You played the man the whole post and actually said nothing.
You played the man the whole post and actually said nothing.What a fanciful claim.
You seem to live in a world filled with your own delusions as this idea is wholly owned by you and those who simply failed to understand what Jordan spoke about.
You have not yet grasped the concept of diversity and how it needs to be better reflected amongst those being elected into office. This is a through a democratic process and has zero to do with phasing out anyone.
You would have to be blessed with ignorance to assume that.
In fact because you cannot work out the context of Jordan's speech, it is saying nothing of the sort.
Stop creating false narratives based on what you want to believe and deal with the very simple idea that those presently in Parliament do not come close to being representative of the broader community. Smurf named the predominant group in Parliament based on occupation, by simple transposition of words.
To suggest identifying the group is pejorative is a step that is very creative and requires a lot more than contained in the single sentence. The reality here is that one has to step out of rational thought into the brave world of delusion to create the ideas you have.
Why not try to match that with what it really means.Identity politics.
Whoop, there it is...I would call it the Wayne response.
Wait was jordy voted in?This is through a democratic process.
Why not try to match that with what it really means.
It's a bit of a stretch suggesting occupation is a reasonable proxy for life experience as it does not reflect the wage disparity between men and women doing the same job
You again confuse racism with discrimination.
You additionally suggest the ability to be a decision maker (as in an MP) is merely an intellectual endeavour when Jordan has outlined the need for diversity to condition how leaders get there.
More likely it is due to ignorance on the part of people who are not good with the meaning of words, do not appreciate context, and are unable to respond to questions which otherwise show they are creating arguments which never existed.
Women know they are not treated equally in the workplace and it definitely affects their outlook and life experience. It's equivalent to you saying their fight for gender equality is groundless.How much someone is paid to do a job makes no difference to their experiences gained whilst doing it. A Police Officer, for example, will be exposed to the same range of situations whether they're paid $10 or $10 million.
They are completely different concepts, and you want to continue to blur them. One might not like a different race merely because they look funny to them or eat unusual foods or are associated with greater wealth. These are aspects of prejudice which may be quite different to believing they are superior/inferior which are the conditional propositions to racism.Note that racial prejudice or discrimination is one meaning of racism.
False.It's a political speech and one of the basics of public speaking is "speak to your audience".
Why would I want to do that. My point was that ignorance has dominated this very issue. People on the street are not being involved in this forum, yet a level of ignorance has persisted despite the ability of posters to be much better informed.Go and ask random people in the street to explain racism and you'll get examples of discrimination, you won't get some academic definition that requires a degree in English to be aware of.
Women know they are not treated equally in the workplace and it definitely affects their outlook and life experience. It's equivalent to you saying their fight for gender equality is groundless.
I have taken a lot of time to put lots of questions to you and others, and they are largely ignored while you run off a new and separate arguments to the pivotal question of how what Jordan said could be construed as "racism."
I also knew being a female even if the bus/train/tram was packed I would always get a seat because blokes were gentlemen in those days and gave up their seats to females, bless them. Discrimination rocks!
...and that is what women never fully understood when they campaigned for 'equal rights'. Get into the scrum bitch and fight like the rest of us!Not any more sweetheart. I wouldn't even open a door for a woman these days.
Kind of all over the place there rob. With some long stretches and delusions of your own.Women know they are not treated equally in the workplace and it definitely affects their outlook and life experience. It's equivalent to you saying their fight for gender equality is groundless.
They are completely different concepts, and you want to continue to blur them. One might not like a different race merely because they look funny to them or eat unusual foods or are associated with greater wealth. These are aspects of prejudice which may be quite different to believing they are superior/inferior which are the conditional propositions to racism.
False.
It was his acceptance speech at the University of Melbourne upon receiving the non-partisan and independent award that recognises outstanding Australians for leadership in politics. Party politics were never under discussion.
Why would I want to do that. My point was that ignorance has dominated this very issue. People on the street are not being involved in this forum, yet a level of ignorance has persisted despite the ability of posters to be much better informed.
I have taken a lot of time to put lots of questions to you and others, and they are largely ignored while you run off a new and separate arguments to the pivotal question of how what Jordan said could be construed as "racism."
None of conditions of racism were satisfied unless posters developed a narrative which had nothing to do with the context of Jordan's speech.
Perhaps realising that failure (and full marks to moXJO on that score), the next pejorative was suggesting he had "dog whistled." Again, posters should have known that a dog whistle which specifically identifies the group to be targeted cannot, by definition, be a dog whistle.
Now we get "discrimination" tossed into the mix.
This has been a moving feast of ignorance.
Leadership, however, is about rising to challenges. It calls out those who want to remain invested in ignorance and believe things which are not reasonably supported.
Showing bipartisan leadership today, Mathias Cormann and Penny Wong today jointly brought on a successful censure motion against Fraser Anning, who actually doubled down on his hate towards Islamists. Pauline Hanson's speech (she was absent and her deputy read it out) on the motion is in object lesson in vitriol and deserved condemnation. One Nation was too gutless to vote on the motion, such is their strength in the Senate.
If you've concluded that your ship really is sinking, and you have no life boats, well then I suppose you'll try anything and everything that might have even the slimmest chance of improving the situation.What's going on with the demonisation of the Greens by the Libs, Nationals and right wing journalists?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?