at 9:17 am
If you can’t even spell it you don’t know what it means and you’re just a mindless dimwitted Labor puppet.
You haven’t given a demonstration of misogyny yet but do keep trying to sound clever.
Here’s a pro-tip to get you started: Misogyny is not a synonym for “sexist”.
twostix
10 Oct 12 at 9:18 am
If this proves anything, it means the sex discrimination commissioner, taxpayer funded abortion on demand, office for the status of women and so forth must be abolished or repealed.
They are just enabling a Prime Minister to take the most pissant position about an opponent. Maybe the time taken to prepare for that rambling tirade would have been used looking at how to balance the budget without increasing taxes and increasing the unemployment rate or how to fund the JSF in a timely manner that doesn’t weaken our air defence or capacity to retaliate militarily.
Maybe Abbot can give her a 15 minute smackdown on good governance.
Identity politics is such bullshit.
This is a bizzare success for Gillard. She doesn’t have to defend her incompetency or the bankruptcy of her policies.
Abbot immediately should have gotten stuck into her about them.
The NBN is a monumental joke. The buck stops with her.
I don’t care if the PM is a loathesome curmudgeon or a ballbreaking, broomstick riding ice queen. I thought the whole Clinton scandal was a joke and Abbot’s fake son was the media effectively resigning in Australia as unbaised commentators.
I just want them to do a good job!
.
10 Oct 12 at 9:19 am
No shame
Septimus
10 Oct 12 at 9:25 am
Real misogyny
SHE became a symbol of resistance to the Taliban. But yesterday a 14-year-old Pakistani blogger was fighting for her life after a gunman shot her in the face on her school bus.
Reality to the Emily’s List Hitsquad inside the Canberra bubble – harden the fcuk up !
Myrrdin Seren
10 Oct 12 at 9:31 am
Isn’t that the point of postmodernism?
.
10 Oct 12 at 9:34 am
At least Sandra Fluke didn’t destroy other people’s marriages. The more I think about it the more I think Alan Jones was right.
Poor Mr and Mrs Gillard.
C.L.
10 Oct 12 at 9:35 am
@ Tom
Ah – the “real economy”. I wonder how far you’d go in the real economy, if you couldn’t read or write – skills taught by one of those sponging teachers.
I wonder where the 5% of Australians with disabilities would be in your mythical “real economy” – begging in the street, no doubt. You’d call them “spongers”. It’s a wonderful thing, this real economy, when the long suffering taxpayer has to bail it out from time to time.
I guess you cure yourself, when you get sick, given that the medical profession isn’t part of the real economy.
Time to grow up.
1735099
10 Oct 12 at 9:38 am
Time to get rid of the troll derailing the thread.
Gab
10 Oct 12 at 9:39 am
It’s all over. After her greatest victory, the usually left leaning media have thrown her under a bus.
http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/political-news/property-links-pm-to-stolen-funds-20121009-27bnm.html
I’m going to drink to this later.
.
10 Oct 12 at 9:40 am
This a bit O/T, but a related issue is why Fairfax, per the Mark Day piece, have attacked Gillard. It’s worth considering.
One possibly is that the article is calculated to pressure Gillard into resigning, although whether it’s for Rudd or somebody else is a more open question. Gillard would be devastated by having to go, and has probably signalled she will fight, (and yesterday’s speech might be a signal to the ALP as well). The Emily Listers would also push for her to stay. A campaign by a ‘third-party’ such as Fairfax might be a way to avoid or at least mitigate an internal ALP fight.
But why Fairfax has decided to attack Gillard? Mark Day certainly ddid not decide to publish, and given the history, one would think that this was taken up at a very senior level. Is the board worried about a complete collapse of Fairfax and now signalling to Reinhardt that they are abandoning a role as cheerleader for Labor?
rafiki
10 Oct 12 at 9:41 am
Rinehart. Dear God, this poor woman has her name misspelled more times than Ahmedinnerjacket.
Infidel Tiger
10 Oct 12 at 9:48 am
My parents got me halfway. I was sent to school to learn about history, maths, science, to be socialised etc.
My early teachers praised my parents for encouraging me to read. My first teacher was more of a consultant. Teachers know it to. Academic success depends on if the parents care. Most middle class kids are partly taught how to read and write by their parents and they could do it in the absence of teachers.
That is what the relationship is like when parents care or are firm with homework and teach the children when study is done in the absence of a teacher.
“We” are not dependent on *you* to be literate. Only the underprivileged are.
Bank bailouts?
Look you idiot you might have a warped view of the world and find circular reasoning a great comfort but very few here supported the bailout and if they did they changed their mind.
Australian banking didn’t need bailouts and the one or two that did should have been bought out like the NBFIs. The US mortgage system is ultimately underpinned by taxpayer funded mortgage insurance almost anyone can get. This is a policy, not a commercial issue.
.
10 Oct 12 at 9:48 am
Go Paul Henry.
Ellen of Tasmania
10 Oct 12 at 9:50 am
Ellen, Bolt posted that too but how do you find the video?
C.L.
10 Oct 12 at 9:52 am
We thank you for your service as a veteran and a teacher, Numbers. Try some humility and stop banging on about it, you pretentious bore.
Infidel Tiger
10 Oct 12 at 9:54 am
Paul Henry is no wimp. What an excellent video!
Gab
10 Oct 12 at 9:55 am
Gold, Paul Henry, gold.
Gab
10 Oct 12 at 9:56 am
Breaking up other people’s marriages is not supporting women it’s crushing them and leaving children fatherless. So Ms Gillard is sexist. She just doesn’t like or “get” women and what’s important to them (ie, striving to raise happy children).
candy
10 Oct 12 at 9:58 am
http://tenbreakfast.com.au/video.htm?movideo_m=233605
Ivan Denisovich
10 Oct 12 at 10:00 am
IT: why don’t you try telling Tom he’s demented for calling a teacher (a special school one at that) a sponger.
steve from brisbane
10 Oct 12 at 10:00 am
@ Judith Sloan
Perhaps, but they don’t assume they have the right to characterise it as a “convenience”. I’m Catholic, don’t support abortion, but don’t have the arrogance to preach about it on the assumption that my position is superior.
Julia’s Pal.
I don’t think she went to his wedding….
Your bias is showing, Judith, or perhaps you can’t see the wood for the trees. With the perspective of distance, other more insightful commentators beg to differ.
And you do this for a living? I’m a part time blogger, Judith, but my copy has fewer errors than yours.
Come off it, Julia. I say just suck it up.
There’s a difference between valid criticism of policy, and personal abuse. Like so many on this site, you lack the wit to tell the difference.
I doubt Abbott would be called a “bitch”. I doubt he would be told to make an honest woman of himself. Your writings are polemic, Judith. You’re not a commentator’s bootlace.
1735099
10 Oct 12 at 10:00 am
[...] intellectually strong woman, Judith Sloan, has a scornful last word: The really troubling implication of this showdown is that Gillard will now mispresent any criticims [...]
Slattsnews » Rank hypocrites
10 Oct 12 at 10:02 am
Modern Labor. No smear too foul, no lie too brazen, no hypocrisy too shameless.
Whatever. It. Takes.
Ivan Denisovich
10 Oct 12 at 10:02 am
Wow. Sexism is the new racism. Even worse, they have renamed it misogyny.
Misogyny is hatred of women. Anyone happily married to a woman with loving daughters is by definition not a mysogynist. He could of course still be sexist, but when they accuse Abbott of misogyny, they are clearly wrong, and are obviously name-calling with the intent to ostracise and repeat a lie in the mistaken belief that if repeated often enough it will become the truth.
As for Abbott’s comments, i’m angry at him for giving them ammo for political benefit that could have been achieved by simply calling the government shameful for their support of Slipper. Still, i’d rather someone of poor taste that utter hypocrites. Hartcher was abosultely right, but the usual suspects predictably tried to defend the indefensible.
Twodogs
10 Oct 12 at 10:07 am
@ Noname
That’s straight out of P G Wodehouse. “Us” and “them” – the “underprivileged”. What a precious little snob you are.
1735099
10 Oct 12 at 10:08 am
I think the Opposition has shown remarkable restraint by never bringing up the fact that Gillard is a home-wrecker. Gillard is permitted to conduct a shrill character assassination against a father of three, to the slobbering applause of the usual pinheads in the media, but the Liberals have never fired back at her character (or lack thereof). Is it civility or weakness?
Feral Abacus
10 Oct 12 at 10:12 am
Actually, your attitude towards society is just like the Kantoreks out of All Quiet on the Western Front or The Wall.
.
10 Oct 12 at 10:14 am
Some shrill Labor female is harking and spitting about Abbott “calling the primeminsta names” “day-in day-out he sits across from her and calls her names”.
Have any Labor women graduated from kindergarten?
Gab
10 Oct 12 at 10:15 am
“‘An epic speech on sexism … (by a) badass motherf***er’ – Jezebel”
My god, isn’t that sexist? The most disgusting sexist term of all time used by a feminist site. Unbelievable, except that IS believable! The hypocrisy is astounding.
Twodogs
10 Oct 12 at 10:21 am
It’s going to be a terribly lonely Christmas for you this year, Dogshit. What are you going to do next year? Who are you going to hawk your skinny white arse to in 2013?
Tom
10 Oct 12 at 10:25 am
It’s just a pity that after her tirade of lies against Tony Abbott, Gillard then goes ahead and votes ‘no’ to firing the misogynistic Peter Slipper as Speaker. How’s that for hypocritical? I guess power trumps principles for this Gillard woman.
Gab
10 Oct 12 at 10:25 am
Focus on this sexism PM
stu
10 Oct 12 at 10:32 am
” Is it civility or weakness?”
My opinion is that they waiting for the time when she goads Tony Abbott one time too many about sexism etc.
candy
10 Oct 12 at 10:35 am
Ah the euphemistically “underprivileged”. Try under talented under intelligent with under class values that ensure they stay that way.
They survive because I pay for their lives.
Reality is a bitch, that’s just the way it is in our counterproductive welfare state.
I have but one request. Is it possible they say “thanks” just once a year? They could leave a small gift of fruit, maybe some burning incense sticks, a personal note at my front gate, create a small shrine …..instead of claiming my work product as their right.
Alfonso
10 Oct 12 at 10:35 am
1735099′s blog and book look quite interesting. A much saner character than a large number of the people who have come to live here.
steve from brisbane
10 Oct 12 at 10:42 am
Poor old Numbers. He, she or it has tried really hard to argue against Judith’s points and deserves credit for doing so in a mostly civilised fashion. However, I think that Numbers has failed to persuade.
This sentence cannot go to prove that Mr Abbott is sexist. It might be an argument that Mr Abbott is arrogant. But last time I looked being arrogant and sexist are, as Charles I would say ‘two plain different things.’
Those at a distance are not more insightful because of that distance. In fact they are less insightful because they didn’t see or care about the fact that after Ms Gillard made a fool of herself defending Mr Slipper he resigned from the Speakership anyway. That deflated Ms Gillard’s performance as far as Australian voters are concerned. And it is they who count, not foreign commentators.
Using a few typos to blakguard someone’s argument is not persuasive, unless those typos make the text unintelligible, which they don’t in Ms Sloan’s case. So here Numbers just comes off as snarky and childish, especially when the next sentence is a non-attributed quotation, from Ms Sloan’s piece, which is left hanging without any comment or explanation from Numbers.
The first sentence here is a truism. The second could be seen as personal abuse in itself. This diffuses the effectiveness of Numbers’ argument. Added to this is the fact that the discussion is about Ms Gillard mistakenly labelling any criticsm as sexist. And even if Mr Abbott has indulged in personal abuse of Ms Gillard, such abuse cannot be of itself mysoginistic. In addition, it is quite clear that Ms Gillard herself, as well as her whole Government has never ceased personally abusing Mr Abbott.
But Mr Abbott didn’t call Ms Gillard a bitch. So Numbers’ argument here is just silly. I bet plenty of Labor peoiple have called Mr Abbott the Mad Monk, which is just as sexist as ‘bitch’, as only men can be monks. Numbers’ second sentence cannot be a proper conclusion because it doesn’t flow from the first sentence. The third sentence is therefore mere bluster and not a conclusion that any rational person could draw from reading Ms Sloan’s post.
Rococo Liberal
10 Oct 12 at 10:45 am
Surely, the purpose of language is to describe reality.
Gillard is not describing Tony Abbott as “misogynist” to describe reality. The witch is trying to cast a spell.
ella
10 Oct 12 at 10:58 am
Interesting that liar-steve™ would find a loon like numbers “interesting”
JamesK
10 Oct 12 at 10:59 am
It’s funny those wishing to besmirch a decent family man with the left’s modern day equivalent to an accusation of sorcery. Ok, lets apply the same rubric to Gillard, Slut? Jezebel? Adultress? Frigid? Unfair perhaps, but why stop there? It’s only her reputation. who said such accusations need to be fair? Right?
Nic
10 Oct 12 at 11:02 am
“1735099′s blog and book look quite interesting.”
Is it as popular as your own insightful blog SOB?
DavidJ
10 Oct 12 at 11:07 am
and
(Misogyny is the hatred or dislike of women or girls)
Have nothing to do with each other.
Helen Armstrong
10 Oct 12 at 11:10 am
And have nothing to do with Abbott.
Gab
10 Oct 12 at 11:11 am
Right. It would be more accurate to describe Julia Gillard as a mysogynist. She passionately believes all married women are whores.
C.L.
10 Oct 12 at 11:15 am
Gillard forged a legal document, the application for association; it is a matter of public record that she did this by including a false declaration of purpose for that application.
How is this different from what Einfeld did?
Given that why all this bullshit about sexism/mysogynism? Or is being criminally liable now gender specific?
cohenite
10 Oct 12 at 11:17 am
If you missed Albanese being beaten up by Leigh Sales last night it’s worth a look.
He’s like, “WTF? – this is the ABC.”
http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2012/s3607232.htm
C.L.
10 Oct 12 at 11:19 am
cohenite, you make as good a lawyer as a you a wannabe climate scientist (that is, craptastic in both cases.)
steve from brisbane
10 Oct 12 at 11:23 am
well, stuffed the wording of that one up…but you can work it out.
steve from brisbane
10 Oct 12 at 11:24 am
Yes, in most cases, it is.
Gab
10 Oct 12 at 11:25 am
I don’t really get the praise for Gillard ‘speech’ yesterday.
She sounded hysterical and looked like she was about to cry.
She actually looked emotionally unbalanced.
Abbott rope-a-doped her for the evening news bulletins wonderfully.
C.L.
10 Oct 12 at 11:27 am
Newspoll upset her.
candy
10 Oct 12 at 11:30 am
Misandrists loved it.
Gab
10 Oct 12 at 11:32 am
Sure. ‘We are us.’
Septimus
10 Oct 12 at 11:34 am
I wondered what sort of women could sleep with married m en – in the one case, carry on a years-long affair – and not feel the slightest bit of guilt to their wives. Now I understand. They’re only whores.
This wasn’t just some bullshit from her youth – she still believes it.
Fleeced
10 Oct 12 at 11:49 am
Not just her youth, btw. Emerson was 2002. And even the union-criminal was when she was a “young and naive” 35-yo law partner.
Fleeced
10 Oct 12 at 11:51 am
“This wasn’t just some bullshit from her youth – she still believes it.”
but that means she thinks her mother is a whore? can that be so?
candy
10 Oct 12 at 11:52 am
The stock slanders of the Left, based on accusations of Racism and Sexism are now meaningless, supported by the great political trick of hypocrisy.
But they control the government money, and much of the media. And they seem to scare the argument out of many decent but uncertain people, like my wife.
I dont care if they call me a racist sexist homophobe, but it upsets my wife. She knows that truth is a struggle, and shit sticks.
Jannie
10 Oct 12 at 11:56 am
Such are the intrinsic absurdities of modern day rabid leftism.
A bit like “all property is theft”.
Fucking morons.
Rabz
10 Oct 12 at 11:59 am
If you missed Albanese being beaten up by Leigh Sales last night it’s worth a look.
He’s like, “WTF? – this is the ABC.”
The best line was the last line by Albasleazy – “Good to talk to you, Leigh”.
Is that the usual response to having an interviewer tear you a new one?!
Twodogs
10 Oct 12 at 11:59 am
I thought Leigh Sales was pathetic. She had Albo by his much abused balls and then let them go.
Infidel Tiger
10 Oct 12 at 12:00 pm
And on the news, the two independents come forward and say that they were instrumental in the resignation of Slipper. They urged him, in private discussions, to resign as his position was untenable.
They are full of hot poo.
kae
10 Oct 12 at 12:04 pm
@ Rabz
My invitation stands…
1735099
10 Oct 12 at 12:07 pm
Poor Mr Gillard, CL. Don’t worry about Mrs Gillard… after all, she’s just a whore.
Fleeced
10 Oct 12 at 12:08 pm
Breaking News : Abbott stands beside sign that says “Keep Left”.
He’s a bloody communist, I tells ya.
Keith
10 Oct 12 at 12:10 pm
As does mine:
Fuck off, you staggeringly stupid commie loser…
Rabz
10 Oct 12 at 12:13 pm
labor “women” defend supporting a misogynist.
– Plebeserk.
– Macklin
– Abbott.
Gab
10 Oct 12 at 12:14 pm
Honestly those “women” ought to die of shame.
Gab
10 Oct 12 at 12:15 pm
LOL… violent and sexist. Unbelievable.
Fleeced
10 Oct 12 at 12:18 pm
WTF?
Rabz
10 Oct 12 at 12:21 pm
Hahahahahahah
IT, you are truly a munny fussel.
Rudiau
10 Oct 12 at 12:23 pm
Gab, you’re a “woman” who is entirely happy to see another “woman” (yeah, I know, my inverted commas make as much sense as yours) pilloried for being a promiscuous slut if she is on the wrong side of a political debate about contraception.
It’s ludicrous watching you define the word to mean “females who agree with me.”
Fleeced (or anyone): can you provide a link to the “Gillard thinks all marriage is prostitution” source? I’ve been googling without success…
steve from brisbane
10 Oct 12 at 12:24 pm
Go do the ironing Gab
Tal
10 Oct 12 at 12:26 pm
LOL
Leave the strawomen alone liar
Those disgusting nasty deranged leftist banshees aren’t merely on the “wrong side of a political debate about contraception”
You dishonest lying leftist turd.
JamesK
10 Oct 12 at 12:28 pm
Bunyip:
http://bunyipitude.blogspot.com.au/2012/10/favourite-reading-of-faifaxs-younger-set.html
Gab
10 Oct 12 at 12:29 pm
Tal, I have a manservant for that drudgery.
Gab
10 Oct 12 at 12:30 pm
Shitfer, you’re a “man” who’s entirely happy to be a much hated and beclowned whiny beta male mediocrity.
Entirely unsurprising – both that you’ve been ‘googling without success’ and stupid enough to admit it.
No hints, you don’t deserve any.
Rabz
10 Oct 12 at 12:32 pm
Google is a website Steve. Googling isn’t what you think it is.
Infidel Tiger
10 Oct 12 at 12:37 pm
I seem to have come close to the source. Form Bolt, quoting someone or other about the AUS in 1983 (the year Gillard got elected as President):
Sounds like a silly statement. It also sound not an argument that all marriage involves prostitution.
steve from brisbane
10 Oct 12 at 12:38 pm
LOL.
IT you very funny.
Gab
10 Oct 12 at 12:38 pm
Wasn’t 1983 or 1984 the Year of the Lesbian that the AUS adopted?
candy
10 Oct 12 at 12:43 pm
Yeah, one of those, candy.
So?
steve from brisbane
10 Oct 12 at 12:45 pm
How’s the ironing going, BTW?
Rabz
10 Oct 12 at 12:50 pm
Plibersek is lying pond scum for saying that. Abbott has never been associated with any such language – ever.
But let’s talk about associations, Tanya.
How about Barry Cohen naming you as an anti-semite?
How about your husband the heroin trafficker?
C.L.
10 Oct 12 at 12:50 pm
1983, Candy – AUS (whose president at the time was one juliar dullard) collapsed the following year.
Rabz
10 Oct 12 at 12:52 pm
Mr Abbott gave a little speech in the Parliament, in regards to Ms Gillard’s father’s passing. He was genuine, warm and moving, a lovely tribute to her dad.
And now the women stab him in the back. He can’t win with these deceitful women. Really he should just stop trying, they don’t appear to have the refinement to appreciate his fine qualities.
candy
10 Oct 12 at 12:54 pm
Coven of witches describes them well.
Gab
10 Oct 12 at 12:56 pm
That was just one of the brain dead policies she helped introduce as President of the AUS…
Some of the outrageous policies that the AUS adopted are detailed below:
Adopted a policy on prostitution which, in part, said “Prostitution takes many forms and is not only the exchange of money for sex … Prostitution in marriage is the transaction of sex in return for love, security and housekeeping”.
Supported all varieties of abortion, including during late term pregnancy.
Asserted that ALL men exercise the threat of rape, ranging from subtle appeals to a woman’s mistaken sense of obligation, to direct threats, blackmail and even physical force.
Declared 1983 to be the International Year of the Lesbian, in an era when globally, issues such as the threat of nuclear conflict were at the forefront of mainstream concern.
Grudgingly conceded that heterosexual coupling was a legitimate norm on campus.
Declared that ‘All women are oppressed because they are women’.
Supported the use of self-evaluation (students marking their own work!) in preference to independent, formal assessment by qualified academics. This policy extended to school students.
Supported banning any government funding to non-government schools.
Supported infiltrating objective education programs to manipulate the curriculum, to covertly influence students’ perceptions of social order.
For all this talk of Misogyny, I would reckon if you looked up the word Misandry in the dictionary you might find the photo of one Julia Eileen Gillard as a perfect example.
As mentioned many times before her problem with men is significantly bigger than AbbottAbbottAbbott’s with women. It is plain to see that she HATES men.
Old Fridgie
10 Oct 12 at 12:56 pm
Steve’s down to the wire defending the fact that Gillard presided over an organisation that called housewives prostitutes.
Pretty clear cut. Spread it loud and large Stevie boy because it’s a great look for Gillard !
No word on Gillards official position as AUS president that all males are rapists though Stevie?
What about her support as president of the organisation that political terrorism is ok?
Let’s have a full and frank talk about it Stevie, lets make it part of the narrative.
twostix
10 Oct 12 at 12:57 pm
David Duke: Israel a “rogue state.”
Tanya Plibersek: Israel a “rogue state.”
C.L.
10 Oct 12 at 12:59 pm
@ Rococo Liberal
It’s not much of a leap to suggest that a male giving advice to a female about abortion is sexist behaviour. It’s also arrogant, particularly used in the context Abbott used it.
What makes you think that local commentators with bias exhibited as starkly as Sloan’s, count? The foreign commentators have no skin in the game, and are consequently more objective.
They go bloody close in yours……
Is it? It’s ranged far and wide from that.
So personal abuse is OK so long as it’s not misogynistic? Now I understand. Abbott has a fine line in personal abuse of those he perceives as vulnerable. Remember Bernie Banton?
Do tell – provide examples.
But Mr Abbott didn’t call Ms Gillard a bitch.
I bet plenty of Labor peoiple (sic) have called Mr Abbott the Mad Monk, which is just as sexist as ‘bitch’, as only men can be monks.
1735099
10 Oct 12 at 12:59 pm
Sounds like a silly statement. It also sound not an argument that all marriage involves prostitution.
Surprise, surprise, sfb providing cover-fire for Gillard et al.
dover_beach
10 Oct 12 at 1:00 pm
@ Rabz
See you at the reunion?
1735099
10 Oct 12 at 1:00 pm
Wow. So Gillard believes all men are rapists?
C.L.
10 Oct 12 at 1:03 pm
The perennially dishonest liar-steve® is scum.
It’s not difficult.
JamesK
10 Oct 12 at 1:10 pm
Numbers, I wouldn’t worry too much about Uncle Tom. It would appear from his inability to reason that he didn’t actually go to school, hence his idea that teachers are spongers.
SteveC
10 Oct 12 at 1:12 pm
d-b, you couldn’t care less whether your buddies here accurately represent anything about Gillard or Labor.
steve from brisbane
10 Oct 12 at 1:15 pm
Surprise surprise, I meant to finish with.
steve from brisbane
10 Oct 12 at 1:17 pm
- The official position of the AUS under Gillards presidency.
twostix
10 Oct 12 at 1:19 pm
Yes, if I recall the only question is whether men is all males above the age of 8 or 13.
Token
10 Oct 12 at 1:19 pm
One honest man in Parliament makes the point I have been saying:
steve from brisbane
10 Oct 12 at 1:21 pm
Tony Abbott’s the kind of bloke who would do it because it’s the right thing to do, regardless of how its received.
Steve D
10 Oct 12 at 1:22 pm
Jezebel.com with such stella headlines on the front page as:
Sexytime Dilemmas: Facials, Masturbation and Butt FingeringSlut-Dropping, and Other Ways College Teaches Kids to Be Sexist Assholes
Swing State Swingers Talk Politics, Sex, Swinging Both Ways
Penis Size Does Matter, According to Study
Are more objective than people in Australia regaring Australian politics according to the supreme intellect of 1735099.
twostix
10 Oct 12 at 1:22 pm
I remember the AUS and that “wives are prostitutes” line. I was at uni at the time. It was probably in the late 1970s. It was one of the lines that people trying to get campuses to leave AUS used against them. I was at UNE when the students voted against AUS.
Jezebel is a feminist site, which is in opposition to sites in the Manosphere. It is accused of misandy and nicknamed Jizzabel.
Julian O'Dea
10 Oct 12 at 1:26 pm
Tim Blair: Peter Slipper resigns as Speaker. This turn of events was apparently caused by Tony Abbott’s sexism.
Gab
10 Oct 12 at 1:34 pm
Who in their right mind sends all these texts? Nothing better to do with their time. My infrequent texts are generally along the lines: Be home in half an hour. At least, I won’t be getting into any trouble.
Judith Sloan
10 Oct 12 at 1:35 pm
Looks like the term “misogyny” is going the same way as “homophobia”: it is meant to turn up the dial making any reasonable critique vulnerable to the charge of hate speech.
Labor women manage to sound like student ideologues well into their thirties and forties.
Viva
10 Oct 12 at 1:37 pm
Gillard shrieking again on QT. She’s discovered a new word “misrepresentation”. She’s used it 25 times in the last three minutes. She’d be awfully familiar with that word, if not the meaning.
Gab
10 Oct 12 at 1:38 pm
It looks like those two clowns Windsor and Oakeshott have some explaining to do over Slipper’s resignation. It seems the “Independents” by voting with Labor (as they have consistently done) might just have pulled the noose on Gillard.
See Chris Kenny’s cryptic comment here. The rest of the article is scathing of Gillard,
H B Bear
10 Oct 12 at 1:38 pm
Yes, I remember that AUS gem too. The one about wanting to declare that “penis in vagina” sex (they used much less polite terms) was not normative. Seeing that debated at UNE by the students, many of them rural, conservative types, was most amusing. They lost that motion, as I recall.
The AUS executive were loonies.
Julian O'Dea
10 Oct 12 at 1:40 pm
It’s the updated replacement for “sexist”, which was an replacement for “chauvinist” once it was worn out.
Each time the word wears out they simply move on.
Most people outside of the uni set had no idea what a Mysgonist is, nor had ever heard of the word until this retarded victim card government got into power.
twostix
10 Oct 12 at 1:46 pm
Numbers, if I were you I’d drop the pedantic prosecutions, as you are unable to grasp basic blockquoting.
oh come on
10 Oct 12 at 1:49 pm
I do think it is a dangerous precedent to have private communications policed like this. How many of us would pass muster?
Andrew Laming has a point.
Julian O'Dea
10 Oct 12 at 1:52 pm
By the way numbers, what do the numbers mean?
oh come on
10 Oct 12 at 1:52 pm
Steve Wynn On Obama: “I’ll Be Damned If I Want To Have Him Lecture Me”
WYNN: I’ve created about 250,000 direct and indirect jobs according to the state of Nevada’s measurement. If the number is 250,000, that’s exactly 250,000 more than this president, who I’ll be damned if I want to have him lecture me about small business and jobs. I’m a job creator. Guys like me are job creators and we don’t like having a bulls-eye painted on our back.
The president is trying to put himself between me and my employees.
RALSTON: How?
By class warfare, by deprecating and calling a group that makes money ‘billionaires and millionaires who don’t pay their share.’ I gave 120% of my salary and bonus away last year to charities, as I do most years. I can’t stand the idea of being demagogued, that is put down by a president who has never created any jobs and who doesn’t even understand how the economy works.
JamesK
10 Oct 12 at 1:53 pm
Wrong fred
JamesK
10 Oct 12 at 1:54 pm
Plenty of us. Those of us who don’t spend our days sending salacious and sexists text like we were hormones-gone-wild adolescents. I’m gathering you would have a problem though.
Gab
10 Oct 12 at 1:55 pm
Steve Wynn not only has amazing casinos, he’s a lifelong Democrat.
I also suspect he and his cronies have made Harry Reid very rich illegally.
Infidel Tiger
10 Oct 12 at 1:57 pm
These foreign sites crowing about Gillard’s ‘smackdown’…it’s akin to someone watching Hitler speak at the Nuremberg rallies and get all fired up whilst being completely ignorant of the context or speaker. “Yeah he really tore those Jews and assorted subhumans a new one! (Whoever they are and whatever they did)”
oh come on
10 Oct 12 at 2:00 pm
Gab
I don’t send texts. I was thinking of private communications in general. Most of us have said or written unguarded things in emails and in private discussion.
Julian O'Dea
10 Oct 12 at 2:02 pm
@OCO: his numbers are likely to be his service number.
FM
10 Oct 12 at 2:02 pm
I don’t speak for “most of us” so I’ll have to take your word as the speaker for the collective.
Gab
10 Oct 12 at 2:05 pm
OCO: you’re ignoring one thing (everyone has here): Abbott’s face in the cut aways during Gillard’s speech did look grimmer and grimmer as she went on. He helped give the impression that he deserved it.
steve from brisbane
10 Oct 12 at 2:07 pm
Sharing texts/emails with work colleagues is different to what you do with friends. It can’t be compared at all.
candy
10 Oct 12 at 2:07 pm
I think with politicians, candy, the line becomes a bit blurred in terms of whether you’re communicating with someone on a purely personal, or a part professional, basis.
steve from brisbane
10 Oct 12 at 2:10 pm
Yep, that’s what I was thinking. Any way to check this rather flashy ex-serviceman’s bona fides? I’ve found servicepeople to be typically reticent about their service. The ones that bang on about it ad naseum often turn out to be frauds. Remember that peculiar character who wrote for some local Canadian paper who claimed to be a vet and was outed as a phoney? I’m getting the same kind of vibe off Numbers.
oh come on
10 Oct 12 at 2:13 pm
Gab, you have never said anything in private you would prefer the whole world didn’t hear?
Julian O'Dea
10 Oct 12 at 2:13 pm
No.
No, he didn’t.
You are a moron liar.
JamesK
10 Oct 12 at 2:14 pm
That mad anti-war self-proclaimed Vietnam vet from Blair’s old site. Ah, good times.
Steve: the fact that, in the washup it was game set and match to the opposition undermines any crowing about Gillard’s hyperventilating. Praising this without knowing the context is exactly as I described above.
oh come on
10 Oct 12 at 2:19 pm
He was probably bemoaning the fact he wasn’t wearing industrial strength earplugs.
Gab
10 Oct 12 at 2:19 pm
The self aggrandising, sanctimonious spud peeler at 8:27am:
and at 8:43am
clinging on still at 12:07pm:
and again at 1:00pm:
Simply heroic stuff.
I’m reminded of Keeping up Appearances and of Hyacinth’s senile father, living in the Hillman car body outside sister Daisy and Onslow’s dilapidated council terrace, snarling at passers by.
The aged old fool is all dressed up in the 50 year old khaki uniform and, rusted rifle at the ready, believes he is back in the trenches of the First World War … it’s a stuck irretrievably in the past thing and most amusing.
Mick Gold Coast QLD
10 Oct 12 at 2:20 pm
OCO: have you read his blog? Looks as genuine as any.
Oh, but that’s right. I have a blog that made it clear I supported John Howard, disliked Kevin Rudd and was dubious about Obama. But, as the brilliant brains trust of Catallaxy knows, I blog from the back room of a Labor MPs office and am a househusband.
steve from brisbane
10 Oct 12 at 2:21 pm
Hence why people who do know the context aren’t so impressed by what she had to say yesterday.
oh come on
10 Oct 12 at 2:22 pm
Which may well be fine if they are from your own phone or computer. But, if the phone or computer is provided by your employer, then those communications are considered to be the property of the employer, whether you’ve sent them to your wife, a colleague, a customer or the postman. Given his penchant for not only the free ride but any other benefit he could conceivably get his grubby fat hands on, I have no doubt Slipper was using a phone paid for by the Commonwealth of Australia.
Which is why Nanny Roxon had to give James $50 grand of taxpayer’s money.
Megan
10 Oct 12 at 2:25 pm
Numbers is no doubt legit, but big shit. You don’t see me boasting about my glory days on the high school rugby pitch or the time I took a hat trick in the under 12′s.
Stop living in the past you sad old bastard.
Infidel Tiger
10 Oct 12 at 2:26 pm
Yes he should have got up and danced a jig as a shrill, near crazed woman suffered an emotional breakdown in parliament and howled, ranted and abused him for 15 minutes.
Idiot.
twostix
10 Oct 12 at 2:26 pm
Communications between the presiding officer of the House of Reps and his staff are not private.
manalive
10 Oct 12 at 2:30 pm
Oops, his or her staff…
manalive
10 Oct 12 at 2:30 pm
Regarding the comments about private communications. There are heaps of posts on this very blog, which is not excatly private, that aspiring politicians could be worried about.
SteveC
10 Oct 12 at 2:30 pm
According to SfB Abbott always “gives the impression he deserves it”.
He “deserved” being linked to Alan Jones’s comments because he didn’t organise a mob with pitchforks to turn up at this house.
He “deserved” the weeks of front page slander and smearing by The ABC and Fairfax because he didn’t snap and hysterically denounce the obviously absurd accusation made about him by long time political enemy and ALP appointee Barbara Ramjan from 35 years ago.
And now his face looking “grim” in the face of a wall of disgusting scripted abuse by the hysterical and emotionally broken supposed Prime Minister in Parliament means he “deserved” the abuse.
These thoughts brought to by Steve “Abbott deserves it” From Brisbane.
twostix
10 Oct 12 at 2:32 pm
manalive, at the time Ashby was not on Slippers staff. Which is why I queried yesterday why someone would accept a job offer from another who had been sending such texts. Presumably Ashby didn’t consider them harassing at the time.
SteveC
10 Oct 12 at 2:33 pm
Yes, my dream of being POTUS has being shattered.
Infidel Tiger
10 Oct 12 at 2:34 pm
Megan, my point is (and I find myself agreeing with Brisbane Steve here) that there is a grey area, and there is the question of common fairness. I used to use a work phone and email to communicate with my wife. This was an accepted thing. We would sometimes say personal things. I would think it very intrusive to have those remarks shared with the world.
Julian O'Dea
10 Oct 12 at 2:34 pm
Hi Alan, as a strong supporter of John Howard and as anti-Rudd and Obama as they come, I still have to say how impressed I was with Julia’s performance yesterday. She really showed what a woman hater that Abbott really is, to international plaudits from informed spectators. It’s about time we rock-ribbed conservatives banded together to elect our ideological brother, Malcolm Turnbull, to head up the coalition. I’ve been speaking to many of the Liberals in the Q&A audience and we all agree. Thanks for having me on the show Alan, you piece of filth.
oh come on
10 Oct 12 at 2:36 pm
Slipper made a crude remark. How many men here have not laughed privately at worse? This place was swimming (!) in bivalve jokes recently. And the ladies joined in, as I recall.
Julian O'Dea
10 Oct 12 at 2:37 pm
I am ever so grateful to you Gab, putting yourself through the torture of listening to the lying witch so that I can be kept up to date by you on her maniacal efforts.
She/It’s been blocked out at our joint, the default position on the remote when it appears on screen is “mute”. She ain’t welcome here and we care not a jot about her mother, sisters, cousins, aunts, pet parrot or dead father.
By the way – it is a revelation reading the confected suppressed wimmenses mantra. Mrs Mick is from a matriarchal SE Asian culture (they have no need to wrest control over their lives, they’ve been in charge for centuries and my family head status is titular) and, whilst she’s been here 20 years or more, she dismisses outright what the shrieking banshees are throwing up, with “These are not women, they are ignorant pigs!”
Mick Gold Coast QLD
10 Oct 12 at 2:38 pm
I endorse that line.
steve from brisbane
10 Oct 12 at 2:38 pm
Errr, homosexuals cruising for some new “talent” ?
Reinforcing the “yuck” factor about girls and women to promote the alternative. And no, homosexuals are not in their right minds, but we mustn’t say that, ever since the American Psychologists Association voted (at one meeting, by a show of hands) that homosexuality is not a mental illness.
I dunno Judith, there could be a whole hidden meaning in there.
A bit like my frequent texting of “the eagle has landed”, and I’m not about the share what I mean by that.
Keith
10 Oct 12 at 2:40 pm
The international reaction to Gillard and Abbott was just cartoonish nonsense. “Feisty redhead kicks mean man in shins.” You go, Girl!
Julian O'Dea
10 Oct 12 at 2:40 pm
“Sounds like a silly statement. It also sound not an argument that all marriage involves prostitution.”
No Steve, only ones involving sex!
Considering marriages can be annulled if not consummated, then all legitimate wives are prostitutes by the definition agreed by Gillard! Duh!
Twodogs
10 Oct 12 at 2:41 pm
Don’t pin a medal on me just yet, Mick. I only listened for that one x three minute screech. Then it was clicked off. There’s only so much one can bear listening to that vile harridan shriek her hypocrisy unashamedly.
Gab
10 Oct 12 at 2:42 pm
Young people are known to SMS pictures of their genitals to each other, so “text” messages can appear a bit tame in comparison.
SteveC
10 Oct 12 at 2:44 pm
@OCO Kev Gillett is an old 7RAR guy (and association official, I think), as well as a long-time conservative blogger.
http://www.kevgillett.net/
If you have concerns, he could help…
FM
10 Oct 12 at 2:44 pm
I agree, Keith. There’s a hint of Madam Lash in that message.
Gab
10 Oct 12 at 2:45 pm
d-b, you couldn’t care less whether your buddies here accurately represent anything about Gillard or Labor.
What you have here characterised as an ‘accurate’ representation, I would consider a tendentious attempt to qualify an absurd statement:
You cannot even attempt to make this appear a reasonable statement without making a fool of yourself. But, sfb, please continue, we find your attempts instructive.
dover_beach
10 Oct 12 at 2:45 pm
twodogs: it’s a one line quote. No doubt the AUS was dominated by mad as cut snake feminists at the time, but if you’re going to honestly critique this statement, you have to see more than one line.
You also cannot claim that the president of such a body means automatically that she must have personally endorsed all policy formulations.
steve from brisbane
10 Oct 12 at 2:45 pm
But of course you do Steve, you big old conservative, you.
oh come on
10 Oct 12 at 2:47 pm
If you find out that anyone of us are the Speaker of the House of Reps feel free to out us to the press.
We sort of expect the people who hold massive power over us all to behave better than Joe down at the service station with porno calenders on the dunny door.
twostix
10 Oct 12 at 2:48 pm
The statement does not say that all sex in marriage has to be a transaction in exchange for love, security and housekeeping, d-b.
The lines around the statement may make the meaning clearer. We don’t know what they are.
You’re supposed to good at understanding words, aren’t you?
steve from brisbane
10 Oct 12 at 2:49 pm
[...] Judith Sloan lectures Julia Gillard on misogyny and sexism: Question 1: Define Sexism and Misogyny. [...]
unwanted lecture … | pindanpost
10 Oct 12 at 2:50 pm
d-b: the statement could easily have been worded “Marriage is prostitution, in that it involves the exchange of ….etc”
It is not worded that way.
steve from brisbane
10 Oct 12 at 2:51 pm
d-b, it’s fairly obvious that the statement means IF sex is provided in a marriage only in return for love, security and house-keeping, then that’s a fairly good definition of prostitution.
Rape in marriage is sex obtained through coercion rather than mutual consent.
That does not mean that all marital sex is rape, in the same way not all marital sex is prostitution.
SteveC
10 Oct 12 at 2:53 pm
FM: thanks for the tip. When I get back to a real computer (rather than this tedious smartphone keyboard) I just might send a quick e-mail to Kev simply for matters of verification. Not saying Numbers is lying about his service history – however I think anyone crowing about something like that is in need of vetting, pardon the pun.
oh come on
10 Oct 12 at 2:55 pm
twostix, there may be people here with aspirations to higher office one day. This kind of forensic approach could affect any of us.
If Gillard resigned today, it would make my week. But I think Abbott was trying to fight fire with fire, and based on a dangerous precedent.
Julian O'Dea
10 Oct 12 at 2:55 pm
@ Mick of Gold Coast
My service was brought up by Rabz and used as a form of abuse. That takes real class/sarc. I did not gratuitously introduce it into the discussion but I reserve the right to call crap when I see it.
One thing I’ve learned over the years is that those bereft of ideas and intellect resort to abuse more often than not. With a few exceptions, this site is notorious.
You bring yourself down to his level when you do the same. You are a complete and utter disgrace.
There could be a few bait-layers (Nashos or Regs) unimpressed by having their service used as a form of abuse. Perhaps I should invite them to the next reunion. You’re also welcome….
1735099
10 Oct 12 at 2:59 pm
Um Mick. I think it was the dog that lived in the car at Daisy’s and not the senile father!
oh come on
10 Oct 12 at 3:01 pm
The statement does not say that all sex in marriage has to be a transaction in exchange for love, security and housekeeping, d-b.
sfb, the claim is sophomoric. Your attempt to save this absurd statement, in this instance, with, to paraphrase, ‘Oh, but she doesn’t mean every sexual encounter between married partners is an instance of prostitution’ is also absurd. Just admit it, FFS. If someone other than Gillard was associated with it you wouldn’t have spent any time defending it. Please, stop.
dover_beach
10 Oct 12 at 3:03 pm
Too true:
Gab
10 Oct 12 at 3:03 pm
Umm no, there’s no “if” or “only” in this broad statement:
Now tell me how somebody “prostitutes” themselves in return for love – if the person they’re having sex with loves them then how is it prostitution?
It’s not, they’re saying that it is, ergo all house wives (security and house-keeping) are prostitutes.
Anyway finally we’ve got you’ll debating whether Gillard believes that marriage is prostitution all the time or some of the time.
Thats how little gravitas she has now.
She’s done.
twostix
10 Oct 12 at 3:05 pm
Just going through Julias maiden speech (or is that sexist?)..
Theres a few howlers there.
For far too long public debate in Australia has failed to nourish or inspire us. For far too long it has been limited to the day-to-day monitoring of the health of our economy rather than the morals and goals of our society. The end result of this political cycle is a weary people who no longer believe what politicians say and who think the politicians saying it do not even believe it themselves.
and
If the politics of values comes to the fore, then the Labor Party will win that contest.
and
It inspired me to spend eight years as an industrial lawyer defending trade unions and working people. In this place, I will remain fiercely committed to working with unions and to working for fair industrial laws.
She should feel shame, her own maiden speech contains more than a grain or 2 of hipocracy in light of recent revelations about her legal and moral failings.
Oh and diont forget, she has shagged her way into, and up the party all her life.
From her Wiki…
She has had previous relationships with union officials Michael O’Connor and Bruce Wilson and fellow Federal Labor MP Craig Emerson.[142] She has never married and has no children.
From her maiden speech
Today I pay tribute to them and especially to the most committed of them all, Michael O’Connor, who has been my closest confidant since those heady days.
thefrollickingmole
10 Oct 12 at 3:05 pm
It would be. Which is why you should keep those kinds of missives off your work phone. Especially if you work for any kind of government bureaucracy. Check the form your employer gave you when he assigned you the phone. I’ll bet it’s in there. If you work for an private employer you may not have been required to sign. You might then have a leg to stand on.
It’s the bog standard HR response but the fact of the matter is that the employer is legally responsible for your actions as an employee.
Megan
10 Oct 12 at 3:05 pm
True, however if one is smart one realises that the laptop and/or cell phone is company property, not one’s own private property, and one should assume that every piece of communication transacted can be/or will be viewed.
Gab
10 Oct 12 at 3:09 pm
d-b, because you are blind to un-justified criticisms if they are made against Gillard, I have to point out that what I am attacking is CL’s (and other’s) attempt to claim that Gillard thought (and still thinks) that all marriage is prostitution.
I have shown why the only evidence I can find does not support that conclusion.
In doing so, it is not necessary for me to argue that the line as found is itself accurate.
Is that clear enough for you?
steve from brisbane
10 Oct 12 at 3:09 pm
Geez if JG can shag her way to the top, doesn’t say much about the standards of ALP blokes. No wonder they were all frothing at the mouth when Natasha Stott-Despoja – a 6/10 at best – became a Senator.
oh come on
10 Oct 12 at 3:14 pm
If the above is true can you please explain or outline what evidence there is that supports Dullard’s claim that Tony Abbott is a Misogynist? Given that you have been supporting such claims.
Old Fridgie
10 Oct 12 at 3:15 pm
Oh Gab, the worst offenders in one workplace were the IT staff themselves. The ones who KNOW how easy it is to find a deleted email. I would have though that a two digit IQ was sufficient to understand this simple concept but no, even MENSA geniuses have failed to get it. See: Slipper, Peter 2012
Megan
10 Oct 12 at 3:15 pm
d-b, it’s fairly obvious that the statement means IF sex is provided in a marriage only in return for love, security and house-keeping,
I really can’t believe the effort being put here to make the above claim remotely plausible. But let’s tease this out, who provides what? As it stands, the relationship seems one in which the wife provides sex, love, and house-keeping, while husband simply provides security. Is that right? Now, it seems to me if he wants love he is inevitably going to return it to his wife. Same goes for sex, and house-keeping. So it’s a transaction that involves a large degree of reciprocity. And the same goes for the security that the wife provides in such married relationships. Consequently, it doesn’t seem at all similar to prostitution, except to those that engage in sophomoric analysis of human relationships.
dover_beach
10 Oct 12 at 3:16 pm
Awkward grammar there…am in no way implying Slipper is a MENSA genius. In fact, the thought…hahahahahaha!
Megan
10 Oct 12 at 3:16 pm
Next up lets talk about Julia Gillard calling all men rapists:
- Official position of the AUS under Julia Eileen Gillard’s leadership.
twostix
10 Oct 12 at 3:17 pm
I’m glad for the clarification, Megan. lol.
——————-
I wonder why Gillard won’t make an honest man out of Timmy?
Gab
10 Oct 12 at 3:17 pm
I am attacking…CL
And you will stoop to defending the absurd in doing so. Understood.
dover_beach
10 Oct 12 at 3:18 pm
Megan, Gab
It is a grey area. And morally, I think it is wrong to hold someone to account for private communications. It is a slippery slope (pardon the pun) and it could affect us all one day.
Julian O'Dea
10 Oct 12 at 3:18 pm
twostix, have you never heard the saying “Girls give sex to get love and boys give love to get sex”? If not, google it, you might learn something. There are whole books written on the subject.
SteveC
10 Oct 12 at 3:19 pm
I see numbers is still banging on about the past…may i regale you all about the time in 1997 i evaded 13 tackles and scored a length of the field try?’Or the night I scored big time at an infamous local watering hole with a sheila who was so hot to trot a car ride home would have inconvenienced her desired goals?
I have a million of these stories and they are all far more interesting than the tales from some leftists bitter and twisted life.
Infidel Tiger
10 Oct 12 at 3:20 pm
Very good advice, but you can assume also that your private equipment is quite open to the authorities. How else to explain the lovely Project Wickenby letter I received from the ATO earlier this year. It was in response to certain email enquiries I made of overseas companies years earlier, using a previous email address at an ISP I had parted company with. It’s all out there and it’s all kept and monitored.
Keith
10 Oct 12 at 3:21 pm
methinks the lad doth protest too much.
And what part of “work” phone/laptop do you not understand?
Gab
10 Oct 12 at 3:22 pm
Wow, Steve, that’s profound. Changed my whole perspective on human relations, that did. And books have even been written about it! Throw away your bibles folks!
oh come on
10 Oct 12 at 3:23 pm
A few weeks ago Stevie proclaimed that an accusation made about by a political enemy of Abbott’s about an event that allegedly happened 35 years ago which despite being interviewed about a couple of times since she never mentioned was “conclusive evidence”.
That was shortly after he stated that a signed and witnessed Statutory Declaration from an ex AWU State President regarding Julia Gillard / Bruce Wilson and Bill Shorten wasn’t.
Don’t go looking for clarity or consistency from Slippery Steve.
twostix
10 Oct 12 at 3:23 pm
So the new bestseller “50 shades of Infidel Tiger” coming soon near you?
thefrollickingmole
10 Oct 12 at 3:24 pm
SteveC, I believe those books sit beside such august titles as ‘Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus’.
dover_beach
10 Oct 12 at 3:24 pm
d-b, you don’t read what I write. Understood.
I said it was a silly statement. Way to defend it, hey?
The point, which you are dancing around, is whether it means “all marriage is prostitution”.
I say it appears not to.
CL claiming that Gillard thought all wives are prostitutes is one of his bullshit exaggerations which you are happy to go along with, because it is Gillard.
steve from brisbane
10 Oct 12 at 3:25 pm
Wow what a misogynist.
How about you take your 1950′s view of female sexuality back to the stone age you sexist creep.
twostix
10 Oct 12 at 3:25 pm
Gab, I am trying to discuss a general principle.
Julian O'Dea
10 Oct 12 at 3:27 pm
How about her supporting the position that all men are rapists.
Or will you not defend that until her next clusterfuck of a failure?
twostix
10 Oct 12 at 3:27 pm
It’s company property and is provided to conduct business on behalf of the company. I can understand your confusion.
Gab
10 Oct 12 at 3:28 pm
AKA The Weiner Principle.
Gab
10 Oct 12 at 3:31 pm
“And morally, I think it is wrong to hold someone to account for private communications.”
That line of defense was howled down when applied by Alan Jones.
DavidJ
10 Oct 12 at 3:34 pm
How bitchy you’re being to Julian today, Gab.
steve from brisbane
10 Oct 12 at 3:36 pm
No, the principle that communications intended to be private should generally remain private. That we have private lives that should generally be sacrosanct.
Julian O'Dea
10 Oct 12 at 3:36 pm
Pleeease twostix!!
liar-steve™ is a consistent dishonest leftist smear merchant and Lying Slapper loyalist.
Why would an additional gillardian scoamf be necessary for him to see the light?
JamesK
10 Oct 12 at 3:36 pm
I said it was a silly statement. Way to defend it, hey?
Yes, I noticed that, but qualifying it, as you are, is defending it.
The point, which you are dancing around, is whether it means “all marriage is prostitution”.
I say it appears not to.
Well, that was practically the case so far as they understood the institution, certainly, the institution as traditionally understood.
CL claiming that Gillard thought all wives are prostitutes is one of his bullshit exaggerations which you are happy to go along with, because it is Gillard.
Yes, I can understand that “all”, as opposed to the “vast majority of” or “very many” marriages are such that those wives are prostitutes, will go down in history as one of CL’s great “bullshit exaggerations”.
Keep talking, sfb.
dover_beach
10 Oct 12 at 3:39 pm
Yeah, that “principle” worked out fantastically for Slipper.
Gab
10 Oct 12 at 3:39 pm
Wow, what’s got into Fauxfacts today ?
Did someone squirt some truth serum into the air-conditioning ?
Paul Sheehan discusses ‘misogyny’
Seems quite relevant to this thread.
Warning – lefty heads exploding in the comments.
(via Bolt).
Keith
10 Oct 12 at 3:40 pm
“It is a grey area. And morally, I think it is wrong to hold someone to account for private communications. It is a slippery slope (pardon the pun) and it could affect us all one day.”
Julian, it came in a court case as evidence. I.e under existing law.
Not that it matters one iota. By the time any of us got into politics, it will be an absolute fucking free-for-all. Young lefties will be breaking into people’s homes to record any personal comments at all. There will be nowhere safe to express an honest opinion. There will be no open debate, only Labor-deemed groupthink. This will creep into the workplace and fuck anyone with an opinion. Free speech is dead.
Twodogs
10 Oct 12 at 3:46 pm
Oh look, another hypocritical Misogynist. Why don’t you threaten her with violence again Steve?
And then tell us all that Abbott really truly is a Misogynist and how awesome Gillard is for her wailing mental breakdown yesterday.
twostix
10 Oct 12 at 3:47 pm
And what a bullshit exaggeration that is, too.
steve from brisbane
10 Oct 12 at 3:49 pm
d-b, I’ve told you before, you’ve become worse at debate and reasonable argument this last year.
steve from brisbane
10 Oct 12 at 3:52 pm
The fact that private communications (however obtained) were used by Abbott suggests an illiberal trend, which I don’t think should be applauded.
It is applying the Leftist maxim that “the personal is political”.
I generally identify with Tony Abbott’s views and approach, but I suspect this was a mistake.
Julian O'Dea
10 Oct 12 at 3:53 pm
Anyone else think Julian sounds like SFB?
Oh stop with the lies you Hi-Alanist moron.
Gab
10 Oct 12 at 3:54 pm
@ ANDREW (Who shouts)
At the beginning of my part in this discussion, I posted a question to Judith Sloan on 10th Oct at 5.07am.
Nilk replied (civilly) at 7.09am.
At 7.35 am, I replied in a post which contained no ranting (violent or otherwise).
At 7.40am, Rabz replied with –
(My bold)
Tal (at 7.57) posted about ironing.
I replied to that at 8.10am and called Rabz for his abuse. The words I used were –
Having said that, you use of this kind of abuse reveals two things -
1. You don’t have a point to make.
2. You’re about as low as a snake’s belly. Anyone who uses abuse of ex service personnel whilst hiding behind a keyboard is a waste of space. I’m glad you weren’t in my rifle section.
I’m to assume that this is what you would describe as
Rabz’ reply to that was (inter alia)
(my bold)
At 8.27am I invited Rabz to a reunion.
His response (at 8.29am) was –
So being abused in the foulest terms, having my service held up to ridicule, being called a “wanker” a “sponger” and “as dumb as dogshit” is OK, and disagreeing with the host and the prevailing opinion is not?
It’s abundantly clear that the only crime that will get you banned from this site is having a divergent opinion.
That says a great deal about the values of the extreme Right, and the totalitarian nature of the discourse here.
1735099
10 Oct 12 at 3:55 pm
Despite almost universal commentary to the contrary, Kieren Gilbert, Laura Tingle and Dennis Atkins just opined on PM Agenda (Sky News) that yesterday Tony Abbott came out looking bad.
Viva
10 Oct 12 at 3:59 pm
Gab:
“Oh stop with the lies you Hi-Alanist moron.”
I don’t understand that.
Julian O'Dea
10 Oct 12 at 3:59 pm
LOL.
Gab, a proud member of the Catallaxy “If you disagree with me, you’re a crypto-Lefty, you don’t fool me” set of fools.
steve from brisbane
10 Oct 12 at 3:59 pm
Can someone please explain this term. Thanks.
Viva
10 Oct 12 at 4:01 pm
Beep, beep, beep- that is the sound of the truck full of irony being backed over your statement.
Seriously, you left wing liars so consumed by your own bullshit that you can never stand back and truly appreciate your breathtaking hypocrisy.
Huckleberry Chunkwot
10 Oct 12 at 4:01 pm
There d_b, the frequently repugnant liar-steve™ a wretched excuse for manhood reckons you’ve become worse at debate.
I guess it must be difficult to live with yourself after such an indictment from this conspicuously dishonest peddler of perversion.
And now we have a poisonous loon numbers infestation
JamesK
10 Oct 12 at 4:02 pm
How to read this blog…
read..read…read… Comment by numbers…scroll,scroll,scroll, resume reading….
thefrollickingmole
10 Oct 12 at 4:04 pm
spud peeler – you’re having a meltdown, sweetie.
Please cease and desist.
BTW, I’ve been having a good ol’ laugh at your expense.
You fucking moron.
Rabz
10 Oct 12 at 4:06 pm
For those who came late: “Hi Alan-ism” is a long standing claim made against me that I am like a Labor Party operative who would ring Alan Jones (or other talk back radio) and disingenuously claim that I am a Coalition supporter, but then proceed to diss the party.
This is based on the fact that I have (temporarily, I hope) turned on the Liberal Party because I consider Tony Abbott a poor leader (essentially, he’s been promoted above his competency and has flakey, off the cuff policy ideas) and the party itself needs to have a serious purge of the anti climate science element.
steve from brisbane
10 Oct 12 at 4:08 pm
The example: “Hi Alan, I’m a life long Liberal voter, but you know, I’ve really got my doubts about this latest idea of Tony Abbott.”
steve from brisbane
10 Oct 12 at 4:11 pm
Viva,
An example transcript:
Hi Alan,
I’ve been a Liberal voter all my life and I’m also a fairly conservative catholic. However, I’m very concerned that the gubberment still hasn’t shut down a ‘blog’ where a bunch of knuckle dragging, mouth breathing evolutionary throwbacks gather to wallow in a climate of hate™ of their own making.
These disgusting degenerates frequent a website known as Catallaxy Files, which given the level of discourse on display, should more aptly be named ‘Catatonic Bile’. Their guru is an extremely unprepossessing, bald fascist dwarf from South Africa, who has the nasty habit of popping up on that racist lunatic Bolt’s show wearing some of the most awful ties in the history of humankind.
The cranky foul mouthed throwbacks who infest this site have also taken to hurling the most obscene, insulting abuse at my good self when I try and move the topic of discussion on to important matters such as contraception, abortion, ejaculation and Tonee Yabbott’s budgie smugglers. Why they do this is beyond me. As a result, I’m forced to regularly attempt to direct the ‘discussion’ back to these matters of vital import, inevitably to be met with the same barrage of depraved, incoherent abuse.
Quite frankly Alan, I don’t know why they or more importantly I, bother.
Love your work, Steve from Brisbane.
Rabz
10 Oct 12 at 4:12 pm
Oh so that’s why you dishonestly and hysterically defend Gillard with every breath in your body and every fibre in your being?
Because Tony Abbott is a flaky leader.
Well it goes without saying then that if the leader is flaky you become a raging communist defender of the worst PM in history until he’s replaced.
twostix
10 Oct 12 at 4:14 pm
Got the picture.
Viva
10 Oct 12 at 4:16 pm
No, it’s based on the fact that you take the leftist position on 90% of the issues discussed here. Then you posture as a conservative. And a Catholic, despite the fact you stand at odds with a great many of that church’s teachings.
The fact most here find you perfidious involves more than your ‘recent’ split with the Liberal Party.
oh come on
10 Oct 12 at 4:17 pm
@ Rabz
Coming to the next reunion?
Now that would be a laugh.
1735099
10 Oct 12 at 4:23 pm
No, dickhead – and don’t ask again, you’re sounding creepy and obsessive.
Rabz
10 Oct 12 at 4:26 pm
Gillard, Roxon and Pliberseck (?) are all what I think are perfect examples of misandrists. You wanna dish it out girls (and by golly aren’t you just the kind of schoolyard bully girls who like to gang up and bitch), then you take it back. They have no credibility at all and the men in the party look incredibly bad as supporters of this puerile level of “debate”. When are the grown ups gonna take over?
elizabeth
10 Oct 12 at 4:27 pm
I’m actually to the left of Mao Tse Tung and support mass murder of the capitalist class because they’re opposed to the People’s Republic of Gillard levying a Great Big Tax on Everything on the pretext that we can actually improve the weather by giving lots of money to my campaign to elect James Hansen President of the USA to save the planet from Christopher Monckton.
Apart from that, I’m a conservative.
Tom
10 Oct 12 at 4:28 pm
The trolls are now behaving like frogs in a saucepan because they know it’ll all be over soon. Get used to saying: please Mr Prime Minister Abbott, sir.
Tom
10 Oct 12 at 4:32 pm
@ Rabz
Gotta be an improvement on prissy and abusive….
1735099
10 Oct 12 at 4:37 pm
I think ‘salty lips’ or something like that is the new term; arse is rather vulgar.
Chris M
10 Oct 12 at 4:41 pm
Is there any more hypocritical blogger than Stevieliar QC?
Tiny Dancer
10 Oct 12 at 4:45 pm
If you mean more hypocritical dishonest lying creepy git then no….. no there isn’t.
JamesK
10 Oct 12 at 4:50 pm
This is, of course, also blog central for Steve Derangement Syndrome.
steve from brisbane
10 Oct 12 at 5:18 pm
Have you coked the dinner, Stevieliar QC
Tiny Dancer
10 Oct 12 at 5:34 pm
Mr. Abbott spoke about housewives ironing. I guess he figured that was something housewives did. If he had said housewives/househusbands, would it have been okay then?
I don’t think it’s a secret that many feminists hate women choosing to stay home, but for the life of me I can’t understand why they should think it such a horrible lifestyle choice.
I’ve been at home for over 30 years. We taught our kids at home for over 18 years. I think it’s a wonderfully free, interesting, multifaceted career choice. Why should Gillard think it otherwise?
Ellen of Tasmania
10 Oct 12 at 5:40 pm
Incoming, SoB! And it’s friendly fire, too! That’s gotta sting.
Oh come on
10 Oct 12 at 5:58 pm
Tiny: has he coked the dinner? Do you mean he’s spiked his family’s food with narcotics or burnt it to charcoal?
Oh come on
10 Oct 12 at 6:00 pm
Numbers.
There’s quite a few current servicemen and ex-servicemen on this site. I’m one of them, done over 30 years.
Quite seriously, you are embarrassing us all, and you are breaking faith.
You may certainly mention your service – but it is NOT to be used as a platform to advance your political views or opinions and you should damned well know that, it’s drummed in as part of the ethos. We do not do that because it aligns your service with a specific political or ideological viewpoint. That is outside the bounds of appropriate behaviour – we do NOT risk politicising the services in any way, shape or form irrespective of our personal views.
That is a clear breach of behaviour expected of you, a clear breach of service ethos, and a clear breach of faith with the veteran community as well.
Stop. Doing. It.
Go and have a think about what you are doing, drop the use of your service number as a handle and then come back.
I am not asking you to change your views one iota.
I am asking you to stop doing something you are required not to do, and for very good reasons.
Mk50 of Brisbane
10 Oct 12 at 6:04 pm
PS. Steve – we aren’t deranged. It’s simply that you’ve been pinned by most here as being exactly what you are; a supercilious, pernicious, dissembling little barnacle. And since barnacles are tenacious creatures, you continuously keep flogging your shagged out old phoney schtick here. And we keep reminding you that we know what you are (see above). That’s not derangement. It’s simply acknowleding and defending the truth by not allowing you to distort it.
Oh come on
10 Oct 12 at 6:05 pm
Thanks Mark.
FFS, he’s an utter embarrassment.
Rabz
10 Oct 12 at 6:10 pm
I have great respect for those who have served, and – as I said above – they are generally a reticent bunch when it comes to mentioning it. They certainly don’t wave it around like a desperate whore would a cheap negligee in the hope of attracting some trade.
MK50: do you know that this character was a serviceman? If not, is there any way to confirm this? His conduct here…raises questions.
Oh come on
10 Oct 12 at 6:11 pm
Mk50 of Brisbane at 6:04pm – well said mate, and most certainly well deserved.
Mick Gold Coast QLD
10 Oct 12 at 6:34 pm
Ellen of Tasmania
Gillard hates to be reminded what normal women do.
My wife has always ironed my shirts.
Julian O'Dea
10 Oct 12 at 6:39 pm
OCO – yes, Numbers was a nasho and that’s absolutely no secret at all. Click on his handle and look at his site. I have not read his book (advertised on his site but out of courtesy I won’t mention his name and I ask others to respect that as well) yet I know a lot of Vietvets. Hell, I’ve served with a lot of Vietvets.
Vanishingly few act in this war, in fact Numbers is the only one I know of.
I knew of a couple of WWI and WWII vets who acted similarly, the reasons were such as to simply evoke the most profound compassion – the least damaged of those men was with 8th Division. Enough said, we all know what happened to those poor bastards. The WWI bloke – you just do not want to know. It was far worse in its way than four years as a Nip PoW. I’ve seen 8th Div men literally weep with anguish when told his tale. Enough to say that he must have punched a hundred local coppers over the years and spent many months in total sleeping it off in the cells, and not one ever laid a charge. He’d paid for such things in advance, and a thousand times over.
Both are gone, now, of course.
Numbers does not have their reasons.
I simply do not care what his political feelings/ideology are. He’s welcome to have whatever he wants in that regard.
I DO care that he’s doing something he should not really do, and that is linking prior service to current political (indeed any political) views.
That’s simply not appropriate behaviour for an ex-serviceman.
It just isn’t.
Mk50 of Brisbane
10 Oct 12 at 6:39 pm
Thanks, Mk50. Well said both times. His behaviour reminds me of what Gillard did yesterday and what she has allowed to happen for the past two weeks, politically trade on her grief with disregard for her mother’s grief.
Gab
10 Oct 12 at 6:42 pm
Just looking in, and the troll situation remains chronic. Bye.
blogstrop
10 Oct 12 at 6:50 pm
OCO, you’re a bore. I’ve explained before, it isn’t that I’ve gone wildly left; it’s the Right (especially in the US, with some spill over into Australia) that has moved to the right.
As for Catholicism, about 90% of Catholics disagree with the contraception teaching. I strongly support a priesthood that can marry, but don’t support women priests. How the Church handles gay relationships is going to be problematic – it is another issue where the laity is simply ignoring Church teaching, but how the Church can accommodate it is very problematic. (See Church of England for details.) The Pope is with me on climate change, and accepts his scientific advice on that topic. (It is very embarrassing for its credibility that the Right in the US, and as represented here, does not.)
I don’t support gay marriage, and am even leery of civil unions, but if de facto couples are going to be treated as if they were married, extending de facto benefits to gay couples is probably inevitable. They can have civil unions then.
Abortion: better legal than illegal, but certainly, as few abortions as possible should be the goal. The reality is, the best way of assuring that is encouraging responsible use of contraception. Pro-lifers who are against every single form of contraception prefer theological purity over the reality that there always be some women seeking abortion if they have an unwanted pregnancy. It’s better to not have the unwanted pregnancy.
steve from brisbane
10 Oct 12 at 6:50 pm
The public debate has reached an all time low. The cultural Marxists have won. Child has been set upon parent. Wife has been set upon husband. This thing will not ‘correct’ itself, any more than Classical virtues were bound to win out in Europe 200 AD.
As we enter the new Dark Ages, PC is the new Christianity. Chaucerian monks and friars of crass feminism, anti-racism, etc, will be the big winners.
Big Jim
10 Oct 12 at 6:54 pm
Has that been confirmed by anyone who served with him, to your knowledge?
Numbers’s behaviour reminds me of the case of that WW2 (or was it Korean War?) vet who was exposed as a phoney a few years ago; the guy who became the head of one of the ex-serviceman’s organisations, was claiming full veteran’s benefits, the works. He must have had a plausible story to tell to have got so far before being found out.
On balance, I’m sure Numbers is who he says he is. But his behaviour raises red flags.
Oh come on
10 Oct 12 at 6:54 pm
Steve is by is own admission a far left, anti-Catholic, homophobic, abortion loving loon. He says as much above.
Infidel Tiger
10 Oct 12 at 6:57 pm
Oh noes! SoB called me a bore (!!!)
And I didn’t go any further than that. No interest in reading any more dissembling from him. Seen more than enough already.
Oh come on
10 Oct 12 at 7:02 pm
You’re summarising how CL would put it, IT.
He’s a pinhead wannabe Crusader Pope who would be happy burning Gillard on the top of Parliament House for past adultery, before arresting every doctor who has referred a woman for abortion, and then nuking Mecca as a way to end his imagined “clash of civilisations”.
steve from brisbane
10 Oct 12 at 7:02 pm
Steve from Brisbane
Interesting.
I am dubious about climate change. I am very much against legalised abortion. I support Humanae Vitae, which is probably infallible teaching BTW.
As I said before, my values approximate Tony Abbott’s on social issues.
I used to vote Labor but I vote Liberal now.
Julian O'Dea
10 Oct 12 at 7:04 pm
This should be game set and matfch for Abbot.
He should start praising Mc Clelland, bring up the Wilson affair, etc and aks when the adults of Smith and Mc Clelland are going to get rid of Ju-liar and DC.
.
10 Oct 12 at 7:05 pm
Interesting that you used to vote Labor, Julian.
As for Humanae Vitae, given that it is virtually never preached anywhere now (at least in the West), as priests know it is a pointless task, and that there was theological opinion against it from the start, I just can’t see that there will not be a move in the future to change that teaching. I know the excuses that are made to explain that the change in the teaching on usury was not comparable: I find those excuses unconvincing.
steve from brisbane
10 Oct 12 at 7:12 pm
@ MK50
I presume you’re addressing me. In future use my tag. It was given to me in 1969. I didn’t ask for it, but reserve the right to use this unsolicited gift as I please.
That’s fine. Thanks for your service. You have the right to express your opinions – just as I do.
Why are you embarrassed? Would you be so put out if I didn’t challenge the extremist orthodoxy paraded here? I’ve noticed something interesting. My service only becomes an issue with those who disagree with my opinions.
And who are “us”? Who are the self-appointed provosts who decide what is politically correct and what is heresy where veterans are concerned? And what is this “faith” I am allegedly breaking?
Is it the same “faith” inculcated by senior NCOs back in Holsworthy when I was told that I was going to save South Vietnam from Communism? Is it the same faith betrayed so comprehensively on my RTA when I was told that “Vietnam wasn’t a real war” (by a Liberal staffer of all people) and that I had been away killing babies for a year?
You might be interested in some thoughts on the subject.
Is it the same faith that evokes foul abuse from many on this site when I have the temerity to disagree with their extreme opinions?
Now here’s the thing. Scroll up through the topic. Show me where I mention my service up front. Show me where I’ve used it as a platform. My only reference was to call Rabz for his/her disgraceful behaviour. Do you believe I don’t have the right to defend myself? Perhaps you should address your concerns towards those who think it’s OK to use active service as an object of derison.
The first reference to my service is Rabz calling me a “spud peeler”. At that point the only link to my service was my regimental number, and as I pointed out above, it was given to me – I didn’t ask for it. Many don’t know what it means anyway. It’s just a tag.
What breathtaking arrogance! I am a civilian, and have been since 1971. The last time I took orders from someone in uniform was on my discharge. I’m not sure whether you’re still in uniform or not, but if you are, kindly address your commands to those who have no choice. Ultimately, it’s this question of free choice (allegedly a value espoused here) that trumps everything else.
<blockquote>stop doing something you are required not to do
Who “requires” me not to comment on a blogsite using my regimental number as a tag?
No, but you are asking me not to express them.
In my book, that’s totalitarianism. Do you have a name for it?
1735099
10 Oct 12 at 7:13 pm
Steve
Fr Brian Harrison argued that Humanae Vitae is infallible. It is a while since I read his argument but it seemed strong to me.
I can’t see the teaching being changed. As you know, the Church is not run by referendum.
Julian O'Dea
10 Oct 12 at 7:25 pm
Dogshit, you’re a waste of food with no redeeming features. There is absolutely nothing about you to like. You’re a hateful, spiteful, narcissistic piece of shit. If you were a dog, I’d do the compassionate thing and put a bullet through you. I’m serious.
We have a strumpet for a prime minister and you are her blog pimp. But you don’t even have the talent to be an arsehole like John McTernan. You’re just an ignorant, suckhole nobody from the suburbs desperate for attention like an emotionally disturbed child.
You have nothing to say of value about anything, but you’re desperate to believe you do and you have an ego the size of a house.
You’re a troll. You’re despised here. Go away.
Tom
10 Oct 12 at 7:26 pm
It is really dis-spiriting reading sfb’s comment above. He evidences a man whose moral beliefs are a horrible botch and mere conventions. There is nothing that knits the various moral views he expresses above together in any rational way. They are literally a hodgepodge. He sounds like another McTernan, not worried about the rationality of his statements, but merely concerned with whether they will retain and attract supporters.
dover_beach
10 Oct 12 at 7:30 pm
I’m not a Mick but I’d be shocked if it wasn’t preached in every parish in the land.
99.9% of Christians still covet their neighbour’s ass and they still teach that as a sin.
Infidel Tiger
10 Oct 12 at 7:45 pm
So can SfB provide links to old posts that prove he was a rusted on Coalition fan and not a lefty flak?
MDMConnell
10 Oct 12 at 8:02 pm
He’s embarrassed cos he’s a proud warrior and you’re a dickwad.
JamesK
10 Oct 12 at 8:03 pm
Be funny if someone asked the PM of her views of Kevin Rudd attending Scores nightclub. The opportunities for revealing the rank hypocrisy of this confected, manufactured campaign of outrage are endless.
Rousie
10 Oct 12 at 8:20 pm
Correction: I must qualify my previous indictment of the age. I suppose, buying in to the whole ‘dark ages’ concept was some kind of sub-conscious curry-favouring with modern sensibilities. (It’s so easy to do when you slip into the contemporary, magisterial, pseudo-NYT op-ed mode.) I apologise unreservedly for smearing my blessed ancestors, their church and their glorious past.
Medieval times were really quite good in the scheme of things. The European Middle Ages were wholesome and fair compared with where we are heading. Again, I don’t know what I was thinking. Forgive me.
Big Jim
10 Oct 12 at 8:57 pm
Numbers:
False. I am asking you not to link your ideology as you have been.
Yes, you being dishonourable.
Note I have not attacked your views, numbers. Put words I have not uttered in my mouth, and that will change very quickly.
I am asking you to stop being a jerk.
Mk50 of Brisbane
10 Oct 12 at 8:57 pm
Correction: ‘curry-favouring’ = favour-currying
Big Jim
10 Oct 12 at 9:03 pm
Pompous ass.
wreckage
10 Oct 12 at 9:06 pm
People asking you to shut up is not totalitarianism. The government telling you to shut up or face imprisonment is. That is because totalitarianism is a word used to describe the State. Expressing support for totalitarianism (in its correct usage) could also be described as totalitarianism.
If I ask you for a dollar I am not a tax. If I have rules in my house I am not a police state. If I wear a large hat I am neither a Monarchy nor Petrine Succession. My adherence to any edicts of religion are not “a theocracy”. And so on.
wreckage
10 Oct 12 at 9:12 pm
Too funny. Rabz and Mk50 and Quentin George and nilk and Token and Skuter and Dr Faustus and Infidel Tiger have striven manfully to no avail. Ya can’t educate dills.
I wore No 1 as a loose head rugby prop and 11 as an open side in rugby league. I didn’t ask for these personality defining symbols on my back, someone else gave them to me … as a gift. That was back in the ‘60s and ‘70s, 40 to 50 years ago, so there, shut up!
In 13 or 14 seasons of hard graft winning ball for poncy, profligate, poofy backs I never, ever, ever scored a try. In the beginning, when I was shiny new, they told me – coaches and managers – that I’d score a try but it didn’t happen. I’m bitter about that still – it has defined my very existence since.
I could otherwise have jagged a starring role in the new bestseller “50 shades of Infidel Tiger” (pre-publishing marketed by thefrollickingmole at 3:24pm) but I’ll merely appear as a dehumanising initial and surname on the team list in the appendices.
But yet, at dusty Wiley Park Oval as we returned to the sheds I remember the fans for the other mob abused me, personally abused me with their chant of “Old Boys are losers, Old Boys are losers … .” We were losing at the time.
I am still astonished and personally very hurt. Mum never told me that people are mean.
For these reasons from now on, I want you all to call me “No 1 or No 11″ … no, that’s complicated … just call me “Loretta”.
You know it makes sense.
Mick Gold Coast QLD
10 Oct 12 at 11:10 pm
What would you call a (Coalition) government offering the choice of two years in the military or three in jail?
1735099
11 Oct 12 at 4:47 am
Tell me about it.
Mind you, I’ve taught a lot of kids down through the years – allegedly with intellectual impairments – who’ve caught on a lot quicker than
.
The other difference is that on the whole these kids behaved with civility.
1735099
11 Oct 12 at 5:04 am
Well this thread sure went into the crapper in a big way. Could we please stop making every thread all about the trolls please ?
Keith
11 Oct 12 at 5:44 am
Crap, I’d better tell Father next sunday at Mass not to mention it.
And all the other things, perhaps is might be better if a few of the priests I know should be quietly told that the laity don’t agree with them.
This is one of the dumbest things I’ve yet heard. It’s the Catholic Church that is leading the charge against abortion, and when you check those christians who go out on marches (which never seem to make the news) against it, the majority of those are Catholic.
The new Ordinariate welcomed quite a few former Anglicans back into the fold recently, and that included clergy, so don’t try to tell me the Church has no relevance.
If, for some reason I can’t make it to the church I usually attend, then there’s one closer to home that has clergy who are just as traditional and happy to expound upon those teachings.
The abortion issue is one that has also won over converts to catholicism, because no other denomination has categorically stood against it so steadfastly.
nilk
11 Oct 12 at 6:17 am
nilk, you’re telling me that you have a priest who frequently preaches against married couples using contraception?
In my experience of church going (which is quite extensive) I reckon I have not heard such a teaching mentioned for at least 30 years. Basically, by the mid 70′s, I think most parish priests gave up on it as a message which was going to be ignored.
It seems to me that, for some peculiar reason, this blog attracts traditionalist Catholics (or wannabe Catholics) who really want to go back to Latin and probably regret Vatican 2. Such people tend to give a very false impression of where the Church is at.
Steve from Brisbane
11 Oct 12 at 6:53 am
As for d-b’s comment: You’re being a drama queen.
My comments indicate a relatively conservative approach towards priesthood and sexuality, while acknowledging that the Church is likely to come under increasing pressure to not condemn all homosexual relationships.
If a huge proportion of the laity increasingly cannot accept that all homosexual relationships are intrinsically disordered by virtue of the sexual acts that happen within them, this is a real challenge.
I do not know how it will be dealt with. I do not have a clear view on it myself. But I can see how it is likely to be a real issue for the church, as it has been for the Anglicans.
Steve from Brisbane
11 Oct 12 at 7:07 am
Cardinal Pell spoke in favour of Humanae Vitae a few years ago. It was reported in the press. Rather generously, as I recall.
The Catholic Church provides advice on natural family planning.
The Church of England was opposed to artificial contraception until a Lambeth Conference in the 1920s.
Steve, I attend both English and Latin masses.
Julian O'Dea
11 Oct 12 at 7:23 am
Julian: well of course Pell may have spoken about it.
I’m talking at the parish level.
I remember vaguely it being the subject of homilies in the late sixties; it caused some consternation within my own family.
But a short time later, contraception pretty much stopped being mentioned at all. I don’t know that there has ever been a teaching so thoroughly rejected by the laity, who do so in good conscience. Personally, I wouldn’t be surprised if it is largely responsible for the huge drop off in the use of personal confession too.
steve from brisbane
11 Oct 12 at 7:34 am
Steve, if a person doesn’t want to follow Church teaching, it would be more intellectually honest just to admit to not being a genuine Catholic.
Julian O'Dea
11 Oct 12 at 7:46 am
Moreover, if their consciences are so untroubled, why do they avoid confession?
Julian O'Dea
11 Oct 12 at 7:48 am
Except “love they neighbour,” teachings on poverty and materialism, marriage, chastity, mass attendance and about a dozen others.
Pretty much. Take Steve, for example. He supports abortion. Steve believes that the Magisterium formulates dogma on the basis of what appears in The Age and on Q&A.
C.L.
11 Oct 12 at 7:50 am
Julian, liar-steve™ is an inveterate liar, pervert, misogynist and slime-merchant which, besides being contrary to Church teaching, means he’s unlikely to recognise his own hypocrisy much less admit to it
JamesK
11 Oct 12 at 7:52 am
No need to emphasise his positives, James!
Rabz
11 Oct 12 at 8:18 am
CL and d-b try this on all the time.
The teaching on contraception is ignored as making no sense to people.
Catholics (even non mass attending ones) do not intellectually reject “love thy neighbour”, or the obvious teachings against adultery, lying, stealing etc.
The Church evolves over time, there is no doubt about that. People who say “well the Church teaches X, Y & Z and that’s that” ignore that the Church lives in a changing world of changing understanding. It is hopeless to argue that it can stay static.
If you seriously wanted people who reject Humanae Vitae to stop attending Church, I expect you would see the congregations cut by more than half instantly across at least the West.
This would not be a good outcome.
steve from brisbane
11 Oct 12 at 8:54 am
And by the way, it is one of CL’s bullshit exaggerations to say I do not “support abortion.”
I don’t agree entirely with the way the Church analyses the issue, but don’t bother arguing it in detail here.
steve from brisbane
11 Oct 12 at 9:08 am
Well this thread sure went into the crapper in a big way. Could we please stop making every thread all about the trolls please ?
Clearly the discussion is too challenging for you, or maybe it just does not say the things that you are comfortable and secure about.
Somebody else posted up, oh yeah, harden up of F off.
Xevram
11 Oct 12 at 9:14 am
Philomena……..have you taken your Mede?
Tal
11 Oct 12 at 9:18 am
Meds
Tal
11 Oct 12 at 9:18 am
My comments indicate a relatively conservative approach
The Church evolves over time…
No, this is precisely your problem. You are simply a conventionalist, and you imagine that the Church must itself adopt conventionalism in morality; slavishly adopting the mores of the time in order not to lose parishioners.
If you seriously wanted people who reject Humanae Vitae to stop attending Church, I expect you would see the congregations cut by more than half instantly across at least the West.
This would not be a good outcome.
Why? What is the good of their attending a Church that merely regurgitates the morality that they find in broader society? The can simply read The Age if they want that.
dover_beach
11 Oct 12 at 9:21 am
And by the way, it is one of CL’s bullshit exaggerations to say I do not “support abortion.”
Ah, your slip is showing.
dover_beach
11 Oct 12 at 9:23 am
.
There are those who operate on that principle, including the “Temple Police” who after about 15 years of trying, finally succeeded in having our local pastor, Bishop Bill Morris of Toowoomba Diocese, sacked by the Vatican.
The church in Australia has drifted inexorably to the right recently, under the stewardship of George Pell, Tony Abbott’s little mate.
Despite Morris’ removal, the inclusive structures he helped set up in Toowoomba, including a migrant resettlement centre (TRAMS) SPRED, an agency that provides pastoral care for people with disabilities, and women routinely continue to preach most Sundays in my local church.
Morris was a visionary, and too honest and compassionate for the hardline rightists who believe they own the hearts and minds of Catholics in South West Queensland.
I had been a Special School principal for over 18 years when years ago Bill Morris phoned one day asking if he could visit the school. This was the first time in my experience in many different parts of Queensland when a leader of an established church demonstrated any interest in children with disabilities.
He did so, and out of that initial visit grew a programme (the above mentioned SPRED – modelled on a Chicago initiative) which took these kids through the same sacramental programme as their able-bodied peers.
This is the kind of compassion that the Catholic church under Pell and Benedict XVI finds unacceptable.
1735099
11 Oct 12 at 9:28 am
Oh yeah, that was a mistake. “that I support abortion.”
d-b, you were saying here recently that you weren’t even sure that there was such a thing as innate homosexuality. I thought this was a pretty remarkable thing to say, and indicates an extremely narrow view and understanding of any matter relating to sexuality.
No wonder you think Church teaching can’t change on anything.
steve from brisbane
11 Oct 12 at 9:31 am
d-b, you were saying here recently that you weren’t even sure that there was such a thing as innate homosexuality. I thought this was a pretty remarkable thing to say, and indicates an extremely narrow view and understanding of any matter relating to sexuality.
Not at all. If I remember correctly, I was merely turning social constructionism back upon homosexuality. I’m questioning the idea that any sexual practice beyond sexual intercourse is necessarily innate. What is “extremely narrow” about such a question even when it is asked from a different perspective? It’s not as if I saying that if something is not innate it does not exist or is therefore immoral.
No wonder you think Church teaching can’t change on anything.
Why would you say that? If we found that homosexuality was innate this would not change the moral teaching of the Church because the fact that something is innate isn’t the ground for it being good or well-ordered.
dover_beach
11 Oct 12 at 10:12 am
Oh yeah, that was a mistake. “that I support abortion.”
Yes, you don’t support abortion but think it should be legal but rare; makes as much sense as not supporting murder or theft but thinking that that they both should be legal but rare.
dover_beach
11 Oct 12 at 10:14 am
.
There are those who operate on that principle, including the “Temple Police” who after about 15 years of trying, finally succeeded in having our local pastor, Bishop Bill Morris of Toowoomba Diocese, sacked by the Vatican.
The church in Australia has drifted inexorably to the right recently, under the stewardship of George Pell, Tony Abbott’s little mate.
Despite Morris’ removal, the inclusive structures he helped set up in Toowoomba, including a migrant resettlement centre (TRAMS) SPRED, an agency that provides pastoral care for people with disabilities, and women preaching routinely continue.
Morris was a visionary, and too honest and compassionate for the hardline rightists who believe they own the hearts and minds of Catholics in South West Queensland.
I had been a Special School principal for over 18 years when Bill Morris phoned one day asking if he could visit the school. This was the first time in my experience all over Queensland when a leader of an established church demonstrated any interest in children with disabilities.
He did so, and out of that initial visit grew a programme (the above mentioned SPRED which took these kids through the same sacramental programme as their able-bodied peers.
This is the kind of compassion that the Catholic church under Pell and Benedict XVI finds unacceptable.
1735099
11 Oct 12 at 10:26 am
No. I do not support illicit drug use at all, but do not freak out at all harm minimisation approaches towards the issue either.
Not all Australians are Catholic or Christian pro-lifers; we know backyard abortion happens when legal abortion is not available.
If you have a problem with my approach, I take it you have a problem with every Catholic politician who has (like Tony Abbott) said he goes along with the safe, legal and rare formula.
No, I bet you won’t raise a word against him about it.
steve from brisbane
11 Oct 12 at 10:46 am
Ask any teenage boy, and they’ll tell you.
steve from brisbane
11 Oct 12 at 10:47 am
Numbers
You are mixing up good with bad. Some of what Bishop Morris did sounds good, and some it not so good.
The faithful have a right to expect that their bishops will follow the Church’s line. If Bishop Morris wants things like women preaching, there are other churches that provide that, including the Anglicans in many places.
Tony Abbott, as a Catholic politician, must face many moral dilemmas. It is natural that he should seek advice from Cdl Pell.
Julian O'Dea
11 Oct 12 at 11:04 am
Like all of the Church’s teachings and Christ’s commands.
News at 11.
C.L.
11 Oct 12 at 11:05 am
By the way, Paul Collin’s succinct summary in the paper today of the unresolved issues from Vatican 2 seems pretty good to me.
In truth, however, I would go wider and say that the Church is still coming to grips with the Darwinian revolution and its effects on the the understanding of original sin. There is no simple way to address that; but I note that if Pelagius had won out over Augustine, we wouldn’t have the problem today.
steve from brisbane
11 Oct 12 at 11:07 am
LOL.
C.L.
11 Oct 12 at 11:10 am
Depends on how you define the church. As far as I’m concerned the Church is the faithful, not the hierarchy, especially a hierarchy so far removed from the real world.
1735099
11 Oct 12 at 11:10 am
Numbers, it is a hierarchical church.
Steve from Brisbane, I believe in evolution and Original Sin.
Julian O'Dea
11 Oct 12 at 11:32 am
I note that CL, as is his practice, merely asserts and thinks that’s an answer.
His take on nothing of the Church’s (or Christ’s) teachings “making sense” is obvious rubbish. There has been value put on basic moral qualities across all sorts of societies, as CS Lewis liked to argue.
steve from brisbane
11 Oct 12 at 11:35 am
How do you believe Original Sin arose, Julian? Via an actual Adam actually disobeying a direct directive from God?
steve from brisbane
11 Oct 12 at 11:37 am
You are not now, nor have you ever been, a Catholic.
Gab
11 Oct 12 at 11:37 am
Gab, stay out of this, because you obviously have nothing of value to contribute.
CS Lewis is quite respected and valued by many Catholics.
steve from brisbane
11 Oct 12 at 11:44 am
Gab
Catholics read CS Lewis. He is one of my favourites.
Steve
I am not sure. I have personal theories, but nothing definitive.
Julian O'Dea
11 Oct 12 at 11:47 am
Numbers
There is a real sense of solipsism to your post. Based on your own experience you are ready condemn Cdnl P and “rightists’ without any real evidence of not caring about the disabled.
Rococo Liberal
11 Oct 12 at 12:00 pm
Steve @6.53 you’re being disingenous. I’ve not actually enquired of my priest’s position on contraception in marriage, but considering we have families in the congregation who don’t appear to practice it, and they’re happy to spend half of sunday driving to and from church, then I don’t think Father would be advocating it.
nilk
11 Oct 12 at 12:02 pm
You miss the point, Julian. As a supposed Catholic, SFB is using what CS Lewis said as an excuse for SFB’s fetid and malevolent mischaracterizations of Christ’s teachings, which is doctrine. He says he is a Catholic but it’s passing strange that one would disagree with their supposed religious teachings by using the age-old childish argument “but other people do it”. I have no animus towards Lewis for his honest opinion.
Gab
11 Oct 12 at 12:06 pm
Regarding Bill Morris, he disobeyed his Vows, and as such should have been removed.
He was leading his flock away from the Church.
And for those who feel that Catholic Church teachings on things moral are too harsh, have a cup of concrete and harden up.
In my experience, over the last few years attending a Latin church, the demographics have changed quite remarkably. There are more younger people, and they are asking for more traditional teachings. There are a lot of priests who are resistant to that, and a lot of parishioners are not happy with them.
There are also changes afoot with the next lot of seminarians coming through, too, with a lot more support for the more traditional teachings.
The Church moves in Her time, not in ours, and there is a lot of crap to be dealt with and cleaned up.
nilk
11 Oct 12 at 12:07 pm
Getting back on topic, is this sexism or misogyny?
Eddystone
11 Oct 12 at 12:10 pm
Um, Gab, you are indicating no understanding at all.
I again suggest you stay out of it.
Nilk: I can’t follow you either now. I said, based on personal experience, that parish priests very, very rarely give homilies which even touch on the topic of contraception, and haven’t done so since about the early 70′s. You don’t actually seem to be disagreeing with that.
steve from brisbane
11 Oct 12 at 12:16 pm
I think Steve was referring to Lewis’ argument about the Tao, the good that all religions agree on.
I respect Bp Morris for anything he did in the area of disability issues. The Church is only now coming to grips with this problem. As my wife likes to point out, most of the children with Down syndrome being born are being born into Catholic families (guess why) and the Church has to step up in this area.
Julian O'Dea
11 Oct 12 at 12:21 pm
I think Steve was referring to Lewis’ argument about the Tao,
SFb is now furiously googling the Tao.
Gab
11 Oct 12 at 12:24 pm
What was the joke ?
Pickles
11 Oct 12 at 12:25 pm
What were the jokes, Pickles. Look we’ll never know as the media will circle the wagons to protect that badass motherf***er Gillard.
As Bolt points out, it’s her ex-boyfriend.
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/did_swan_laugh_or_complain_and_is_this_labors_woman_hating_culture/
Gab
11 Oct 12 at 12:27 pm
What “vows” were those, and how would you know? I’ve been a parishioner in Toowoomba for fifteen of the eighteen years he was Bishop, and have never seen him disobey. I saw a strong and compassionate pastor who had the courage of his convictions living (rather than giving lip service to) the Gospel.
1735099
11 Oct 12 at 12:29 pm
Gab, seriously. Yesterday you suggested Julian and I were the same person.
Julian knows what I am talking about. It’s in the early section of Mere Christianity.
You, on the other hand, don’t know what you are talking about, and are simply following a wrong formula (deny that I am Catholic) that you learned from CL.
steve from brisbane
11 Oct 12 at 12:31 pm
Yesterday you suggested Julian and I were the same person.
Liar. I said he sounded like you on a particular topic. If I actually believed he was a SFB sockpuppet I would have said so outright.
As to the rest of missive blah blah blah blah, you ought to get new material.
What you used as an “argument” above is nothing short of “what Lewis said is correct and Christ’s moral values are wrong and outdated”. It’s your usual argument in different form.
Gab
11 Oct 12 at 12:36 pm
Anne Summers is a malicious, stupid, lefty twat!
Sorry, I just had to get that off my chest, after seeing her article on the Drum in which she claimed Gillard’s speech in favour of Slipper was a masterpiece.
Rococo Liberal
11 Oct 12 at 12:37 pm
Gab: you have confirmed you have not understood anything. You are, yet again, embarrassing yourself.
I did warn you.
steve from brisbane
11 Oct 12 at 12:39 pm
Well that comedian fellow should be sacked and never allowed to do comedy again. Comedians have been getting away with telling jokes for far too long. The Government should do something.
Pickles
11 Oct 12 at 12:41 pm
No, Gab, Lewis didn’t argue that.
Julian O'Dea
11 Oct 12 at 12:42 pm
“I did warn you.”
The pansy has thundered. Scary.
DavidJ
11 Oct 12 at 12:43 pm
I am exercising Christian charity, DavidJ. Gab tends to sulk and get upset when I outright call her dumb.
steve from brisbane
11 Oct 12 at 12:46 pm
“What were the jokes, Pickles. Look we’ll never know as the media will circle the wagons to protect that badass motherf***er Gillard”
Apparently the jokes involved Tony Abbott and Ms Credlin so one gets the picture.
candy
11 Oct 12 at 12:55 pm
You must be shaking in fury about it, then candy.
steve from brisbane
11 Oct 12 at 1:06 pm
That’s enuff to make a Christian familiar with liar-steve™’s regular sickening dross on these threads revolt and/or vomit
Why exactly would you have thought that liar-steve™ “was referring to Lewis’ argument about the Tao”, Julian and how exactly you think that undermined Gab?
I’d genuinely be interested in your explanation.
I think most churches are hierarchical; Quakers would be an exception but even there I’m not sure.
The Churches hierarchy is specific:
The Catholic Church’s considered theology over the last 50 years has proven Her strength comparatively and I don’t agree with much of the Vatican ll changes.
JamesK
11 Oct 12 at 1:13 pm
Candys furious at the blatant hypocrisy of fucking idiots like you, SoB.
harrys on the boat
11 Oct 12 at 1:13 pm
I assume that Steve was referring to Lewis’ polemical argument that all religions agree on certain basics: truthfulness, the Golden Rule, respect for parents, that kind of thing. He referred to this as the Tao, so as not to make it specifically Christian.
Julian O'Dea
11 Oct 12 at 1:23 pm
Yes, it’s the hypocrisy that is astounding, in light of Ms Gillard’s speech about sexism and treatment of women.
She was at the dinner too, with W. Swan.
candy
11 Oct 12 at 1:23 pm
Both of them ought to die of shame.
Gab
11 Oct 12 at 1:26 pm
@ CL, still dumber than dirt I see.
The teaching on contraception is ignored as making no sense to people.
Like all of the Church’s teachings and Christ’s commands.
What is it about, shall not kill or shall not steal that you have trouble understanding CL ?
Look for me the progression of the church and its various adaptions to societal change is almost immatterial in relation to people changes and adaptions to their own spirituality.
Xevram
11 Oct 12 at 1:28 pm
I ask again:
Where did you assume that Julian?
What did liar-steve™ say made you make that assumption?
How did your assumption undermine Gab?
I am very interested to discover your line of reasoning.
I might learn
JamesK
11 Oct 12 at 1:32 pm
What on earth are you talking about? As a left winger who has not categorically disowned Stalin, Mao, Lenin, Marx, Guevara or Pol Pot, you have no moral unction to bring down such double standards.
Let me guess, you believe there is a lot of unfair propaganda about the tyranny of communism and we just haven’t tried it properly yet?
.
11 Oct 12 at 1:39 pm
Eddystone, I am surprised at you. Don’t you recognise cutting-edge political satire when you see it?
James in Melbourne
11 Oct 12 at 1:40 pm
Steve wrote this:
“His take on nothing of the Church’s (or Christ’s) teachings “making sense” is obvious rubbish. There has been value put on basic moral qualities across all sorts of societies, as CS Lewis liked to argue.”
I took this to mean that many of the Church’s basic teachings make sense because they reflect a shared moral sense among humans, the Tao. Lewis argued that men, as he would say, have a shared and innate moral sense of right and wrong. I believe that this is Catholic teaching too – that people have the Natural Law written on their hearts. Do not kill, tell the truth, honour your parents …
Julian O'Dea
11 Oct 12 at 1:41 pm
Which came first? If we’re talking about conscription, then yeah, I’m dead against it. If the Coalition take it to a future election I will vote against them.
wreckage
11 Oct 12 at 1:47 pm
Julian: if you haven’t been reading here for all that long, you’re getting a very good education on Steve Derangement Syndrome.
steve from brisbane
11 Oct 12 at 1:51 pm
Julian is, of course, right.
steve from brisbane
11 Oct 12 at 1:52 pm
Conscription in Australia for overseas action was put forward by the leader of the ALP (Hughes), rejected by the Catholic working class, supported by the next wartime ALP PM who was initially against it and used in Korea and Vietnam where it was used at the behest of Menzies.
Numbers you are a lunatic. Who were the poeple who mistreated the diggers after Viernam?
Far leftists and traitors like Lee Rhiannon whom you are ready to figuratively die in a ditch for. The Communist states she supported all had conscription for as long as they were oppressed.
Your hypothetical is completely fuckbrained. We are not America and the conservative party here does not support conscription or selective service registration. No thinking conservative or libertarian would support that (libertarians of course wouldn’t support it anyway) after Oi and Greenspan showed how inefficient conscription was.
.
11 Oct 12 at 1:57 pm
No no. I was laughing at you, a fake Catholic who now claims to know better than the Holy Spirit – which sacred personage got the call wrong on Pelagius, according to you.
Almost as funny as you recent forays into economics.
C.L.
11 Oct 12 at 2:02 pm
Lewis argued that men, as he would say, have a shared and innate moral sense of right and wrong.
It’s called General Revelation. It aint so general. Ever heard of the Taliban, the Nazis, Stalin, etc etc ??? Many commentators here clearly think that anyone who disagrees with them are lacking in General Revelation. General Revelation is a generalisation.
Dead Soul
11 Oct 12 at 2:08 pm
Steve, I have been an intermittent commenter for some months.
Julian O'Dea
11 Oct 12 at 2:09 pm
Julian, after much wheeling of the mouse I finally found liar’s quote:
The first sentence us a lie.
The second sentence is lie
CL clearly said no such thing
Here’s Cl’s comment
I’m tired checking back but it looks like CL was commenting on a liar quote (it is certainly a familiar liar-steve™ refrain – which is an arguable interpretation of the facts)
The third sentence is a non-sequitur which is obviously true with or without CS Lewis
None of this points to CS Lewis supporting liar-steve™ on anything except the egregiously and stultifyingly superficial.
Moreover this dross in no way undermines Gab’s comments.
liar-steve™ is a malignant presence here.
He cosies up to newcomers and initially, at least superficially, he appears to be thoughtful and considered.
He is not.
His main purpose is to derail interesting threads whenever possible.
The rest of the time he pebble-dashes threads with inanities heaped on inanities as a means to irritate the unwary into a soul-destroying debate.
It’s how he gets his jollies.
No one knows why.
JamesK
11 Oct 12 at 2:10 pm
Don’t know what’s happening on all the threads but there’s amusing breaking news of Gillard and Swan laughing up a storm last night at a dinner where a comedian trashed Abbott’s female chief of staff with vulgarities.
Offensive joke about Opposition Leader Tony Abbott’s female Chief of Staff Peta Credlin.
C.L.
11 Oct 12 at 2:14 pm
So “Ditch the bitch” was OK too, right?
C.L.
11 Oct 12 at 2:15 pm
Nemesis strikes again.
twostix
11 Oct 12 at 2:18 pm
JamesK, you may be right. Frankly, I am suffering from a minor illness today, and my head is a bit muzzy. I thought Steve’s point was a fair one, as far as it went. Credit where credit is due.
As for the “sexist” joke thing, the Labor party will have this come back repeatedly to bite them on the bum. It is a minor example of the maxim that “the revolution always eats its own”. They will regret going down this path.
Perhaps it is tales out of school, but it can hurt nobody now – A well-respected Minister for Primary Industries in whose department I once worked was famous for telling extremely racist jokes at office parties. He was a Labor man. Everybody makes unguarded remarks.
Julian O'Dea
11 Oct 12 at 2:22 pm
Julian
This is just exactly why identity politics is bullshit.
They only want it because they cannot defend their policies or administration.
.
11 Oct 12 at 2:23 pm
Interesting point, CL: your approach (and most people’s here) to economics is pretty much faith based too: “lower taxes, absolutely minimal government spending – that’ll always cure what ills the economy.”
steve from brisbane
11 Oct 12 at 2:24 pm
So has anyone reported the offensive joke told about Peta Credlin and Tony Abbott verbatim?
If it’s OK to repeat Alan Jones’ offensive remarks at a private function, let’s be consistent and hear exactly what the union boys said.
papachango
11 Oct 12 at 2:27 pm
More on Labor’s Peta Credlin sexist attack:
Ministers belatedly condemn ‘offensive’ joke about Tony Abbott staffer Peta Credlin.
What did Gillard and Albanese say re Jones?
Oh yeah:
C.L.
11 Oct 12 at 2:28 pm
I want to know. Honestly, I’m extremely curious. And it’s going to really piss me off if the media protect my delicate ears from finding out what the joke was.
dd
11 Oct 12 at 2:30 pm
JamesK: you’re nutty, and I have adopted a policy of not seeing any doctor with the first name “James” in order to avoid the risk of your ever treating me.
Gab was clearly not understanding the argument, and clearly knows naught of CS Lewis.
It is impossible for you to save her mistake by your standard pouring of bile upon anything I say.
steve from brisbane
11 Oct 12 at 2:32 pm
I’ve read a half dozen reports on the Credlin scandal but none report what the joke was.
It was endorsed by Wayne Swan and Tanya Plibersek, though – who both stayed put. Swan even rocked up to give a speech after his warm-up act was finished.
C.L.
11 Oct 12 at 2:33 pm
Oh. So Peta Credlin had her father die recently too?
That’s some co-inkidence.
steve from brisbane
11 Oct 12 at 2:34 pm
Probably some worn out gag involving Peta Credlin, Abbo and an old door off a prawn trawler. They seem very, very reluctant to retell it, so it must be a goody.
Pickles
11 Oct 12 at 2:35 pm
I bet every MP, every chief of staff, and every press gallery reporter know exactly what the joke was, word for word. The public mustn’t find out though.
dd
11 Oct 12 at 2:35 pm
No, as it happens Gab was right.
The truth is inscribed on the human heart, yes, but to regard this as some kind of personal research library for moral conundrums is a protestant view, not the Catholic one. The Catholic Church teaches that what is innate to the human heart must be nourished and directed – by sound teaching provided by the successors of the Apostles (as solemnly sealed at Pentecost) and by the sacraments.
The very word heresy literally means “I choose.”
C.L.
11 Oct 12 at 2:37 pm
Wayne Swan apparently said he “didn’t understand” the lewd joke.
I’m not sure what that says about the Treasurer’s understanding of things.
Suppose the skit is all on a phone or camera somewhere.
candy
11 Oct 12 at 2:37 pm
Fuck off liar you psychopathological perversion
JamesK
11 Oct 12 at 2:39 pm
Would you please stop murdering the English language?
Gab
11 Oct 12 at 2:39 pm
Where is the video of the night?
twostix
11 Oct 12 at 2:39 pm
Moreover Judeo-Christianity assumes the worst in human nature whilst knowing the best in our nature needs nurturing.
It’s for this societal good that even many genuine atheists and agnostics support the Church.
JamesK
11 Oct 12 at 2:43 pm
Gillard must sack Swan and Plibersek for not walking out.
Re Jones:
Swan and Plibersek must go.
C.L.
11 Oct 12 at 2:52 pm
CS Lewis was not being quoted as Protestant authority on the issue of the primacy of conscience.
He was being quoted to reject your lazy (and silly) argument that nothing of the Church’s teaching (or Christ’s) “makes sense” to people.
Gab’s statement:
You’re last comment, CL, agrees with Lewis’ point about there are matters “innate to the human heart”, making a nonsense of your earlier claim, and showing your failure to defend Gab, who just didn’t understand what was being argued.
steve from brisbane
11 Oct 12 at 2:53 pm
@ Noname -
Australian history according to noname –
Actual history –
Although Hughes was originally Prime Minister as leader of the Labor Party, his support of conscription led him, along with 24 other pro-conscription members, to form a different party called National Labor. This National Labor merged with the Commonwealth Liberal Party to form the Nationalist Party.
In all, during his 51-year federal parliamentary career, Hughes changed parties five times: from Labor (1901–16) to National Labor (1916–17) to Nationalist (1917–30) to Australian (1930–31) to United Australia (1931–44) to Liberal (1944–52). He was expelled from three parties, and represented four different electorates in two states.
If you’re seeking to characterise conscription as a Labor initiative on the basis of Billy Hughes, you’re sadly mistaken. He was an arch enemy of TJ Ryan, Labor Premier of Queensland (1915 – 1919), and a major source of disagreement was Ryan’s opposition to conscription. Have you heard of the Warwick egg incident?
All kinds of people, including a Liberal booth worker (when my father, voting with me in December 1975), told him I was a Vietnam veteran and wouldn’t vote Liberal. This character told me that Vietnam wasn’t a real war, and anyway, I wasn’t fighting for him. I kid you not.
Show me where I have praised Lee Rhiannon, whom I understand is a member of the Australian Greens, not the Communist party. Show me where I have said that I would figuratively die for her. What Communist states did she support? By whom were they oppressed?
What hypothetical? I can assure you there was nothing hypothetical about receiving a callup notice from a Coalition government.
So your main objection to conscription is that it’s inefficient? You don’t have a problem with the moral implications?
1735099
11 Oct 12 at 2:54 pm
C.S. Lewis didn’t come up with the notion, Steve.
Shoo.
You’re embarrassing yourself again.
C.L.
11 Oct 12 at 2:55 pm
Amazing, isn’t it?
Another fuck up by the most hypocritical bunch of oxygen thieves ever to grace politics, and who is running point on the first line of defence?
Why it’s none other than our resident conservative Catholic, SfB.
Fuck Off you pathetic partisan shill.
Huckleberry Chunkwot
11 Oct 12 at 2:56 pm
“Grace builds on Nature”.
(The Angelic Doctor.)
Julian O'Dea
11 Oct 12 at 2:58 pm
#WhatWasTheJoke
dd
11 Oct 12 at 2:58 pm
I didn’t say he did. He did, however, make the argument a key component of an extraordinarily widely read defence of Christianity. (Although it’s clear Gab didn’t read it.)
As usual, your personality defect will not let you admit mistake; you will claim you were always right and always will be; and Gab will sit at the sidelines and say something “Steve you’ve lost again.”
It’s really pathetic in its way.
steve from brisbane
11 Oct 12 at 3:02 pm
Has Gillard apologised yet? What about Wayne Swan? Or Plebeserk? Or Roxon? Or are they busy defending the sexist jokes hiding behind the cover of the “comedians” being hired by the CFMEU?
Has the CFMEU apologised to Abbott and Credlin? Or are they so sexist they believe it warrants no apology?
The jokes must have been extraordinarily vile in their sexist nature for the media not to print the content.
Gab
11 Oct 12 at 3:03 pm
SFB you always lose. This is axiomatic.
Gab
11 Oct 12 at 3:06 pm
Fairfax are reporting the story under the heading
‘Abbott joke: Labor ministers offended’
What a hoot.
Still not revealing the joke, although they do say that the joke ‘drew a laugh from the crowd.’
Lazlo
11 Oct 12 at 3:06 pm
Nah, I’m sure it was completely tame, family friendly, and this is all a storm in a teacup. I bet the joke wasn’t as offensive as people are making out.
dd
11 Oct 12 at 3:07 pm
SfB,
You must really have some deep seated personality issues.
What is it that would make someone continually try and interact with people that clearly despise them?
Day after day you fill this blog with inane ramblings and provocative non argument. You subject yourself to abuse that is thoroughly deserved, but still, you come back for more.
What are you trying to achieve Steve?
Do you have any friends?
Do you have anyone else to talk to?
I am beginning to think that this whole “family” and “househusband” thing of yours is just a story to cover the fact that you are a sad, lonely old man.
Are there any Cat contributors that have training in mental health issues who can attempt to throw some light on Steve’s bizarre need for attention from those who hate him?
Huckleberry Chunkwot
11 Oct 12 at 3:12 pm
In which it would not be an issue to let the public know.
Gab
11 Oct 12 at 3:13 pm
Wasn’t Gillard calling for Abbott to apologise about Jones the other day?
Well Julia, show Tony how it’s done why don’t you.
Keith
11 Oct 12 at 3:14 pm
I find it hard to believe there’s no video of an event at which Gillard and Swan appeared.
Where’s the video?
C.L.
11 Oct 12 at 3:15 pm
(cf. Obama university transcripts).
Gab
11 Oct 12 at 3:16 pm
The CFMEU spokesman said he was (theatrically) “horrified” and would have “pulled him off stage” had he known the content.
So no, I don’t think it’s family friendly.
C.L.
11 Oct 12 at 3:17 pm
News reports seem to be alternately referring to a ‘Credlin joke’ and an ‘Abbott joke.’
My guess is the joke was about them both.
It’s not hard to guess where this is going.
C.L.
11 Oct 12 at 3:19 pm
Must have been bad enough to warrant Gillard’s “castigation” of her former boyfriend over the matter. You wouldn’t do that is the jokes weren’t as bad as people say. And Gillard et al have been known to “laugh off” poor taste jokes and comment in the paste as a “trivial matter”.
Gab
11 Oct 12 at 3:20 pm
Good grief. Preview, girl preview.
Gab
11 Oct 12 at 3:22 pm
Apply The Fisk Doctrine
Tal
11 Oct 12 at 3:23 pm
Opposition not telling what the joke is. It’s Labor’s boerm. Has to come out of a Labor mouth.
Pickles
11 Oct 12 at 3:33 pm
Tony the Terminator will just store the whole matter for future use as required.
No Huss no Fuss.
twostix
11 Oct 12 at 3:38 pm
By the way, what Alan Jones said was not a joke.
When some people in the audience indicated it was too much, he told them to toughen up.
This alone makes comparison with that incident not at all close.
[But I understand people are making a broader point re sexism. I note the comedian has apologised, and claimed sole responsibility and no prior notice to the organisers. No doubt he also did away with a 45 minute explanation attacking Abbott or Credlin.
You're not going to get much political mileage out of this.]
steve from brisbane
11 Oct 12 at 3:47 pm
You’re right, SFB. It’s always different when your lot do that which they attack the Opposition for and yes, any potential political mileage will be cut short swiftly thanks to the media protecting Gillard at all costs.
Gab
11 Oct 12 at 3:51 pm
Quick catch up:
- Old media tart, throws slur to a room of nubile acolytes
- gay man doesn’t like vaginas
- Comedian tells a racy joke about a politician at union function
I see nothing wrong with any of these things.
As you were
Rex
11 Oct 12 at 3:55 pm
Gillard again displays her control of the media, keeping a lid on this “joke”.
Oh, and irony plus :
“A great day for women in our union”
article on the CFMEU website.
Keith
11 Oct 12 at 3:56 pm
Oh, you forget Gab… The Opposition IS sfb’s lot. He’s a conservative Catholic!
Fleeced
11 Oct 12 at 3:57 pm
And I’m an astronaut.
Gab
11 Oct 12 at 4:00 pm
“By the way, what Alan Jones said was not a joke.”
I agree, Jones said it in his capacity as SA Coroner.
DavidJ
11 Oct 12 at 4:00 pm
I’d like to see Abbott deal with the comedian mano a mano
Tal
11 Oct 12 at 4:02 pm
What SoB is actually saying is because Peta Credlin is Abbotts chief of staff she deserves to be beaten and gang raped to an inch of her life.
harrys on the boat
11 Oct 12 at 4:06 pm
LOL.
C.L.
11 Oct 12 at 4:10 pm
Interesting Bolt update.
Looks like Gillard may have committed a very serious crime.
C.L.
11 Oct 12 at 4:11 pm
Harry, that is very OTT.
SDS yet again.
steve from brisbane
11 Oct 12 at 4:15 pm
Oh god.
Look at what you are now.
It’s awful just awful.
twostix
11 Oct 12 at 4:19 pm
This is poetically beautiful.
All along, it was Gillard being hatemonger-in-chief.
In 36 hours, her hatred of Tony Abbott caused her to beclown herself re Slipper and also inspired a hate-fest at the CFMEU knees-up – which has forever destroyed her credibility and that of her hatemongering minions.
Abbott played it cool, didn’t rise to the bait. He just waited for the inevitable beclowning. He has proved himself of prime ministerial timber.
C.L.
11 Oct 12 at 4:20 pm
twostix joins in the with the SDS. Any more takers?
steve from brisbane
11 Oct 12 at 4:20 pm
Heavens, Harry. Where you at the Labor Union dinner last night? Didn’t happen to get video of it?
Gab
11 Oct 12 at 4:21 pm
Oh and Steve “mileage” doesn’t need to be made, Labors golden high octance smear campaign against Abbott is now dead in the water.
So.
Let’s talk policy, 250 billion debt, mining boom over, miners fleeing the country, reserve bank worried, unemployment rising, cost of living ramping upwards, NBN failing.
What about Thompson, he’s still in parliament, what’s that all about?
What else?
twostix
11 Oct 12 at 4:23 pm
I think Harry means the Sarah Palin treatment
Tal
11 Oct 12 at 4:24 pm
Oh Steve.
SteveC is way better than you are, I think he should become the official Steve leftist on the blog, you’re boring as shit nowadays and you lie far too often to be interesting.
twostix
11 Oct 12 at 4:26 pm
Ah, I see the reference now Tal.
Nonetheless, it is completely wrong to say my comment excused the comedian.
steve from brisbane
11 Oct 12 at 4:28 pm
Which report did you get that factoid from liar?
JamesK
11 Oct 12 at 4:32 pm
These functions are just private affairs and jokes/skits are made as always, who cares?
But Ms Gillard made a song and dance about sexism and misogyny in the Ausralian Parliament when she would have attended hundreds of these functions and seen all the jokes, her boyfriends were union men.
So her outrage was all a lot of rubbish, scripted nonsense designed to hurt Tony Abbott politically and personally (and his family). She’s not nice.
candy
11 Oct 12 at 4:43 pm
JamesK, you tedious, tedious moron:
steve from brisbane
11 Oct 12 at 4:45 pm
Going mainstream – again:
Julia Gillard faces renewed focus on her conduct at law firm in 1990s.
Well well well.
Expect the following explanation to appear tomorrow after being workshopped with John McTernan: “This is totally untrue because sexism and Abbott.”
C.L.
11 Oct 12 at 4:54 pm
Breaking:
Footage leaked of John McTernan’s reaction to explosion of phony sexism war…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dsx2vdn7gpY
C.L.
11 Oct 12 at 4:57 pm
Clearly you’re a troll numbers. Of course I reject conscription out of hand as a libertarian. A country that isn’t willing to defend itself doesn’t deserve to exist.
.
11 Oct 12 at 5:00 pm
By “fended off” they of course mean, “refused to answer”. Even The Australian lets her off too easily.
Fleeced
11 Oct 12 at 5:27 pm
LOL
This the relevant recording
Loathsome leftist liar-steve™ said:
It is – to be kind – a fanciful stretch to assert that the audience indicated it was too much or that Jones responded to “surprise” or the audience supposedly indicating “it was too much” by telling them “this where we’re weak”
Here’s MediaWatch leftist Jonathan Holmes’ indictment of the self-described (to everyone but the Syd Uni Liberal Club’ to whom he lied to gain admission) ‘journalist’ Jonathan Marshal
That would be the same Jonathan Marshal now proven by Jonathan holmes to be a liar who wrote:
[Sounds of surprise from audience]
You are a tiresome, loathsome and malevolent, leftist liar-steve™
JamesK
11 Oct 12 at 5:40 pm
Wow, that’s convincing analysis, JamesK [sarc], as it completely fails to address the question of what Jones’ was reacting to when he said “No, no look, hang on, this is where we’re weak. This is where we’re weak”.
I know – the waiter had just put in front of him a cup of tea which had been poured too quickly?
I wouldn’t let you near me with a stethoscope if my life depended on it.
steve from brisbane
11 Oct 12 at 6:12 pm
Fair point. I would concede that while sleeping.
JC
11 Oct 12 at 6:14 pm
You’re just like Gab, aren’t you JC. Pick up the pom poms and get some cheerleading practice in.
steve from brisbane
11 Oct 12 at 6:16 pm
Malala Yousafzai, a 14 year old Pakistani school-girl, was shot in the face by a piece of male scum on two legs as a result of (religiously inspired) misogyny. That’s a fine example of misogyny: a murderous pathological hatred because she was female and did not keep her subordinate place.
Gillard, on the other hand, is a self righteous narcissist, who thinks that any man who disagrees with her is doing so because she is a woman, not because she is a wrong-headed fool.
Easy, isn’t it, when there is real misogyny to look at.
Cato the Elder
11 Oct 12 at 6:19 pm
Remeber when
shethe lying slapper lectured the UN on defending the religion and limiting free speech? Good times.Gab
11 Oct 12 at 6:21 pm
It just gets better, don’t it?
Gillard is so deluded that when she gets mugged by reality she doesn’t even notice.
Cato the Elder
11 Oct 12 at 6:30 pm
It’s so interesting that sfb should raise C S Lewis as his chapter on sexual morality in Mere Christianity is significantly at odds with sfb’s.
dover_beach
11 Oct 12 at 6:48 pm
LOL
This apropos of nothing important – it was just that I hadn’t heard liar’s spin anywhere else before.
So I asked.
Got the inevitable sweet response – so I found and linked the audio
After listening x4 times I reckon it could have been anything.
The likeliest was laughter which seemed to start during and after “they are inveterate and compulsive liars. They’ll lie and lie and lie. Every person in the caucus of the Labor party knows that Julia Gillard is a liar. Everybody.”
Liar simply manufactured of it what he wanted – he’s a deceiver and fantasist and then peddles his fanciful interpretation as unquestionable fact.
Liar simply makes sh1t up all the time.
As we all know it’s liar-steve™ standard operating procedure.
That’s why if it’s egregious one of us has to go to the trouble of checking it out.
And low and behold inevitably it’s never as liar-steve™ characterised it.
Never
That is but one reason why all here know liar-steve™ to be a piece of filth.
JamesK
11 Oct 12 at 6:59 pm
It certainly doesn’t cover contraception, as far as I can recall, d-b. (The entire book avoided issues of difference between Protestant and Catholic views.)
I don’t think it even went close towards discussing homosexuality. (It is some years since I have revisited the chapter.)
It was, if I recall correctly, a general defence for Christian belief that sexual relations belong only within marriage, and a general attitude of not being sucked into modern thinking that puts sex as being at the heart of everything. (He really disliked Freudian analysis that saw sex as the key.) From that point of view, I did not find it objectionable.
One of the biographies of Lewis I have read (the AN Wilson one, which concludes he did indeed have a long illicit love affair with that older woman, whose name I forget) also argues that he had a very simplistic view of homosexuality as being just about limp wristed, effiminate men. He was certainly a “man’s man”, and presumably did not go out of his way to learn about the personal experiences or feelings of homosexual men or women. Whether, if he had been around in the world for longer, his views towards homosexuality might have changed a little is something we won’t know.
steve from brisbane
11 Oct 12 at 7:20 pm
JamesK continues his little rant and LOL-ing, all without plausible counter-explanation to what the journalist who was there (who presumably oversaw the transcript from his won recording) inserted.
steve from brisbane
11 Oct 12 at 7:22 pm
It was Mrs Moore, Steve, that AN Wilson thought Lewis had an affair with. I think this would have been before he converted to Christianity.
Wilson is a wonderful writer, but he made a few blues in that book. I suspect it was written in a hurry.
Lewis seemed to like rather dominant women, which Wilson speculates about …
Julian O'Dea
11 Oct 12 at 7:26 pm
Even if we were to accept the proven liar and deceiver leftist Jonathan Marshal’s ‘surprise’ characterisation that still would still represent an implausible stretch to allow liar-steve™’s version.
The fact is the audio doesn’t support his drivel.
What a surprise! LOL
And, of course, I am not actually required to supply an alternative to liar’s silly version except in liar’s furtive sickening mind.
Having said that, my suggestion after listening to the audio x4 times is obviously at least more considered and honest than liar-steve™’s version
LOL
Now this particular ‘debate’ (lol) is over wanker-steve
JamesK
11 Oct 12 at 7:42 pm
It certainly doesn’t cover contraception, as far as I can recall, d-b.
Page 87, old chap, of my Fontana edition. It’s about two or three pages into the chapter. He considers its use, in marriage and out of marriage, as making our surrender to sexual appetite all the more easier. Shades of Humanae Vitae.
dover_beach
11 Oct 12 at 7:50 pm
Yes, d-b, I’ve checked the book.
The sentence is odd: “Contraceptives have made sexual indulgence far less costly within marriage and far safer outside of it than ever before…”
“Sexual indulgence …. within marriage” makes it sounds like he’s not even sure that married couples should have a go at it whenever they like.
Yet on page 88 he emphasizes that Christianity has nothing against it at all.
Anyway, it’s a big stretch to say that he implying in the sentence that the only appropriate sex in marriage is the “more costly” variety (without contraception.)
I took to mean he accepted that contraception was a given that was going to be used sometimes by married couples. (And I don’t know that there was anything other than condoms available at the time, which any writer could probably assume was not going to be used all that much in a marriage.)
steve from brisbane
11 Oct 12 at 8:05 pm
Stevieliar QC. How did you become so boring? Have you done the dishes? Two questions tonight.
Tiny Dancer
11 Oct 12 at 8:08 pm
No, it doesn’t sound or make it sound like that at all.
Calender and fertility awareness methods were well established.
JamesK
11 Oct 12 at 8:13 pm
Julian: looking at Wikipedia, Lewis and Moore lived together from the end of WWI until she went into a nursing home in the late 40′s. He became a Christian by 1931, and had moved into the Kilns in 1930.
The article notes that one biographer (not Wilson), after talking to Mrs Moore’s daughter and considering the room arrangements in the house, changed his mind and came to believes that they were lovers. As we are talking about The Kilns, this really seems to me that it was after he had become a Christian.
steve from brisbane
11 Oct 12 at 8:20 pm
On page 87 he is referring to the undisciplined sexual appetite and on page 88 he is referring to the appetite once it is disciplined. So there is no “and yet” because the statements are not in conflict. And no, it is no ‘big stretch” to conclude, at all, from the brief reference or from his entire chapter that its use both within and without tends towards the habituation of an undisciplined sexual appetite. As I said, shades of Humanae Vitae.
dover_beach
11 Oct 12 at 8:23 pm
Perhaps I should say, it would appear that more than one biographer considers it continued after he became a Christian…
steve from brisbane
11 Oct 12 at 8:24 pm
d-b: go to the preface of Mere Christianity at page 9 – he specifically denies addressing the matter of birth control in the book.
Makes your case look harder….
steve from brisbane
11 Oct 12 at 8:29 pm
Because the idea of chastity just isn’t acceptable today.
Abstinence. Don’t Do It. It’s almost like a Nike ad.
nilk
11 Oct 12 at 8:30 pm
Steve, Wikipedia quotes this Sayer chap and the bedroom layout argument, but I don’t see the force of that. The Kilns was not a big or comfortable place, so good rooms were probably at a premium.
Mrs Moore was an older generation than Lewis, the mother of a fellow soldier. She was a mixture of mother, shrew and maybe lover. The relationship was odd. I do wonder if Wilson was right to see something masochistic in it, although Lewis had sadistic fantasies when he was young. There is something a bit cruel about some of his Narnia imagery too.
Julian O'Dea
11 Oct 12 at 8:35 pm
Yes, a bare faced lie. This is all the left has left in the saddlebag. Like Wong on 7.30 yesterday claiming that Abbott has said that women are not fit for high office.
Disgusting, loathesome liars. Off you go and lie down with them sfb..
Lazlo
11 Oct 12 at 8:48 pm
The week ends with another Gillard disaster.
Her sexist war in smoking ruins, unemployment up.
World’s stupidest politician.
C.L.
11 Oct 12 at 9:01 pm
There’s videos of Gillard “flirting” with Abbott a couple of years ago.
I watched it and felt sad for her, she was so happy, carefree and decent then.
Compare with now she’s a most bitterly, bitterly unhappy, vicious, stressed and angry person.
Sad.
twostix
11 Oct 12 at 9:17 pm
Julian, looking around some other websites, like this one, I see that even the famous Walter Hooper – keeper of all things Lewis – came to the view that at least the early relationship with Mrs Moore was sexual.
Mrs Moore’s daughter says much to convince biographers, it seems.
It also seems to be the view of some that the sexual relationship ended when he became a Christian. However, as I say, if Maureen’s evidence of arrangements at The Kilns is anything to go by, I wonder about that even.
steve from brisbane
11 Oct 12 at 9:20 pm
What a stupid claim.
The audio is not 100% as to what sound the audience is making; but there is a transcript which the journalist present presumably produced. The reaction of Jones is entirely consistent with his responding to something coming from the audience that indicates someone there didn’t approve.
But continue your fantasy that this is a gigantic lie, you dimwit.
steve from brisbane
11 Oct 12 at 9:25 pm
Hey SFB, how about discussing Gillard’s sexual relationships?
Gab
11 Oct 12 at 9:31 pm
LOL
Obumma’s reaction to the Benghazi assassinations is entirely consistent with him not knowing you did it liar but that doesn’t mean AL-queda terrorists didn’t
JamesK
11 Oct 12 at 9:32 pm
Also – back to Julian – about the only person still alive (I think) that I can remember mentioning meeting Lewis is Paul Johnson, who said he found him a bit of a bully. (I think I am recalling this correctly.)
I was disappointed to read that, but I can’t remember what amount of contact Johnson had with him.
Have you read Johnson’s book on religious musings? It surprised me that he thought that women priests in Catholicism was inevitable, and there were some other things he said that struck me as surprisingly liberal.
But I think it was written before the revelation came out of his long standing affair.
I don’t think his reputation ever was quite the same after that. Certainly Hitchens (I think it was) attacked him for all the tut-tutting he had done about Prince Charles and his failed marriage.
steve from brisbane
11 Oct 12 at 9:32 pm
Course you think you’re recalling that correctly liar-steve™.
Why wouldn’t you?… oh …wait.
JamesK
11 Oct 12 at 9:35 pm
Thanks, Steve.
Interesting.
Julian O'Dea
11 Oct 12 at 9:37 pm
Your obsession with claiming every single thing I say is a lie is tedious and indicates there’s something not quite right in the noggin, JamesK.
steve from brisbane
11 Oct 12 at 9:38 pm
Self-diagnosis leading to self-awareness at last. Well done , SFB.
Gab
11 Oct 12 at 9:40 pm
Hilarious, Gab [add your own interpretation of whether I mean it.]
steve from brisbane
11 Oct 12 at 9:42 pm
sfb, the fact that he doesn’t explicitly and at length treat the problem of birth control does not mean that his chapter on sexual morality or Christian marriage do not have specific implications for birth control. For one thing, if their use is moral the claim that sex can only occur within marriage becomes untenable by his own reasoning on the matter. Further, in Christian marriage, he writes:
How could you miss the obvious implications that this had for birth control? It is also one of the most clear and concise statements of the Catholic natural law position that I have come across.
dover_beach
11 Oct 12 at 9:43 pm
No, just saying you are a liar.
The ABC is desparately trying to push this down the memory hole on Lateline right now. They even had Emerson saying that he left the CFMEU dinner because of the ‘offensive’ joke. What a desparate lie.
Swan is now lying about when the government was aware of the Slipper text messages.
How can you defend this stuff any more sfb?
But, I forget, you get your jollies hanging around a place all day where everyone despises you. Weird.
Lazlo
11 Oct 12 at 9:50 pm
d-b: from the preface:
“I have also said nothing about birth-control. I am not a woman nor even a married man, nor am I a priest. I did not think it my place to take a firm line about pains, dangers and expenses from which I am protected; having no pastoral office which obliged me to do so.”
I can certainly argue that this shows an inclination to leave it to personal conscience within marriage as to whether contraception may be acceptable for good reason (that is, to avoid significant “pains, dangers and expenses”.)
steve from brisbane
11 Oct 12 at 9:55 pm
Swan now giving a ‘half hearted’ apology..
Lazlo
11 Oct 12 at 9:56 pm
Because liar-steve™ sees what he wants to see and more importantly doesn’t see what he do doesn’t want to see, d_b.
Dishonesty is the common theme to his entire psychopathology.
JamesK
11 Oct 12 at 10:01 pm
Swan is nearly half as disgusting as liar.
Like liar a shameless goose.
I can’t wait for the next Newspoll
JamesK
11 Oct 12 at 10:03 pm
I get quite tired of the SfB versus Catholic dogma (said without malice) fights here.
wreckage
11 Oct 12 at 10:20 pm
sfb, but why only within marriage given what he argues? What do you think he meant by “It means that you must not isolate the pleasure and try to get it by itself“? And so far as your quotation is concerned, it seems to leave the issue not to personal conscience as the final arbiter but to the pastoral office which is obliged to take a firm line (in our instance, exercised by the Church in accordance with the Magisterium). BTW, I would think those significant “pains, dangers, and expenses”, in the relative few instances, mitigate the wrong, not absolve it.
dover_beach
11 Oct 12 at 10:21 pm
Sorry, wreckage, but I enjoy them.
dover_beach
11 Oct 12 at 10:23 pm
Like Wong on 7.30 yesterday claiming that Abbott has said that women are not fit for high office.
It would seem an odd thing to do for Abbott to campaign for his sister to be Mayor of Sydney then, wouldn’t it? I really don’t get what the idea is supposed to be here. Abbott allegedly hates women, but surrounds himself with them. Is he secretly some sort of masochist as well?
Quentin George
11 Oct 12 at 10:25 pm
It could be interpretted as alluding to at least two things irrelevant to contraception:
* masturbation
* the pursuit of purely recreational sex with a stranger (a prostitute, or someone you just picked up at a bar on a Saturday for a one night stand).
steve from brisbane
11 Oct 12 at 10:47 pm
Yep to all but the last point.
You think she’s stupider than Shane Wand? Wand makes stupid people look like Einstein.
JC
11 Oct 12 at 10:53 pm
Steve
I have Paul Johnson’s History of Christianity, written before he became a Catholic. I didn’t know he thought women priests will come. I don’t. Ordinatio Sacerdotalis is very clearly infallible teaching, the only such teaching JPII produced.
I can believe that Lewis was a bully. He was unpleasant to John Betjeman and his diaries show him to have been an academic in-fighter. There is much unconscious biographical revelation in That Hideous Strength. I think he was a pretty good operator. I blame Tolkien more for the failure of their friendship, but Lewis was part of the problem.
He was such a good polemicist that one tends to give his arguments too much credit. He was not a good thinker in the strict sense. The irony is that, like Belloc, his best work was his writing for children. And he really sucked as a poet. All style, no passion.
Julian O'Dea
11 Oct 12 at 10:56 pm
Indeed, housewives (including aspirant ones like me) do iron, and I would like everyone who has followed here my anguishes over ironing Da Hairy Ape’s shirts to know that I am improving. My laundry skills are on the up and up. My skills at logistic regression and stochastic analysis are probably fading and good riddance, I do declare. This is my choice and my life, so piss off Julia and anyone else who tells me I can’t make my choices. Diamonds, after all, are forever. Love matters.
Back from Sydney and just had to put a word in here on a borrowed computer (mine is still kaput) for a different sort of feminism, one that is not man-hating and one that is sympathetic to women’s real lives, our children, our careers and our choices. To every thing there is a time …
And look, another Elizabeth is commenting on the Cat. Well, there are many good Elizabeths around. All power to them and to all Cat women. What a week of fun it has been so far, with me off-line and stuck in Sydney traffic digesting 2GB (station set to this in the hire car, as they always are; scraped the wheel hubs a bit, as I always do) and coming back to find this long thread of comments. What a lot of hissy, spitting, unpleasant females Labor is currently nourishing. They are soooo dated. Younger women should beware. They could end up like them. Erk.
Elizabeth (Lizzie) B.
11 Oct 12 at 10:58 pm
By the way, for Julian and (perhaps) d-b: while Googling around for information about Lewis and Mrs Moore, I stumbled upon this entry from a blog apparently from some English Professor.
Apart from that entry, the whole blog is about Tolkien, and often references Lewis too. Some entries are quite interesting, even though I am actually dismissive of Tolkien – his work completely fails to appeal to me.
Furthermore, if you go to the guy’s profile, you’ll find he seems to have blogs about all sorts of odd things (Mormon fertility anyone? – This is a bit of a coincidence, because in my arguments here about birth control, I have previously pointed to that religion as one which is very conservative on matters of sexuality, and encourages couples to have children, but at the same time leaves use of contraception entirely as a matter for a couple to decide when to use.)
Anyway, I thought someone would find this man’s blogging interesting.
steve from brisbane
11 Oct 12 at 10:59 pm
Steve, I have come across that guy before. He is a kind of polymath and eccentric academic.
I find Tolkien unrewarding too.
On ironing, surveys show that wives do the bulk of that. Hardly surprising, but apparently a revelation to Ms Gillard. Mrs O’Dea has always done mine. I suppose I must be a misogynist.
Julian O'Dea
11 Oct 12 at 11:13 pm
Eggasctly Lizzie. Wifey was on track to becoming an academic in the ed field or some shit like that. She then met me and decided to give all that away to make my life happier for which I’m eternally grateful.
You sound like a perfect wife.
She doesn’t iron much, or she cleans just after the cleaner has been around… I never get that..but she cooks and does all the other stuff.
JC
11 Oct 12 at 11:17 pm
Yes, sfb, it is alluding to those two things as well as to contraception, because all three do exactly what he states, “isolate the pleasure and try to get it by itself”. In fact, it is referring to all sexual acts and practices that deliberately separate sexual pleasure from the function of sex, which is clear from his analogy involving eating. I’m sure you see this but you’re just unwilling to acknowledge it for some reason.
BTW, any Chesterton fans here? I’ve recently downloaded a number of his works that are available free in their Kindle versions or at very cheap prices. I’m tossing up between beginning his Thomas Aquinas or The Everlasting Man. But I’m open to The Man who was Thursday as well. Any suggestions?
dover_beach
11 Oct 12 at 11:24 pm
Julian, I very much enjoyed Johnson’s History of Christianity; apart from filling in many gaps in my knowledge of the topic, reading it often made me laugh at some of the things that are ludicrous to the modern eye. I remember the section on the trade, theft and forgery of saints relics being particularly amusing.
steve from brisbane
11 Oct 12 at 11:27 pm
d-b, you’ll probably find my opinion unworthy, but for me (and I have tried The Man who was..etc and The Everlasting Man) his prose style alone is a real slog of long sentences, and the enlightening ideas are too slow to arrive.
I really did not get far into either book.
I find this a real problem with other writers, particularly pre 20th century. I can get through Conrad – just – but I just become very aware of how very l—o—-n—-g each sentence is, and how I’ve nearly forgotten its start by the time I get to the full stop.
steve from brisbane
11 Oct 12 at 11:36 pm
d-b, let’s put it this way: he might not have been the biggest fan of contraception, but the preface seems to make it clear he would allow that factors such as “pain, danger and expense” may, in appropriate cases, make its use legitimate.
I think you have nothing other than your own bias, and your over-confidence that your own analysis is the only way the issue can be viewed, if you think that he probably agreed with you that “pain danger or expense” could only be matters of mitigation, rather than legitimizing its use.
steve from brisbane
11 Oct 12 at 11:42 pm
You do realise what a hypocrite you are? You accuse Dover of that which you yourself do on a daily basis. And why are you being so bitchy to Dover when he has been civil and even cordial towards you? And you wonder why people give you a hard time.
Gab
11 Oct 12 at 11:47 pm
Julia Gillard’s insistence that men walk out if anything ‘sexist’ occurs in public forums took a bizarre twist tonight on Lateline when Tony Jones – the man who laughed and sat in situ as Barry Humphries joked about Gina Rinehart’s “hole” asked Wayne Swan why he sat in situ while a comedian said something too crude for publication about Peta Credlin.
Neither man has ever raised hundreds of thousands of dollars for breast cancer and women’s shelters.
Swan was also twice invited by Jones to “walk back” the charge that Tony Abbott hates his mother, wife and daughters but refused to do so.
C.L.
11 Oct 12 at 11:59 pm
It’s hard, on a daily basis, to keep up with Steve’s storied buffonery but he has now dismissed Aquinas and St Augustine as unworthy intellects.
He prefers Paul Collins.
God, what can I say but LOL?
C.L.
12 Oct 12 at 12:02 am
I’m sure a sixth century villager would be equally amused by your belief that the Gaia monster will soon become corporeal and reign over a living earth organism.
C.L.
12 Oct 12 at 12:05 am
I didn’t realize homosexuality was a gender.
Lloyd
12 Oct 12 at 12:10 am
Cartoonist Lobecke summarises what Julia Gillard has become: a sleazy slimeball.
It illustrates a piece by a Graham Richardson – who is almost too astonished for words by Gillard’s polictical imbecility and moral filthiness.
A brutal column.
Just a snippet from its conclusion:
C.L.
12 Oct 12 at 12:13 am
Gab, Pom Pom cheerleader extraordinaire, you’re adding nothing again.
And to not be sexist, I note that CL is here to repeat a misrepresentation, and hence is also adding nothing.
Steve from Brisbane
12 Oct 12 at 12:17 am
Steve is holier and a more accomplished a divine than St Thomas Aquinas and St Augustine. He also argues he knows better than the Holy Spirit and that C.S. Lewis invented the idea of truth inscribed on hearts or something.
Bravura buffoonery.
C.L.
12 Oct 12 at 12:33 am
Julia Gillard: “Stunning”… “Spectacular”
Double standards a stunning display.
PM’s gender war ends in a spectacular self-wedge.
C.L.
12 Oct 12 at 12:37 am
But, but, her stunning performance where she ripped Abbott another “asshole” went viral. Surely that’s proof of her genius and complete mastery over Abbott.
Steve of Ferny Hills
12 Oct 12 at 12:51 am
This disgraceful episode proves once again that Leftism has no place in public debate and that we would lose absolutely nothing by totally banning all Leftist statements and expression from any public domain. There is no risk to civil liberties from this because Leftist policies are never legitimate or beneficial and there is therefore no reason to allow Leftist speech.
Fisky
12 Oct 12 at 1:21 am
It’s difficult to believe that this could get even worse.
But we’ve said that before.
JamesK
12 Oct 12 at 7:22 am
Never claimed that he invented it, but CL will continue his invention (that is, lie) that I did.
steve from brisbane
12 Oct 12 at 7:47 am
Gillard is Stinking … Disgusting
Septimus
12 Oct 12 at 8:17 am
Awww… How can you say that?
Rudiau
12 Oct 12 at 8:33 am
No, sfb, the preface doesn’t make that clear at all. If its use where legitimate in those circumstances, it wouldn’t be a matter for personal conscience. He is essentially saying that I can understand why a desperate father might steal a loaf of bread to feed his family, but understanding and sympathizing with the circumstances only mitigate the wrong, they don’t absolve it. BTW, there isn’t any bias here on my part; I’m reading Lewis and taking him at his word.
dover_beach
12 Oct 12 at 8:33 am
Not at d-b, you are interpreting his words, because his views are not detailed.
The man specifically writes: I have not dealt with birth control, it is (to use Obama’s phrase) beyond my pay scale.
You interpret what he says in the text as clearly implying he must always thinks it is wrong, but it can sometimes be less of a wrong than at other times.
This is your interpretation, and given the preface, I think it is unwarranted, especially when you can interpret his content as referring to situations where birth control is not relevant.
steve from brisbane
12 Oct 12 at 8:40 am
And yet he writes: “It means that you must not isolate [sexual] pleasure and try to get it by itself.” But we aren’t allowed to interpret the clear implications that this has for birth control because of his remarks in the preface.
especially when you can interpret his content as referring to situations where birth control is not relevant.
No one ever said that the above quotation only involves birth control; in fact I expressly state the opposite that it includes all acts that “isolate [sexual] pleasure and try to get it by itself.”. Anyway, the second example you provide is very definitely facilitated and encouraged by birth control.
You obviously respect Lewis, but, for some reason, you cannot accept that his position on birth control is shades of Humanae Vitae.
dover_beach
12 Oct 12 at 9:02 am
It’s a clear reference to the selfish wanting of sexual pleasure without consequence without love without responsibility.
The selfish seeking of sexual pleasure for no other reason than the the selfish seeking of pleasure of itself.
It presages the modern world.
It really isn’t difficult.
JamesK
12 Oct 12 at 9:18 am
See Hansard. They are the words she has spat across the table at Abbott in many Question Times. Maybe she practices them while looking in the mirror.
Septimus
12 Oct 12 at 10:03 am
You have to excuse my weird sense of humour, Sep.
Rudiau
12 Oct 12 at 10:12 am
Well what does that mean?
Humanae Vitae is emphatic that in all circumstances it is always wrong to use anything other than self control and planning to avoid pregnancy.
CS Lewis in his preface indicates that he is aware that “pain, danger and expense” is relevant to the topic of birth control.
It seems entirely possible that he may have had no problem with his own church’s decision before he became a Christian that artificial contraception may be legitimately used, at least in cases of where there are serious issues of “pain danger or expense” if pregnancy occurred.
If he allows for any exceptions at all, this is a very significant difference from HV. (And a more reasonable position, of course, from my point of view.)
steve from brisbane
12 Oct 12 at 12:04 pm
“Pain, danger and expense” are relevant so far as mitigating the wrong is concerned but they do not absolve it. It is not different at all to HV because he is not making an exception. If the circumstances ‘excused’ it would not be a matter for personal conscience.
dover_beach
12 Oct 12 at 1:02 pm
d-b, I can see you’re having a good time. SfB is being pretty good too, apart from snide bitching at Gab.
wreckage
12 Oct 12 at 7:28 pm
This is a list, but by no means complete,of things Mr Abbott has said or written,these do not strike me as a misogynist,just sexist,he is more like an ambassador for the Vatican.
1. Quote from an undergraduate piece he wrote on feminism
‘I think it would be folly to expect that women will ever dominate or even approach equal representation in a large number of areas simply because their aptitudes, abilities and interests are different for physiological reasons’
2. From an address to the Adelaide University Democratic Club, 17 March 2004.
‘The problem with the Australian practice of abortion is that an objectively grave matter has been reduced to a question of the mother’s convenience.’
“If half the effort were put into discouraging teenage promiscuity as goes into preventing teenage speeding, there might be fewer abortions, fewer traumatised young women and fewer dysfunctional families.”
“Why isn’t the fact that 100,000 women choose to end their pregnancies regarded as a national tragedy approaching the scale, say, of Aboriginal life expectancy being 20 years less than that of the general community
3. From Sunday Profile, 12 June 2005.
“You don’t have to be a Catholic to be troubled by the current abortion culture”
4. In Parliament (pdf), 15 Feb 2006.
‘ Mr Speaker, we have a bizarre double standard; a bizarre double standard in this country where some-one who kills a pregnant woman’s baby is guilty of murder, but a woman who aborts an unborn baby is simply exercising choice.’
5. From Q&A, 19 March 2009.
‘I think there does need to be give and take on both sides, and this idea that sex is kind of a woman’s right to absolutely withhold, just as the idea that sex is a man’s right to demand I think they are both they both need to be moderated, so to speak’
On aid to the ‘third world’ funding abortions:
“I just think that surely there are higher priorities for Australia than funding things like that.”
On whether a national celibacy campaign would be helpful to counter the rise in teen sexual activity, sexual infections and pregnancies:
“I think that it’s very important that we empower people to reject this kind of rampant sensuality.”
6. NSW town of Queanbeyan 8th February 2010
‘What the housewives of Australia need to understand as they do the ironing is that if they get it done commercially it’s going to go up in price and their own power bills when they switch the iron on are going to go up, every year…’
jacqui
14 Oct 12 at 8:39 am
[...] It’s not the first time ‘Albo’ has been called Albasleazy! Albanese shows up Gillard weakness | Daily Telegraph Piers Akerman … If it had been a Conservative, the media would have been salivating and dribbling all over the place, just like they do about Climate Change on a hot day. Question 1: Define Sexism and Misogyny at Catallaxy Files [...]
“massage parlor matter” … | pindanpost
26 Mar 13 at 11:39 am