Closed Thread
Page 94 of 99 FirstFirst ... 44849293949596 ... LastLast
Results 931 to 940 of 984
  1. #931
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    my house
    Posts
    17,710
    Thanks
    1,392
    Thanked
    7,295
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 postsRuby Star - 15,000 posts

  2. #932
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,603
    Thanks
    126
    Thanked
    267
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by BigRedV View Post
    It's a little short-sighted of O'Farrell. And he has verballed Brandis. Brandis never said that racism was right, or was sanctioned, and to say that he did is mis-representing the point.

  3. #933
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    1,310
    Thanks
    136
    Thanked
    808
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Father View Post
    It's a little short-sighted of O'Farrell. And he has verballed Brandis. Brandis never said that racism was right, or was sanctioned, and to say that he did is mis-representing the point.
    O'Farrell just has a keener political nose than Brandis, who basically stepped on his own landmine with the bigot comment. With weeks of "consultation" to go, this has turned into a running sore for the Libs, and O'Farrell wants no part of it.

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to JohnC For This Useful Post:

    Atropos  (27-03-2014)

  5. #934
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    8,806
    Thanks
    7,267
    Thanked
    9,720
    Reviews
    5
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Father View Post
    It may give people a different way to express their hatred (ie. calling Abbott a ******** and showing pictures of his head as male genitalia is because he is a man, and people using the word '*****' because Gillard is a woman), but it was not because she was a woman, or Obama being black, that they are/were disliked by people. Gillard was a hopeless PM, and people criticised her because of her incompetence of doing the job and because they did not like her policies. Just as people are criticising Abbott because they do not like his policies. That is politics. You won't please everyone, and by pleasing some (in this case the majority), you will undoubtedly upset the minority.

    98 days without any boat arrivals!
    Any evidence to support your claim that Gillard did not face harassment, discrimination, vilification and disrespectful treatment at the hands of the media AND the opposition based on her gender?
    I'm sorry but your continued denial of the obviously sexist treatment of the first female PM is getting laughable. Why can't you accept that it happened?
    I don't support gender based slurs towards anyone but I don't think calling Abbott a ******** is necessarily gender based- it's a fairly common term in Australian slang and I've heard it applied to both men and women. And the sign saying Resign, Di!!head? Written by and carried by a man. That's just one example. He's not being vilified, mocked or harassed for being male. People don't like what he's doing to the country. Do I agree with how they express their opposition? Not always, no.

    To answer your other question, it's never ok to vilify anyone, but it's certainly ok to disagree with them and what they stand for.

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to Atropos For This Useful Post:

    JohnC  (27-03-2014)

  7. #935
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    1,310
    Thanks
    136
    Thanked
    808
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Atropos View Post
    He's not being vilified, mocked or harassed for being male.
    That seems to me the key point of difference.

    Now, as a separate issue, one could wish for a more elevated tone of political discourse from all sides of politics . But that's a separate question from sexism and racism, which are not about a vulgar tone but concern fundamental issues of prejudice and unequal treatment.

  8. #936
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,603
    Thanks
    126
    Thanked
    267
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Atropos View Post
    Any evidence to support your claim that Gillard did not face harassment, discrimination, vilification and disrespectful treatment at the hands of the media AND the opposition based on her gender?
    She faced some sexist comments yes. But was the root cause of them because she is a woman, or because of her performance - one cannot be sure either way. But because she did not receive any of this prior to becoming PM, it would not be invalid to assume that it was because of her performance. Do you have examples of sexism against her prior to her becoming PM?

    In contrast, Abbott had been regularly the subject of sexist type remarks due to his wearing of speedos long before he became PM. He has had to stop being himself (not wearing them anymore) due to the repeated harassment. Was that acceptable? Would criticism of Gillard's bathing attire have been acceptable whilst she was an MP prior to her becoming PM? Or would have that been sexist?

    Quote Originally Posted by Atropos View Post
    I'm sorry but your continued denial of the obviously sexist treatment of the first female PM is getting laughable. Why can't you accept that it happened?
    I have. I just don't believe that the root cause of her criticism is due to her gender. But gender played a part in how the criticism took place.

    Quote Originally Posted by Atropos View Post
    I don't support gender based slurs towards anyone but I don't think calling Abbott a ******** is necessarily gender based- it's a fairly common term in Australian slang and I've heard it applied to both men and women.
    I can say the same about the word '*****'. I have been called, and heard other males being called that. Does that make it acceptable? Not at all. But I can't see you can be so hypocritical to think that '********' is ok but '*****' isn't.

    Quote Originally Posted by Atropos View Post
    People don't like what he's doing to the country. Do I agree with how they express their opposition? Not always, no.
    And people didn't like what Gillard was doing to the country. And no, I do not agree with hate signs.... always. Regardless of the side. I do not have double standards.

    Quote Originally Posted by Atropos View Post
    To answer your other question, it's never ok to vilify anyone, but it's certainly ok to disagree with them and what they stand for.
    I agree.

  9. The Following User Says Thank You to Father For This Useful Post:

    Mod-pegasus  (28-03-2014)

  10. #937
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    my house
    Posts
    17,710
    Thanks
    1,392
    Thanked
    7,295
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 postsRuby Star - 15,000 posts

  11. #938
    Mod-pegasus's Avatar
    Mod-pegasus is offline ADMINISTRATOR
    and all that the Lorax left here in this mess was a small pile of rocks with the one word...UNLESS
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    14,644
    Thanks
    1,733
    Thanked
    1,735
    Reviews
    2
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 posts
    Regardless of whether you think calling someone a ******** is sexist, drawing male genitalia on a man's head is definitely sexist, and it's depicting the same thing.

    You are right Busy Bee - I wasn't at the march - I don't partake in such things (for many reasons - I don't agree with hatred protests, I prefer to do my political debates via the pen than by surrounding myself with others of similar disposition. I believe my method of contact local politicians is more likely to achieve going about getting change, also because my weekends are for my family and contrary to how some people acted (I've mentioned getting a toddler carrying a sign saying "toddlers against tony") its not the way I want to bring up my children - where they have no idea about what they are protesting about. I'd rather fight my political battles with politics rather than emotion.

    However, I still stand by the fact that regardless of the nazi insignias etc, there were a lot more signs depicted in any pictorials I saw which were defamatory in any of the photos I saw. Obviously, I didn't see all of the signs and they are easy pickings over people who didn't carry signs.

    I stand by the fact that defamatory signs calling people names etc, is a form of abuse and therefore in my book rules all of the people who thought to carry them out as being part of a civilised protest.

    ETA: I'm sure there was more that I was to respond to, but I'm not going back to previous pages now. I do stand by my previous posts and the fact that any emotionally based rally which is there to incite hatred (or unite people in hatred) is not useful nor something I want to be part of.

  12. The Following User Says Thank You to Mod-pegasus For This Useful Post:

    Father  (28-03-2014)

  13. #939
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    8,806
    Thanks
    7,267
    Thanked
    9,720
    Reviews
    5
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by pegasus View Post
    Regardless of whether you think calling someone a ******** is sexist, drawing male genitalia on a man's head is definitely sexist, and it's depicting the same thing.

    You are right Busy Bee - I wasn't at the march - I don't partake in such things (for many reasons - I don't agree with hatred protests, I prefer to do my political debates via the pen than by surrounding myself with others of similar disposition. I believe my method of contact local politicians is more likely to achieve going about getting change, also because my weekends are for my family and contrary to how some people acted (I've mentioned getting a toddler carrying a sign saying "toddlers against tony") its not the way I want to bring up my children - where they have no idea about what they are protesting about. I'd rather fight my political battles with politics rather than emotion.

    However, I still stand by the fact that regardless of the nazi insignias etc, there were a lot more signs depicted in any pictorials I saw which were defamatory in any of the photos I saw. Obviously, I didn't see all of the signs and they are easy pickings over people who didn't carry signs.

    I stand by the fact that defamatory signs calling people names etc, is a form of abuse and therefore in my book rules all of the people who thought to carry them out as being part of a civilised protest.

    ETA: I'm sure there was more that I was to respond to, but I'm not going back to previous pages now. I do stand by my previous posts and the fact that any emotionally based rally which is there to incite hatred (or unite people in hatred) is not useful nor something I want to be part of.
    I Think it's unfair to label the country wide March in March protests as a rally to incite hatred. You have said you weren't there. busy Bee was there and said there were many, many more signs that weren't photographed that had legit complaints and concerns on them. You are focussing on a minority, I think, and losing site of the big picture- that a grassroots protest came together around the country where thousands and thousands of people expressed their lack of confidence in the Abbott govt.

  14. #940
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,603
    Thanks
    126
    Thanked
    267
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Atropos View Post
    You are focussing on a minority, I think, and losing site of the big picture- that a grassroots protest came together around the country where thousands and thousands of people expressed their lack of confidence in the Abbott govt.
    Out of interest - what was your view of the 'convoy of no confidence'?


 

Similar Threads

  1. Be honest ,have you/do you.....
    By MonsterMoosMum in forum General Chat
    Replies: 62
    Last Post: 01-09-2013, 08:42
  2. Be honest, have you?
    By MonsterMoosMum in forum General Chat
    Replies: 59
    Last Post: 17-08-2013, 11:30
  3. Be honest! How much did you pay for your dog?
    By Janesmum123 in forum Pets
    Replies: 79
    Last Post: 30-11-2012, 07:51

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
free weekly newsletters | sign up now!
who are these people who write great posts? meet our hubbub authors!
Learn how you can contribute to the hubbub!

reviews
learn how you can become a reviewer!

competitions

forum - chatting now
christmas gift guidesee all Red Stocking
Riverton Leisureplex
An Extreme Family Pass at Riverton Leisureplex is the ultimate way to cool off during the summer school holidays. The $30 Pass allows pool and waterslide access for 2 adults and 2 children, as well as a drink, popcorn and an icy pole for each person.
sales & new stuffsee all
Bub Hub Sales Listing
HAVING A SALE? Let parents know about it with a Bub Hub Sales listing. Listings are featured on our well trafficked Sales Page + selected randomly to appear on EVERY page
featured supporter
L'il Aussie Prems Foundation
An Australian charity supporting families of premature babies & children. The charity assists families who are at high risk of giving birth prematurely, who have babies currently in hospital and families with toddlers who were born too soon.
gotcha
X

Pregnant for the first-time?

Not sure where to start? We can help!

Our Insider Programs for pregnancy first-timers will lead you step-by-step through the 14 Pregnancy Must Dos!