Talking Politics

[Anduril]

I thought it was a refreshing change from claims of "barreness" and "she gets more press 'cause she's prettier than me", but I can understand why some took offence.
The role and status of women in today's society has changed and widened so much over the last half century that I would think any politician should think twice before comment as it is so easy to alienate some women without meaning to.

 

[Rosy]

I thought it was a refreshing change

I'm as gob smacked as I was with your comments about Mrs Howard Andy. You're probably the last person on the forum I would have thought would think demeaning comments about women are "refreshing". I can't see any difference in the barren statement and the appendage one, other than they came from different sides of the fence. Both are personal judgements on another person's private way of life and I don't think either is acceptable to voice in the public arena. It makes no difference to me which party they came from. They are both equally abhorrent and unacceptable.

 

[Anduril]

"Refresh" as in reanimate, reinvigorate the debate on the status of women.

Both are personal judgements on another person's private way of life and I don't think either is acceptable to voice in the public arena. It makes no difference to me which party they came from. They are both equally abhorrent and unacceptable.

I thought my post was saying the same, obviously I wasn't clear enough.

 

[tigersnake]

Rosy, and anyone who thinks Rudds appendage comment was a slur on women are missing the point. The point he was trying to make was that our society has moved on from a time when women were seen ONLY as appendages to professional men, or any men for that matter. That’s how things used to be. He meant that now its valid for women to be A) just as professional/ entrepreneurial/ capable etc as their husbands or b) if they do stay home, society now values this role far higher than it used to and sees it as valid.

I’m not a massive fan of Rudd to be honest, but its ludicrous to interpret his comments as meaning he thinks women who don’t run businesses or work as appendages, the broad point is actually based on the opposite.

 

[poppa x]

I love how people are now saying what Rudd really meant by his appendage statement. They twist his simple words to suit their political views and try and get him off the hook.

IMO Rudd was under pressure and said the first thing that popped into his head.
Likewise Howard was equally inept when discussing the AFL's drug policy with Neil Mitchell.

Not a good week for our leaders.

 

[tigersnake]

As far as I’m concerned pop my post outlines what I believe to be pretty bloody obvious as to what he really meant. But as usual, maybe I’m on the crazy pills.

 

[Rosy]

I don't think women on the whole have ever been an "appendage" to men and it's a very sheltered opinion to think they are/were.

Can anyone post a link to Rudd's actual comments so I can read them in context again please?

 

[Anduril]

http://www.mytalk.com.au/aspx/pages/mediaplayer.aspx?t=audio&w=791

 

[tigersnake]

I don't think women on the whole have ever been an "appendage" to men and it's a very sheltered opinion to think they are/were.

Can anyone post a link to Rudd's actual comments so I can read them in context again please?

Women used to second class citizens rosy. Its a fact. Couldn't vote, sacked if they got pregnant, Unthinkable for a woman to be in any position of power.

 

[Rosy]

I don't think that's what Rudd was referring to ts although I'd still like to read it in some kind of context.

His statement "it's the age of professional women who run their own companies, who have their own lives, and are not simply appendages of middle aged men" to me infers a lack of respect for those who choose not to live that way.

He didn't mention it's an age where that it's an option that was available to women but rather inferred those who didn't take that path are appendages. Very dismissve and condescending towards those who don't live the life he describes. It's also the age of stay at home men and they wouldn't be considered the appendage of a woman.

I think it's fair to suspect the reference to "middle aged men" in particular could be taken as a jibe at the Howards' personal lifestyle but reading the statement in context could possible change my view there. I can't see why else age is relevant, and that young and old men don't get a guernsey.

 

[Liverpool]

Rosy, and anyone who thinks Rudds appendage comment was a slur on women are missing the point. The point he was trying to make was that our society has moved on from a time when women were seen ONLY as appendages to professional men, or any men for that matter. That’s how things used to be. He meant that now its valid for women to be A) just as professional/ entrepreneurial/ capable etc as their husbands or b) if they do stay home, society now values this role far higher than it used to and sees it as valid.
I’m not a massive fan of Rudd to be honest, but its ludicrous to interpret his comments as meaning he thinks women who don’t run businesses or work as appendages, the broad point is actually based on the opposite.

Tigersnake,
YOU may claim that this slur isn't offensive to women, but apparently, the group he offended aren't happy about it at all:

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,21795309-662,00.html

I love how people are now saying what Rudd really meant by his appendage statement. They twist his simple words to suit their political views and try and get him off the hook.

Yeah, it's quite funny isn't it.....more spin than a Warnie leg-break. :hihi


Getting away from Rudd and his slurs for a moment....how's the gay-rights lobby going?
We hear all this "treat us the same as heterosexual couples" line....and then they go ahead, and segregate themselves by this:

Gay pub can out straight patrons
Matt Doran
May 28, 2007 12:00am

A MELBOURNE pub catering for gay men has won the right to refuse entry to heterosexuals in a landmark ruling at the state planning tribunal.
The owners of Collingwood's Peel Hotel applied to ban straight men and women to try to prevent "sexually based insults and violence" towards its gay patrons.
The Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal last week granted the pub an exemption to the Equal Opportunity Act, effectively prohibiting entry to non-homosexuals.

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,21804219-2862,00.html

Now, not that I would frequent such an establishment anyway, but it does highlight the hypocrisy of such a group.
They have been supported by the left-lobby for a long time by protesting how they are treated differently on some issues, yet here we have them now conducting bans, where if the shoe was on the other foot, and it was a heterosexual club (are any clubs called that anyway?) banning homosexuals, there would massive outcries about discrimination and the like, as well as class-actions, and compensation.

Secondly, how are they going to police this anyway?
Are gays branded with special tattoos, or do they give a secret handshake at the door, to distinguish themselves apart from heterosexuals?

Thirdly...interesting that lesbians are banned also, meaning it is a "male only" club....surely this is not only discrimination based on the sexual persuasion of patrons, but also, gender discrimination against females?

Finally....if any heterosexual people do go to this pub....why would they go there, unless they are mates with gays who go there?

As far as I am concerned, this is VCAT being hypocritical, and surely now, this has given other establishments the right to ban people on such matters also.
So much for "equal rights".

We can add this discrimination by a minority group to the list along with the "Indigenous Round" of footy (looking forward to a round celebrating the achievements of white players)...and pool bans for people who aren't Islam.

 

[Rosy]

I thought my post was saying the same, obviously I wasn't clear enough.

No worries Andy. I took your comment that Rudd's words were a refreshing change... but you understood that some took offence indicated support for Mr Rudd's statement.

 

[tigersnake]

Like I said Liverpool, I believe he's been misconstrued. I don't think I can explain my view any clearer than the post you quoted, either you don't understand my point or don't agree. Either way, nothing I can do about it.

Rosy, historically middle aged men held all positions of power, business or politics, still do mostly, I don't see how that is equivocal. Also women were once viewed by society as appendages to middle aged men. To me that statement isn't contentious at all.

Feminism, whatever you think it is and whatever you think of it, has succeeded in a) making it OK for women to succeed in business and politics just like men and b) have their work raising kids and running the household properly valued.

 

[Rosy]

Like I said he didn't mention it was an option and that plenty still choose to live the kind of lifestyle Rudd describes as being an appendage.. "Feminism" doesn't enter into my thoughts on the matter.

 

[poppa x]

As some of you are aware, my 2nd daughter is gay and lives with her partner and 2 children in rural Victoria. She (my daughter) is a stay at home mum by choice and would be outraged by any suggestion that she's a lesser person or an appendage of her partner, who goes to work and brings in the $'s as her part of the deal. She would also reject the notion that she's living the life of a 1950's mum.

She would also be offended by the Robert Peel ban on anyone other than homsexual men. She thinks (yep she's told me) that you should not be able to tell a perons sexual preference by looking at them or talking to them. Because it's a private issue, or shoud be.

The problem with Rudd and his supporters is they sterotype everyone, and can't grasp the concept that everyone is different and has made different choices. Eg: it's possible to oppose the war in Iraq, nuclear power and support the environment and still be a stay at home mum. Likewise you can be one of Rudd's so-called career women and at the same time think the sun shines out of Howards you know what.

 

[Anduril]

The problem with Rudd and his supporters is they sterotype everyone, and can't grasp the concept that everyone is different and has made different choices. Eg: it's possible to oppose the war in Iraq, nuclear power and support the environment and still be a stay at home mum. Likewise you can be one of Rudd's so-called career women and at the same time think the sun shines out of Howards you know what.

But you can stereotype Rudd and his supporters?

 

[FightingFury]

The problem with Rudd and his supporters is they sterotype everyone, and can't grasp the concept that everyone is different and has made different choices. Eg: it's possible to oppose the war in Iraq, nuclear power and support the environment and still be a stay at home mum. Likewise you can be one of Rudd's so-called career women and at the same time think the sun shines out of Howards you know what.

Its the problem for anyone who has alighned with any political camp IMO.

You may agree with its views and directions some of the time, but to blindly defend each and every stance of a political party or its leader is close minded nonsense and laughable.

Still, its made for some entertaining reading on this thread so, as you were................

 

[poppa x]

The problem with Rudd and his supporters is they sterotype everyone, and can't grasp the concept that everyone is different and has made different choices. Eg: it's possible to oppose the war in Iraq, nuclear power and support the environment and still be a stay at home mum. Likewise you can be one of Rudd's so-called career women and at the same time think the sun shines out of Howards you know what.

But you can stereotype Rudd and his supporters?

yep. I'm as hypocritical as the next person.

 

[ssstone]

Firstly Janet Howard is a typical 1950's mother and housewife - she would not dare to work as John would frown on this - nor do I think she has the ability to run a business like this.

Secondly - if the Libs could start becoming positive with strong policy and capital infrstructure projects for Australia then they would get a rise in the polls plus possibly my vote - however they are constantly relying on the negative politics of shooting Kevin Rudd down.

The voters of Australia according to the polls are perceiving John Howard has been in the job too long - he himself admits it could be a more of a negative than a positive, yet all the Libs are doing is poking sh!t at the ALP - why can't they get on the front foot - particularly with the oversize budget surplus they have and start building Australian infrstructure again - get a positive vibe about them - instead of their stale old negative take on politics.

Then an only then will they look like a Government deserving re-election....................

this would have to be the most condesending post ive ever seen regarding women. stale negative politics ?? tell me what little kevvy and his band of ex lathamites have come up with ?? yes i agree that little jonny may have been around too long but lets look at the alternatives.. here we have a party that claims to be for the working class yet started the scurge that is the "level playing field" that has driven aust manurfactoring to its grave.its greatest hero was sacked,its favorite son gave us the recession we had to have ,he also wanted a G.S.T then didnt so he campaigned against it then promptly put in place a 30% sales tax when he won office on the back of his FEAR campaign .ripped out technical schools with the help of state cronies that put 3 generations of kids that were never going to be rhode scholars b ackwards.then this party called in the messiah LATHAM nuff said there .now tell me rmote where are little kevvys grand plans for infrastructure ?? if mr garrisson comes out tomorrow and promises to make water tanks compolsury 4 every house,puts a 10%sales tax on imported goods ,sets a 20 year jail term for the lefty love child hicks ,stop lifetime pensions for pollies,then plough that extra money into aged care and put a stop to pandering to minorities i will vote for him. but all they will do is bag the other bunch and they will continue to do likewise

 

[evo]

The problem with Rudd and his supporters is they sterotype everyone, and can't grasp the concept that everyone is different and has made different choices. Eg: it's possible to oppose the war in Iraq, nuclear power and support the environment and still be a stay at home mum. Likewise you can be one of Rudd's so-called career women and at the same time think the sun shines out of Howards you know what.

But you can stereotype Rudd and his supporters?

hehe.That was a pretty good comeback.