Quote Originally Posted by Sextus View Post
Wayne, I don't know what an "MSM" lemming is, though I do know what a lemming is supposed to do, that is, leap off a cliff in a mass suicide. No-one has ever thought me to be any less than an individual though, never part of a mass movement. My input to the forum I hope is yet more evidence of this.

But I am really interested in your point of view and am grateful to hear it. Not only for its own sake, but like wilisno, I really like to debate. I imagine all those readers out there who never join in, but for whom we all struggle on these pages for the hearts and minds of.

I'd like to know, for example, what point it is that I am missing.
Sextus, the reference to a lemming is to people who simply follow the leader, without contemplating the consequence. Its only the lead lemming who makes the decision to jump off the cliff; all the others mindlessly follow. My reference was to you blindly parroting the main stream media (MSM on all the all political blogs) about Gillard's misogyny speech. They, like you, focussed on the speech being in response to an Opposition motion to dismiss the Speaker of the House. An act that would have been unprecedented in the Australian parliament with all sorts of unpleasant implications to the future of debate in the house. There was no discussion about this in the following days MSM; and I mean none because I monitor these things. All the commentary was about Gillard's supposed hypocrisy. And that is the point. She was not being hypocritical. She was pointing out Abbott' hypocrisy. Listen to the speech and hear the list of on-the-record statements Abbott has made about gender roles. Gillard was not defending Slipper's confidential dialogue with his staffer (who has since been proved to have been slippery with the facts and his motivation). Gillard was defending Slipper's rights as an individual to defend himself. Abbott was the one who was using labels about sexism and Gillard called him out, brilliantly. The MSM is so concerned with the contest of the parliament, and so eager to please their partisan proprietors, that they fail to recognise when there are tidal shifts in public perception of that game. Few would contest that Gillard's speech shifted the perception of her government. She may still be behind in the polls, but nothing compared to where she was prior to the speech; and the Opposition is now scrambling. The silly coverage of Peta Credlin's IVF program is a case in point. These sorts of stunts simply reinforce the perception that Abbott sees gender issues as simply a box to be ticked. He just doesn't get it. Like you with your dismissal of my reference to the Delhi rape.

Rape is the ultimate act in the objectification of women. It is a power trip by men. As is prostitution. Why do fat old codgers pay gorgeous young women to suck their dicks; and why do these women participate in this transaction; and why are they almost all Asian women with limited English speaking skills? It is all about money and power. I lived in India for years so am particularly attuned to the shocking sexism in that society. But I see the same elements here, and particularly on some of the comments on this forum. The question on this thread really got my hackles up because it just demonstrates how vigilant one must be not to descend into that nasty world where men are men and women are their toys. I know that is not your view, but I equally know that many of the working girls in Sydney are subjected to some horrible behaviour by their clients.