Australian Politics General...

basilio said:

There are squillions of people who have committed illegal actions who never get interviewed let alone charged or convicted. That is just the way of the world. To pretend otherwise is a nonsense.

Sexual assaults, particularly by people in positions of power, are the classic case. They are always very hard to prove. When people have enough money, power and ruthlessness they will usually get away with it.

Bruce Leherman is small fry. Just a wanna be politician who seems to have a knack for finding drunk woman who just can't say no to his charms. The big guys in this story are the Liberal political heavyweights who desperately wanted to bury this sordid little story before the stench permeated the whole leadership of the party. That is what political power is all about.

Anyway I'm a great believer in karma.

Click to expand...

Actually Bas, you will find the majority of sexual abuse is carried out by family members, or close friends, but don't let your political bias get in the way of your political rant.
Being obsessive compulsive, also leads itself to strange behavioral traits, just by the way.

sptrawler said:

Don't get me wrong, if it was rape, he should be put in the slammer and the key thrown away.
But if you are going to base all your evidence and assumptions on what the media tells you, it just shows how far we have fallen IMO.

Click to expand...

Agreed, I'd go further, fair dinkum rape is an awful thing with long term effects for the victim.

And it is unfortunate, terrible actually, that the alleged victim must suffer an inquisition.

But considering the punishment, (which should be bloody severe), we need to be sure.

Also, I'd differentiate between rape and regret.

Advice to women... don't get rat-arsed.

Advice to men... don't get rat-arsed.

Having nookie is a pretty serious thing and one should have their faculties about them.

I'd shy away from the app idea which makes it all rather transactional... I think I'd wilt like a bank of faded geraniums, if it ever got to that

wayneL said:

Agreed, I'd go further, fair dinkum rape is an awful thing with long term effects for the victim.

And it is unfortunate, terrible actually, that the alleged victim must suffer an inquisition.

But considering the punishment, (which should be bloody severe), we need to be sure.

Also, I'd differentiate between rape and regret.

Advice to women... don't get rat-arsed.

Advice to men... don't get rat-arsed.

Having nookie is a pretty serious thing and one should have their faculties about them.

I'd shy away from the app idea which makes it all rather transactional... I think I'd wilt like a bank of faded geraniums, if it ever got to that

Click to expand...

Absolutely agree, I never shagged any lady I wouldn't have married, these days that seems the furthest thing from both parties minds.
Just watch the adverts for the shows on T.V, farmer wants a root, grab a bachelorette, or a bachelor or any other pick a bloke or a girl and have a rip roaring time.
But beware, that isn't real life, don't try it at home, it is carried out in a controlled environment by professional spunks.

Just to point out how weird things are getting these days, this article in today's SMH.
When will the first court case involving this happen OMG.

SirRumpole said:

Maybe social media should have to follow the same standards as MSM when it comes to commenting on court cases.

Click to expand...

In general I'm firmly in the "free speech" camp but when it comes to an actual court case I think it's reasonable to apply some restrictions yes. If a proper process is underway to get to the truth then it's not for anyone to mess with it.

sptrawler said:

Actually Bas, you will find the majority of sexual abuse is carried out by family members, or close friends, but don't let your political bias get in the way of your political rant.
Being obsessive compulsive, also leads itself to strange behavioral traits, just by the way.

Click to expand...

Lets step back a bit shall we ? If we want to have a serious discussion I mean.

Yes the majority of sexual abuse is carried out by family members. Not to mention clergy, scout leaders, movie stars, pop stars, people running institutions like child protection sectors, even jails. Clearly awful and frankly largely hidden/ignored for ages. Would we agree that it has been only relatively recently that the reality of this abuse has been acknowledged and acted upon ? Would we agree that most of the time no one would believe such accusations because of the relative positions of the child and the adult ?

But that wasn't the topic of discussion in this case. The issue was what appeared to be an opportunistic sexual assault on a woman who got ratfaced. The other overarching issue I suggest was the political angle where the Liberal Government wanted to bury this issue because of the political embarrassment it would cause them. This was the case when it arose in 2019 and then later on.

I raised the issue that the most recent spate of sexual assault scandals has been when powerful figures ie movie directors, politcians, media personalities use their position to get their way with people. In the way of the world, power, money, who gets believed, who can hurt you the most, people who have been squeezed do end up shutting up. The legal system has historically made it very hard to get justice in the majority of cases that don't fit the "proper" rape narrative. ( Savage rape, by a brutal assailant of innocent girl. Often severely attacked if not killed.)

My experience has been extensive. Many friends have told me of date rape experiences, childhood sexual abuse, sexual power plays in work situations. The lot. Very few were able to take legal action.

On the other side of the coin I can also relate four other situations I am aware of. All are husbands who have been accused of abusing their children and/or raping abusing their partner. In all cases I'm quite certain (with plenty of evidence) these allegations are malicious lies made with the intention of gaining total access to children and the family assets. These allegations have only ever been made as statements to police and or Family Courts. There was no opportunity to investigate or ask for evidence. Unfortunately the Family Law situation as it stands seems to allow such cynical opportunistic behaviour. This is xxxt.

If you want to see two sides of the picture around the behaviour of big name media people to women this story is worth considering

‘Being heard is better than being seen’: supermodel Paulina Porizkova on living ‘unfiltered’​

Eva Wiseman

‘I’m not precious about my secrets. I guard other people’s, but you can have all of mine’: Paulina Porizkova, at home in New York City. Photograph: Ali Smith/The Observer
Paulina Porizkova, one of the great supermodels of the 80s, has refound fame – as ‘the lady who cries on Instagram’. It began with the death of and betrayal by her husband of 30 years

Moving through a room as a teenage supermodel when she first came to New York, mouths would drop, drinks would appear, eyes would spring out of sockets as if from a cartoon cat. In one chatshow appearance I watched on YouTube, from 1994, the radio personality Howard Stern spontaneously undressed in front of her. Trousers, shirt, everything.

...... It was on her fourth booking as a model – she would have been in her mid-teens – when the photographer approached as she was having her makeup done and rested his penis on her shoulder. As the makeup artist rolled her eyes, she realised this was, “My new normal. I quickly assumed it was part of the job and I wasn’t wrong.” She wrote about the experience not because it was unusual, but because it was ordinary. “It was a freaking everyday occurrence! That was just the first time it happened. We got really good at fending off sexual harassment by making a joke of it, because you can’t insult the guy’s ego – that’s really important, he’ll never book you again. You learn all these little manipulations as a young girl.” When her peers had breakdowns and went home, she “wasn’t particularly empathic. Because I thought, ‘Well, why can’t you fend them off like I do? And why are you taking it so personally?’ But, I was a child. I was a child!”

Watching the fashion industry crack under the weight of #MeToo, at first “felt incredibly rewarding. Everybody in the business knows the same creeps, so it was kind of beautiful. A victorious moment of validation.” But: “Then some accusations came against people I liked. And that’s where things got interesting, that conflict in me. I felt like, ‘He did that to me, too, but we laughed when I told him to xuck off. So he’s not a bad guy, right?’ There was some moral wrangling I had to do.” She winces.

That's a very thorough and accurate description of the history of sexual abuse Bas, probably worthy of its own thread.

The political pressures at work with the Brittany Higgins allegations.

‘Right to be scared’: Brittany Higgins and the harsh realities about justice and power​

Former Liberal staffer’s experience after alleging she was raped is an insight into how powerful institutions react when confronted with such allegations

From the article:

• Brittany Higgins could receive up to $1million compensation over rape trial
• She will seek compensation for lost and future earnings and at-home support

• Man originally charged with her alleged rape, Bruce Lehrmann, to seek a payout

Brittany Higgins could receive up to $1million in compensation as the former Liberal staffer broke her silence days after the sexual assault case she was a complainant in was sensationally abandoned.

Mr Lehrmann is also seeking cash compensation, with his lawyers considering a Comcare claim, defamation action against media outlets, and unfair dismissal from the jobs he lost after the rape allegations emerged.

Some great points @basilio

But I don't think it's serves the issue very well to focus so much on Brittany Higgins per se, as is seems to have become a point of political division, rather a focus on the greater issue.

wayneL said:

Some great points @basilio

But I don't think it's serves the issue very well to focus so much on Brittany Higgins per se, as is seems to have become a point of political division, rather a focus on the greater issue.

Click to expand...

This is a thread about Australian politics. The Brittany Higgins case is multifacted. But it is such a big case because she was Liberal Party employee who alleged another Liberal Party employee raped her in the offices of her boss in Parliament House. And since that time the then party in power moved heaven and earth to close down investigation of the alleged encounter.

This is the overriding political issue in this case. Yes it intersects with the other elements of abuse and these will be highlighted. But what will come to light in the fullness of time is the machinations that happened around protecting the Morrison government by attempts to simply bury Brittany Higgins.

basilio said:

This is a thread about Australian politics. The Brittany Higgins case is multifacted. But it is such a big case because she was Liberal Party employee who alleged another Liberal Party employee raped her in the offices of her boss in Parliament House. And since that time the then party in power moved heaven and earth to close down investigation of the alleged encounter.

This is the overriding political issue in this case. Yes it intersects with the other elements of abuse and these will be highlighted. But what will come to light in the fullness of time is the machinations that happened around protecting the Morrison government by attempts to simply bury Brittany Higgins.

Click to expand...

Sure, but there is still a greater issue of politicians in general. For instance, why was the Shorten issue never really pursued?

It's not just a liberal party thing.

wayneL said:

why was the Shorten issue never really pursued?

Click to expand...

Because there was no evidence ?

SirRumpole said:

Because there was no evidence ?

Click to expand...

Exactly. The police interviewed both parties, and established (at least back then ) that there was insufficient evidence to convict.
At not stage did any of the media , the feminists, the #metoo movement etc etc raise the "poor treatment of women in rape cases".
She has received no publicity, no sympathetic interviews, no high profile legal women at her side to help her, and is in fact invisible.
What is the difference between the two cases?
Politics.
Mick

mullokintyre said:

Exactly. The police interviewed both parties, and established (at least back then ) that there was insufficient evidence to convict.
At not stage did any of the media , the feminists, the #metoo movement etc etc raise the "poor treatment of women in rape cases".
She has received no publicity, no sympathetic interviews, no high profile legal women at her side to help her, and is in fact invisible.
What is the difference between the two cases?
Politics.
Mick

Click to expand...

Did it happen in Parliament house?

IFocus said:

Did it happen in Parliament house?

Click to expand...

From the court case, it would appear not.
Not that rape is excusable anyware IMO.

mullokintyre said:

Exactly. The police interviewed both parties, and established (at least back then ) that there was insufficient evidence to convict.
At not stage did any of the media , the feminists, the #metoo movement etc etc raise the "poor treatment of women in rape cases".
She has received no publicity, no sympathetic interviews, no high profile legal women at her side to help her, and is in fact invisible.
What is the difference between the two cases?
Politics.
Mick

Click to expand...

Politics Mick, spot on.
Poor Brittany will soon be removed from the front page and the removal of Scomo from politics will again take front and centre stage, the media you have to love em, not.

Meanwhile, back on policy.. Just wondering what others here think about "The Voice" ?

I have a nasty feeling that it could be a bureaucratic nightmare that could impose itself on virtually every decision of government, Federal, State and local and could hamstring the normal processes of decision making.

And, if in the interests of the wider community, The Voice doesn't get what it wants then there will be the usual allegations of racism and how indigenous people are being continually repressed.

It could be a focal point for division rather than unity if it's not handled properly.

Maybe Jacinta Price has it right.

Just my opinion.

@SirRumpole, IMO you nailed it.
The road to disaster is paved with good intentions.
If laws etc need to be enacted to better facilitate the indigenous people, just enact them, they already have far more say in what can and can't be done in Australia than any other sector of the general public.
To re write the constitution IMO is going a step too far, the laughable part is no one knows what the "voice" is, or its ramifications, it is just a case of "sign this blank piece of paper we will fill in the details".
And they crucify Morrison for doing something secretively, what a hoot, Just shows how out of whack the media is IMO. ?