Freedom of speech

Err, so no comments about the rape charges, no comment on doing a deal at the expense of the workers, nout about having one of his staff get an abortion, for ol BullShitten Shorten? slick eh!

How about, Plibeserk? Married to a convicted drug dealer. Honourable chap what? How about hmmm, Di Natale, paying girls less than minimum wage to look after his country house? No? How about Dastyari taking money from the Chinese? How are we doing? No matter the ALP member, they are all pathetically compromised.

Yeah, you sprayed that a while back but no names then. Still no sources on the spurious/salacious stuff. Dear, dear me.

I know the actual day was a while back, but R U OK, comrade?

And de fun don't done:

http://www.9news.com.au/national/2016/11/07/17/14/hinch-wants-proof-of-a...

Are we allowed to talk about the Point Piper cat strangler? http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/heartbreaking-history-of-a-poor-littl...

Sources stu, sources mate something reputable like buzzfeed or Wikipedia will do.

look those things up you lazy so and so's! sheesh the younger gen with all its IT knowledge but lazy as a pair of socks.

Says the guy too lazy to cite his references.

discostu = the donald trump of swellnet.

Labour respect women, they show their respect for their wives by rooting other women

http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/stories/s599161.htm

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/national/mp-dumps-wife-for-g-gs-da...

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/tony-burkes-taxpayerfunded-lux...

Holy sh!t, Labour Politicians are the only people to ever stray!

Dumbass.

Ooooh look a master of the logical fallacy, two in one post, aren't you the local smart pants. mk1 sounds like the same guy moaning about lack of references in his last post,? I'll put a trigger warning there for you next time.

Just watching Gillian Triggs on 7:30. As I thought, the hullabaloo against her was overblown. The HRC didn't bring the case to court, they tried to stop it, the complainant took it to court. It's not the role of the HRC to take matters to court. It's the opposite, they try, and they tried in that case, to resolve it prior to court. In the end, they terminated the process because it was going nowhere and there wasn't anything in it in their view. Huh. That's a different story from the media misrepresentations we've seen, that didn't even understand the role of the commish.

The HRC may have bungled the conciliation process, and it sounds like they think they did, but the claims that Triggs politicised the role and the commission are bogus. They themselves are political claims.

What a joke when the media and the associated frothing pack can't even get the basic roles of the key players right. It's not surprising we all get strung along with the narrative.

Zen and stunet, thanks for your reasoned responses.

Zen nothing better than getting together with a bunch of fellas and yarning about all manner of bollocks and serious stuff, whether it's in a man cave thing or at the pub or the beach or round the fire. I don't see that we white blokes have been kicked around, just asked to change our language and behaviour to accommodate the equality we all no doubt support. I'm probably missing some things but that's all I see.

It plays out a bit trickily in Australia i reckon because we've got such a crass and disrespectful humour at our core. I mean that in a complementary way, our larrikin, anti-authority and egalitarian sensibilities mean almost everyone's a target for a piss take. I love it about us.

But I can see how that needs to change or moderate a bit. As we all know Up until a generation or two ago, Australia was white. It sucked if you were black, gay or a woman with big dreams. Apparently the Bulletin had on its masthead, Australia for the white man, until the 60s. Of course that's a crap attitude and we've moved on, and most Aussies treat everyone they meet with respect (or at least, not with hostility) regardless of race, gender and sexual preference. We do that better than most and we are rightly proud of that.

But, there are still things we can improve on and that's things like making lightly racist or homophobic jokes. Among many in our great land that kind of thing is still viewed as ok. We all have different opinions of course and that's cool. While not speaking for the entire gay community blowin's brother was ok with nick3's comment. I didn't bother asking any of my gay mates (male or female) but I know a few who'd disagree, the social justicey type, you know...

Anyway the point is, we aspire to equality in Australia. We do pretty well too. We're working on the marginal things now I reckon, but the kind of language that has been acceptable in the past few decades, good natured though it sometimes was, is one of the few remnants of exclusivity. Moderating that kind of thing in polite society is all I can see that we white fellas are being asked to do, to finish our transition to a fully equal and excellent society.

Aaaand there's another sanctimonious blurb from me.

Just saw that too benski and your little summary is spot on , media fail, frothers fail, everyone's pushing an agenda without even looking at the details

Just saw don Watson on q and a, firstly what a classic! watson on political correctness....I hate political correctness, but the problem is, those that challenge it nearly always have an agenda...

Interesting just saw that liberal aboriginal Wyatt guy too, said 18 c was relevant 40 years ago and served a purpose but australia has changed and grown since then, and we need legislation to serve us for the next thirty years...

Tend to agree, I haven't followed this thing at all, but what a fucking waste of resources and good will, we really have better things to waste our time on

I only caught the end of q and a but that Watson fella was awesome. Loved his tone and style. So dry.

Maybe 18c isn't necessary any more but gees I can't get excited by it as an issue. To use the far right's line on marriage equality, so many more important things to take care of thanks abolishing 18c.

Actually it's somewhat depressing that those peeps appear to think abolishing 18c is more important than marriage equality but here we are.

To your second post, generally agree, I just see the current (fourth?) wave of feminism in australia as particularly nasty confusing and contradictory and I reckon that's what Zen's mates will be struggling with

Frivolous arguments about a gender pay gap presented by people like van Badham do little to give the modern movement credibility, and the nastiness of the likes of c ford just creates more division.

Idealism is fine, but we all need to get along which means accepting other perspectives. Modern feminism fails that miserably. Passively aggressively imposing a dictatorship doesn't cancel out the dictator part.

Ah yep I dig that. Although I think it's kind of cool those writers are firing up. On the notion of hearing multiple perspectives. I did get a better understanding of the gender pay gap recently when yarning with a female colleague.

We were talking about raising kids and her parents were visiting from OS and noticed the way her and her bloke shared the kid raising jobs. They said to her, your so lucky he helps you with your son. She was angry and said, bullshit if that's the case then he's lucky I help him with his son. Started a long convo about women's roles in our little lunch break.

The upshot was, of course we live in a systemically equal society where women can do anything. But the cultural norm and default assumption is that after being pregnant the woman will take time off and raise the kid. And that of course contributes to the observed gender pay gap. It's not because we hate women so we pay them less. It's that our assumed position is that she'll do that role just like always. And so long as that's the cultural assumption then there's a degree of inequality.

That might be ok. Hell it might be optimal for lots of reasons. But if we want a genuinely equal society like we say we do, we have a few more steps to take like that. I think It's good that Van Badham raises that but maybe could express it better. Although to be fair, look how quickly shit gets cranky and full of insults here, can't imagine what that corner of the internet would be like. So I can understand the combative attitude they'd take.

I do see that it is potentially confusing when it starts with men are this or that. I think it's often not men per se, but the cultural norms we've still got which don't necessarily jive with our highest ideals.

Of course men should learn to breastfeed instead of assuming that only women can do it

While Mr. Koch is being facetious he raises a point that modern feminism endeavours to overlook, and that is biology, some things it's just better (or more practical) if the woman does it. Careful raising that point with the ladies though!!!,....geez speak about reactionary

I actually don't mind badham, and appreciate that she does interact with comments on her articles. However when people try to challenge the gender pay gap all they get is steely cold silence, or at best a link to spurious research with no explanation. As many men have pointed out to her, it's actually illegal to pay men and women different amounts for the same work in Australia. And drawing distinctions between a miners salary (men's work) and childcare (women's work) is totally pointless. Many guys also like to point out that if a chick is that way inclined, they are also able to get a job in the mine, as many do.

Then there's the time off for child rearing thing, yes if women take time off for child rearing, they are instantly behind, but you know, nobody makes them have a child, and couples have had to plan for such events since the beginning of time. To think the tax payer should cover this with over generous parenting payments is just ridiculous, yeh, provide them some payment, but the numbers thrown around are over the top. Making this payment also available to the male in the relationship seems to overcome the equality issue.

interesting reading the comments to one of her articles, many people had examples of men taking over the female roles, especially when the female earns more. The overwhelming consensus was equality is alive and well in modest income homes, where economics makes couples share the roles more determined by practicality. It seems the high income chicks just expect to maintain their high income right through these child rearing periods no matter what.

My issue is how much money and resources is the government expected to provide to give this illusion of equality we're striving for?

It's like most idealism from the left, all is good in theory but the practicalities are lacking, especially as the western world spirals towards a situation where countries can no longer afford the basic welfare state that pays pensioners and doleys, never mind this gold standard idealism.

It seems much of the pay gap argument is based on loss of income that a female misses out on through having children when a relationship breaks up, hence the talk of superannuation etc. as well. Planning pay rates etc. for failed relationships seems a little counter productive to me, and totally overlooks the biology and responsibility of having children.

Any (good income) guy who's been through a break up can tell you that the gender pay gap is well and truly taken care of though the courts,..... geez most of the 'ladies' even go after the man's super!!!

Idealism is good, until it becomes so unworkable it takes the energies of many people to do the work of two, so middle class mothers can live in a palace

The current unsustainability of the welfare state means it needs to be more focussed, not widened

It is interesting to see that in the recent 18C cases, no one here has any thought on the impact to the complainants. In the Leak cartoon issue, it seems the complainants were not even aware of the formal complaint. In the QUT case, no thought of the impact to Ms Prior and the indigenous body paying for legal fees. Seems the students in the QUT case were collateral damage. If the arbitrator, in this case the HRC, is not removed politically or emotionally then we are left for the courts to resolve. Is that really where it should be resolved ? If so, we left exposed to legal blackmail.

Anyone heard the theory that feminism was conceptualised and promoted with malicious intent to create a new stream of labour - that of the former housewife / mother - and to create generations of state raised children with a more tightly controlled education through limited parental input ?

Cue conspiracy theory theme track.....

What, conspiracy theories don't have their own theme track by now ?

Smart as rocks.

The students weren't told about the case until 14 months later according to Triggs. So who had she been conciliating with? With the non entity and the dropkicks at the Uni that's who. Not with the students. The students were given 3 days notice of a conciliation hearing about a matter that they didn't know existed. Triggs claims that it was clear that there would be no conciliation during the 12/13month period. How would she know when she never engaged with the relevant parties?

Just as I thought Benpi ( look that up ), you don't know jack. And Sypper, you must definitely be related to BB!

Why don't you idiots try reading instead of making facts out of what you "think"? You can interpret that last word in the loosest possible way.

You need a bit more accuse in your accusations sheepdog

I think what I'm saying, and certainly what my.colleague was saying, is not about govt funding or ignoring biology but rather a cultural shift. Of course women have to breastfeed (although alternatives do exist) but that's usually about six months. Typically women spend longer than that out of the workforce because our default system is that the mother takes care of the kids from beginning to end. If we are truly an equal society then why shouldn't the father stay home once the breastfeeding phase is over? There's still another few years before school starts.

Clearly that is an option and does happen but it's unusual and while it's unusual (or at least considered weird or wrong), it's fair to say we haven't achieved a societal norm of greater equality.

Clearly every couple makes their own choice but the cultural setting is still one where the roles tend to split leading to the pay gap. That's ok for some people and of course they're free to do that (one of my most radical femmo friends quit her job and raised the kids cos she and her bloke decided that was best for them). But while It's assumed by culture and our unspoken or unconscious attitudes include, that's her role and this is his role, we'll hear from Badham et al to change it up and bring our unconscious thoughts in line with our aspirations.

"The current unsustainability of the welfare state means it ['idealism'] needs to be more focussed, not widened." - InSypo

Right.......idealism is the problem!

Here's something you may be familiar with InSypo. Posted previously on these threads.

"OK, here's a little experiment for you. Stick you fingers in your ears, close your eyes, and say, in a stern voice, "I told you so". Now, open your eyes, pull your fingers out of your ears, and look around. Has anything changed? Is the world a better place?

What "we" have been "seeing" is that something is not right. But, as we already know that something is not right, the mere fact that self-appointed spokespeople for the common man like Trump, Hanson and Abbott make lots of noise in their attempts to use our dissatisfaction against us is more of a negative that a contribution. We need to ignore this static, and concentrate on fixing the problem. And the problem is a thing called "corporate rent", and how it has grown to unsustainable levels over the past forty years.

Corporate rent is wealth that is extracted from the economy via profits, property rent and interest, by corporations. In being extracted from the economy, this wealth becomes unavailable to us for the satisfaction of our needs and wants. So, if we look at the wealth that we create as a nation (Gross National Income) as a cake, corporate rent is like a slice taken out of the cake by the waiter before it is served to the diner. And, ever since 1974, the size of the slice taken out of our cake by corporate rent has almost doubled from under 15% to nearly 30%.

In 1974, when corporate rent ate up less than 15% of our national "cake", we had enough to pay for Medibank, free university education, a massive revamp of public education, and huge boosts to the liveability of cities. Now, with corporate rent consuming nearly a third of all that we produce, we can't afford it, and that is what is making us cross.

So there's the answer. We need to control corporate rent, and to bring it down to sustainable levels that will allow the wealth that we produce as a nation to be spent by us and on us, in the satisfaction of our needs and wants."

Nothin' to see here? The 'shiny, shiny' of the totalitarian 18c is the main game!? Am I being too 'idealistic'?

Yeah, nah your right. Ban anything you don't like the sound of and more free shit for everybody because...socialism works, ask Venezuela.

Benski you can call them cultural assumptions if you like but sooner or later you're gonna get slapped with the immutable facts of biology. If you think western society isn't egalitarian enough perhaps you need a broader perspective, feminism and yourself would be better served putting energy into inequities in sociateies where women actually are oppressed rather than inventing a "pay gap" or whatever the next 1st world whinge can be.

word mr koch!

I know I could take modern feminism more seriously if it even remotely seemed concerned with the plight of poorer societies

the irony of clinton sprouting feminist and diversity bullshit while taking funds from one of the most oppressive mysogynist regimes on the planet burns....burns deep

then she admits in emails that saudi regime funds terrorism schools across the planet....privately of course.

diversity? yeh right

"I know I could take modern feminism more seriously if it even remotely seemed concerned with the plight of poorer societies"

Ha ha ha...'cos yeah, that's what us blokes do, right? Always caring for the Third World and that.

Chuck us another beer, will ya?

turkeyman I get all that, and unfortunately for you I see trump as a better answer to that in particular

while I generally agree with you surely you can appreciate in the same time frame, services have increased both in expenxse and volume?

we have just gone through a very wealthy period where the answer to all of societies ills has been more programs and more education. the result is services and departments developing to manage services and departments as the monstrosity feeds on itself. so many people producing nothing, just people managing people

a reckoning has to come eventually

all this is combined with the ever increasing costs of a medical system driven by technology

Kochie, that was piss-weak. Dumb & piss-weak. Like Disco-Stu's schtick. Ah well...

Hang on, unless...you're actually one of the rent-seekers! Or a wannabe rent-boy* at least...

Who's buttering your corporate loaf, comrade?

*that one's for you, InSypo.

Tuesday, 8 Nov 2016 at 2:16pm new
"I know I could take modern feminism more seriously if it even remotely seemed concerned with the plight of poorer societies"

Ha ha ha...'cos yeah, that's what us blokes do, right? Always caring for the Third World and that.

Chuck us another beer, will ya?

well that's where my pissy little guilt assuaging monthly money contribution goes

so yeh some of us do

Yeah I was a low blow to bring up Venezuela. Tell us that story again, you know the one where great uncle Karl predicted the downfall of capitalism.

Oh hang on, I bet you got a few more rent boy quips before we got onto that.

"Unfortunately for you I see trump as a better answer to that in particular..."

Why is that unfortunate for me? Thankfully, I'm not a US citizen.

Putting that aside, how is Trump a better answer to what? in particular???

His 'voodoo economix' makes GW Bush's look...well, less dismal (even for the 'dismal science').

Trickle-down?! Trump is gonna shit from on-high all over his 'Thanksgiving-voting turkeys' like a prehistoric orange shit-a-saurus.

Kochie...'free-trade' deals, TPP, de-regulation, privatisation...fan-boy?

"Corporate rent is wealth that is extracted from the economy via profits, property rent and interest, by corporations. In being extracted from the economy, this wealth becomes unavailable to us for the satisfaction of our needs and wants. So, if we look at the wealth that we create as a nation (Gross National Income) as a cake, corporate rent is like a slice taken out of the cake by the waiter before it is served to the diner. And, ever since 1974, the size of the slice taken out of our cake by corporate rent has almost doubled from under 15% to nearly 30%.

In 1974, when corporate rent ate up less than 15% of our national "cake", we had enough to pay for Medibank, free university education, a massive revamp of public education, and huge boosts to the liveability of cities. Now, with corporate rent consuming nearly a third of all that we produce, we can't afford it, and that is what is making us cross."

Australia...not Venezuala or Cuba...or Angola...or China. AUSTRALIA.

& USA. USA.

TRUMP is...REVOLUTION!?

OI!

he's the trigger turkeyman

not the solution....that will come after

The final solution?

Win or loss?

Ohhhh, you mean the tpp and "free trade" deals opposed by trump, supported by Obama and Clinton and largely by the AUTRALIAN labor party, nah not a fan.

Stu - you don't think Aussie blokes care about third world countries ?

Who do you reckon stumped up the $5,003,000,000.00 last financial year alone ?

When you factor in the aforementioned gender pay imbalance , that's not a bad little donation from the sweat of the Aussie male's brow is it ?

Just cause most blokes suck a tin on a Saturday arvo rather than digging a well for a village in Sumba, doesn't mean their not going well above and beyond with their efforts during the working week.

Turkey :Pretty sure One Nation opposes the rent seeking of transnational corporations as part of their policy, so if you vote for them it's a vote in the right direction right ?

Or are you just going to keep voting for the parties that are all for the continued rape of our nation cause they've got runs on the board......in allowing the continued rape of our nation.

You realise your own argument is self defeating ?

win or lose?

that's up to the public, unfortunately we are so divided atm it doesn't look good

it's interesting watching American media presenting a more sombre mood portrayal of bias as they realise trump's support is real and not going away on nov 9

whatever happens this war thing has got to srop, not least because the empire is overstretched.. so that would be a win

it's the observer I know, but it's a lefty writer apparently,...maybe

whatever...he's right...the whole thing has been disgusting from all sides and the casualty is trust

dark times ahead whoever wins

http://observer.com/2016/11/this-election-has-disgraced-the-entire-profe...

sypkan, very respectfully the line that they should concentrate on problems in other places before they're worthy of time and respect is a pretty flimsy dismissal.

First, how do you know modern Aussie feminists don't do the same as you, or more, by donating cash or time to feminist causes in the developing world? If Van Badham or Clementine Ford wanted to help women in the third world, maybe they'd do it by contacting them directly and assisting with the writing of content for issues there. We wouldn't know if they did or not, just as stu didn't know you donate cash to the developing world.

Second, it would be fairly pointless to write articles for an Australian audience, to try and change attitudes in Qatar or Sierra Leone. Especially since we all know there are issues there and that women in places like that are often second class citizens. And imagine how that would go down anyway? The NY Times has written two editorials in the last month or so condemning Australia's treatment of asylum seekers and weren't they received gratefully by our political class? Imagine an Australian woman writing articles arguing that Saudi women deserve the right to drive and that the country is backward or that PNG men should stop beating women. It'd be a waste of energy and wouldn't help the situation at all. And in any case, I'd have thought those things go without saying.

Third, doesn't it make sense for Australian writers to write about Australian issues? There are far greater issues with exploitation of workers in Bangladesh than there are in Australia, but we don't expect the ACTU to campaign for workers rights there. It's their job to look after Aussie workers. But if we're going to dismiss Aussie feminists for not writing about 'more important' issues in developing countries then the unions ought to be fighting for the rights of the exploited in the same places. After all, Aussie workers have it pretty good.

Fourth, here's an article from Ford addressing the issue, in her own confrontational manner, and listing feminist organisations in the developing world. And as I said, for all we know maybe she supports some of them herself.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-06-21/ford-femenism-global/4771966

Sypkan, 'dark times' - relax and enjoy your surf. Don't forget either one needs the Senate. And that aint guaranteed. You can see that Obama was a virtual lame duck in his final years.

You guys (chuckle)...

Apart from side-stepping the de-reg & privatisation part of the neo-liberal equation, Kochie, and forgetting Sanders (as most of the corpo-media tried to do for a very long time), does anyone, ANYONE, truly believe ANYTHING that the Donald has said about EVERYTHING? The gamble is part of the attraction, I guess. Or so I read about low-self esteem and addiction and gambling.

Ditto Hanson.

Last time it was Asians & Abos for Pauline. Now it's Muslims, Climate-changers, & 'globalisationism'. Hmmmmm, similar song-book there as the Donald.

HANSON IS...REVOLUTION! TRUMP IS...REVOLUTION!

Wanna buy a used casino/fish n chip shop?

Anyway, here's a US hindsight hypothetical. Who'd have won between Sanders & Trump?

(we haven't fallen so low yet here as the States has now...hopefully, it's not a 'watch this space'....for once! Pato for PM!?)

I agree with all that benski

and to their credit it is actually feminists and unions asking questions about Bangladeshi sweat shops

that doesn't mean I can't point out that the aussie narrative has become very self indulgant and somewhat superfluous of late

Obama and the clintons push these free trade deals, good ole Bernie the used car salesman pushes for both and you wanna scream oh trumps a liar when he opposes said trade deals, now where did I put that foil

Turkey -So you're all for Globilisation , but against corporate rent seekers....

What exactly do you think Globilisation means ?

Hint : it means shifting the cheap labour to where labour is expensive and moving the profits to where tax is minimal. That's Globilisation mate.

Don't tell me you thought it meant cultural jamborees where we all got together , held hands and swapped stories of spiritual attachemant to Gaia ?

trump is revolution

hanson is a fucking idiot (apart from the good bits blowin sniffs out)

don't expect ttrump ro do half of what he says, not expecting much at all, but he can hardly go back on saying he would not be expansionary, that's a step in the right direction

Dave kilcullen last night, aussie terrorism expert, basically said it's hard to say trump would be more dangerous when he proposes a change to accepted wisdom on the middle east, when 15 years of the accepted wisdom has been so disastrous