This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

Australia - No Place For Real Men

Jump to new
Some Dude said:
I'm also interested to hear from anyone else with the courage to come forward and tell us about how men are vilified in general society.
Click to expand...

As a payback for years of women made to look helpless and silly, men are now portrayed in ads and elsewhere as bumbling fools.
 
explod said:
I am very pleased that this situation has changed today and though the feminist movement may seem to be the dominant force, this is still a long way from the case here in Auz. In most overseas Countries it is still an unspeakable situation.
Click to expand...
"In most overseas countries"??? That seems an unreasonable generalisation, doesn't it?

explod said:
Good point, can remember well my Farther saying a number of times, "ah way back when men were men and women were glad of it"
Click to expand...
Sounds like a typical comment from a typical chauvinist of the time. Who ever actually asked the women?
(I realise, explod, that in quoting your father, you're not yourself accepting the appropriateness of such a saying.)

I agree with these points. Gillard's misogyny campaign against Abbott has succeeded only because he has permitted it. He has appeared like a confused deer in headlights, apparently unable to come up with a suitable rebuttal, thus looking pathetic.


Calliope said:
Yesterday I was soundly ticked off by the forum's alpha feminist for calling Hillary Clinton a "dog."
Click to expand...
I'd appreciate your withdrawing your labelling of me as above, Calliope. You have no basis for such name calling.
As a woman I'm grateful to those women like Germaine Greer, Betty Friedan, et al, who did so much for bringing equal rights to women. However, I think the pendulum has swung too far in the other direction now, the result being, as an example, the ridiculous admiration offered to Julia Gillard for her now infamous misogyny speech.
This was a piece of confected rubbish, yet the man haters amongst the sisterhood fell upon it with joy, thus demonstrating their lack of capacity to think critically or rationally.

Yes, I objected to your labelling of Hillary Clinton. You wouldn't have drawn similar attention to an unflattering photograph of a male politician. Imo Ms Clinton should be judged on her competence or otherwise in the role of Secretary of State, not how many wrinkles she quite reasonably might have for a woman of her age.
She has also demonstrated resilience and courage in the face of her husband's behaviour which imo provides an example to other women.
I was just expressing surprise that she had been selected by the Gallup people as the world's most popular woman. I was told I was being gratuitously insulting. Maybe, but I still think she has a "head like a robber's dog."
Click to expand...
Why not just say you were surprised? Why describe her in such an unnecessarily insulting way. It's similar to your description a while ago of the Governor General as a 'stick insect'.
Just demeaning to yourself as well as the person you are so describing.


Some Dude said:
I'm also interested to hear from anyone else with the courage to come forward and tell us about how men are vilified in general society.
Click to expand...
I don't think I'd say men are vilified in general society, but I don't think any such generalisation applies to women either. Seems to me to be a mistake to interpret a political manoeuvre as a more general reflection of attitudes to either gender.

We can all only speak from personal experience, I guess. Mine has almost invariably been that I've been treated as an individual, rather than experiencing any bias against or for my gender.
 
Julia said:
We can all only speak from personal experience, I guess. Mine has almost invariably been that I've been treated as an individual, rather than experiencing any bias against or for my gender.
Click to expand...
+1. People seem to centre the world around themselves and blow minor incidents out of proportion in order to prove something.
 
Julia said:
I agree with these points. Gillard's misogyny campaign against Abbott has succeeded only because he has permitted it. He has appeared like a confused deer in headlights, apparently unable to come up with a suitable rebuttal, thus looking pathetic.
Click to expand...

I also agree with Calliope on this point - I'm a self-employed small business owner and the escalating power of the union movement is something that concerns me, and almost every businessperson I'm familiar with. It may surprise quite a few to hear that quite a lot of employed people are also fed up with union interference in their negotiations with employers. This is an area that I would love to see the opposition tackle head on.


I partially agree here. I too am immensely grateful to those women who agitated for the vote, then for equality of pay etc - I am cognisant of the fact that I have reaped the benefit of a long hard struggle that took place decades before my birth, and that I think will eventually take place in some of the overseas countries alluded to by Explod. I do think some young women have a tendency to use their sex to their advantage when it suits them, and to then cry foul when they're not taken as seriously as they would like. I do, however, believe our society has a way to go yet until there is true equality in all sections of society, and the workplace in particular. Sometimes the worst culprits are women themselves - go figure! The misogyny speech given by Julia Gillard tapped into a simmering resentment felt by a lot of women, who have mistakenly given their admiration to a woman who was giving voice to a complaint they could identify with - but unfortunately they've largely failed to examine her political motivations and the particular event that prompted them. The mostly positive coverage she gleaned from overseas media speaks to this aspect I believe - very few articles had much idea why she made the speech she did, but applauded her for it nonetheless


I quite strongly objected as well - was just about to start typing a reply when sanity returned and I realised the pointlessness of doing so. It irks me no end that although men are almost always judged on their abilities and/or accomplishments and actions, women are still quite often judged by a neanderthal section of society purely on their looks. Since when does a woman have to be attractive to be popular? Could it be that a lot of people admire and respect her for what she has achieved in life, and the example she sets, despite her lack of offers from Victoria's Secret?


I also can only speak for myself. When I was employed I was promoted over several men, both younger and older, and can definately say I had no complaints of sexism in the workplace. Having said that, I worked for a large institution where such practices were not encouraged or tolerated and would have been met with swift action. I don't know that all women of my age could say the same - those in male-dominated industries or employed in smaller organisations may have hit a glass ceiling I didn't have to contend with.

I have two teenage sons at high school and I can tell you that every Speech Night there are at least 30% more female award recipients than male. It pleases me no end to see young women making no attempt to dissemble about their intelligence for fear of being unable to attract a man. More power to them I say - any Real Man worth his salt should have nothing to fear from an intelligent, confident woman who speaks her mind and knows what she wants, surely?
 
Dear all, just a reminder to please play the ball, not the wo/man. Some personal insults creeping in that are out of line and not in the ASF spirit. Some good robust discussion also which is nice to see, as always. Cheers, kennas
 
white_goodman said:
you mustnt have delved too deep into her past then
Click to expand...

re. Hillary Clinton

I met her once or twice as I have said above, and found her beyond reproach. It was in the early seventies and we were all young and idealistic.

She made some unwise investments and they are on the public record ( Whitewater) , but she had a zeal and intellect which I have rarely met when I knew her.

Bill Clinton was a tosser, by the way.

gg
 
Julia said:
Yes, I objected to your labelling of Hillary Clinton. You wouldn't have drawn similar attention to an unflattering photograph of a male politician.
Click to expand...

No? Wayne Swan makes Ms Clinton look good. Here he is trying a contrived smile.



Imo Ms Clinton should be judged on her competence or otherwise in the role of Secretary of State, not how many wrinkles she quite reasonably might have for a woman of her age.
Click to expand...

The poll was on popularity... not competence.

She has also demonstrated resilience and courage in the face of her husband's behaviour which imo provides an example to other women.
Click to expand...

Yes, but a bad example to other women. She should have kicked him out. She demeaned herself by not divorcing him.

It's similar to your description a while ago of the Governor General as a 'stick insect'.
Just demeaning to yourself as well as the person you are so describing.
Click to expand...

I borrowed that one off another (female) poster and I am grateful to her for this apt description.

P.S. I apologise to your dog for calling Hillary a "dog."
 
In early December 2012 after my stint in the German nunnery I had a 3 hour rest in the Qantas Chairmans Lounge at Sydney Airport, awaiting a flight to Townsville.

As bad luck would have it, about 30% of the Cabinet and 40% of the ALP Caucus were stuffing themselves on the public purse, in the Lounge, they must have missed feeding time at the Canberra Zoo.

You have never met a sorrier bunch.

Talk about sadness, you would need a phalanx of psychologists to even go there.

They looked like a losing team, bickering and scratching their balls and/or whatever females do.

I was wearing thongs, and looked my normal grubby self with backpack and shower-shampooed gear on.

One of the comrades in an annoyed tone said to me, " So they let people with thongs in now"

I replied yes they ****ing do, comrade and I will cut and paste you.

He said sorry and went in to a long diatribe about the value of thongs in Australia culture.

Before I told him to **** off, I grabbed the last of the Qantas soup.

I can tell you, the ALP caucus are not the sort of people you would need in a debate on ordinary Australian values or in a crisis.

Imagine if the latte had been switched off.

The present mob of Labor politicians are so removed from the values of Men in Australia, that they live in a vacuum. They have no idea of the concerns and ethic of men.

They will get hammered at the next election.

gg
 
Garpal Gumnut said:
Thats it folks, pick off a word or phrase, here or there, but don't debate the issue.
Click to expand...

Repsond to my posts then. How is complaining about stereotyping as a political tactic any different to what every other political party, organisation, or group does? Are you seriously trying to tell us that the coalition or you do not engage in unjustified stereotypes?
 

Sorry Some Dude,

I have you on ignore because you are such a pillock.

You came through in a repost.

Let me un ignore you and go back through your posts and then I'll answer you.

Kind regards,

gg
 

Whatever anyone else does it's so mild it goes unnoticed, but Gillard and the band of socialst looters thrive on it, they wrote the book and rely on it manipulate public favour.
 
Garpal Gumnut said:
Sorry Some Dude,

I have you on ignore because you are such a pillock.
Click to expand...

No problem. I was aware I was on your ignore list (system or voluntary) and if you don't feel like you can handle the discussion feel free to place me on ignore again. It won't stop me from expressing my opinion
 
MrBurns said:
Whatever anyone else does it's so mild it goes unnoticed, but Gillard and the band of socialst looters thrive on it, they wrote the book and rely on it manipulate public favour.
Click to expand...

Do you genuinely believe that? I mean, is the modern ALP so amazingly good that they have broken new ground which will be studied throughout history?

Really?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...