Gillard labels Abbott a misogynist

[bit_pattern]

Gotta love Peter Van Onselen, he just opened an interview with Sophie Mirabella with; "you are one of only two women on the Coalition front bench - is that because Liberal women aren't good enough or is it because the Liberal Party is sexist?"

 

[Hallo Alfie]

Please show how the statement "abortion is the easy way out" is not misogynistic? The link is there, with all the context in the world. Defend this statement.

Show me how it is. The onus is on you, not me. What is the connection between a probably out of context statement and misogyny?

Moreover, even if it is as you say (which is yet to be shown) does one comment damn him?
Is this really the best you can do?

Back to you.

 

[a_unique_person]

Gotta love Peter Van Onselen, he just opened an interview with Sophie Mirabella with; "you are one of only two women on the Coalition front bench - is that because Liberal women aren't good enough or is it because the Liberal Party is sexist?"

And no one even knows what she is doing there. The brain of a turnip. I find it hard to believe that there aren't conservative women out there who aren't more capable.

 

[Legend]

Appears to be a slight -- uh, bewilderingly mammoth -- double standard in this discussion. Alfie, you continually make extreme claims about Julia Gillard, and you, sometimes proudly but always childishly, mention it in transience and keep it entirely void of substance.

So. In what context were these quotes made? Are they accurate, what were the precise words used? And in what way does that prove he is misogynistic?

The reluctance of one and all here to address the actual argument is very telling. It suggests to me that in context his comments are reasonable or, you guys are just very lazy. If there is another, I can't think of it.

You consistently refuse to research, asking everyone else to do it for you, but you just proposed that other people are lazy. Nevertheless, because I'm just a generally sterling chap, I'll go through each of the bits that Morrigan mentioned.

You asked for context and the full quotes. The first is here: "I think it would be folly to expect that women will ever dominate or even approach equal representation in a large number of areas simply because their aptitudes, abilities and interests are different for physiological reasons." I struggle to realise what context could excuse what is an obviously sexist remark, aside from him having been at gunpoint or in a play at the time he said it. A possibly mitigating consideration is the fact that he said this a long time ago.

The term "to make an honest woman of you" is an idiom that is used to refer to a man marrying a women to somehow make her more pure or acceptable. It was quite clearly a gibe at the fact that Gillard isn't married and is therefore inferior, but he used the term in reference to calling an early election because of the Carbon Tax controversy, but I think that's a weak way to vindicate the comments.

Regarding the comment about ironing, Tony Abbott said, "What the housewives of Australia need to understand as they do the ironing is that if they get it done commercially it's going to go up in price, and their own power bills when they switch the iron on, are going to go up." This, to me, is indicative of a man with antiquated opinions of how the world works and makes stereotypically inappropriate and gender-specific observations.

 

[Hallo Alfie]

Exact statements, context, evidence, and a link to misogyny?

Back to you.

 

[lionking]

Exact statements, context, evidence, and a link to misogyny?

Back to you.

This has gone beyond childishness. All has been provided. Apologistics 101.

 

[MarkCorrigan]

Exact statements, context, evidence, and a link to misogyny?

Back to you.

You must be kidding.

Here's a little thought experiment.

Think of a way, any way, where the statement "Abortion is the easy way out" is not misogynistic irrespective of the actual context that statement was made in.

Any context whatsoever whereby the statement is said seriously that strips it of any sexism.


Of course, you will not do this, you will just ask for the context and why this makes the statement misogynistic. If you fail to see why this is a stupid way to go about things, let's take the statement "If these Jews and Muslims want to integrate better they could just convert."

I hasten to add, that is NOT what I think nor is it a phrase I have heard from any politician. It is simply an illustrative phrase.

That being said, I think you will agree that it is pretty obviously a racist (or if you prefer, xenophobic) phrase whatever the context is. If that phrase was ever said in seriousness by a politician, you would have a fairly good idea of their attitudes towards immigration in general and Jews and Muslims in particular. It doesn't need an argument to show it's racist because it is quite obviously so. You don't have to provide the entire speech it was made in, nor the question(s) asked to prompt the speech to show that this individual is a racist.

So why do we need to give you, someone who refuses to click on links provided which gives the context I might add, a whole swathe of information providing direct context and quotes to show that a plainly misogynistic statement is in fact misogynistic?

Do you think that the statement shorn of all context is NOT misogynistic? Is that what is happening here? Do you think saying abortion is the easy way out is perfectly ok and not at all sexist?

What about this?

It would be folly to expect that women would ever approach equal representation in a large number of areas simply because their aptitudes, their abilities and interests are different for physiological reasons

That statement is another that doesn't need context because it is an independent statement. It doesn't matter what question was asked. He replied with his view, to whit that women won't have equal representation, and then supplied his reasoning, that they have different priorities and ability compared to men. That makes the statement easy to interpret because it is entirely self-contained.

Do you think the idea that women are of lesser ability than men and thus won't be ever equally represented is a sexist statement?

 

[Shiner]

This is all from links in this thread Alfie. You're right at least about me. Too lazy to point out the obvious to someone that can't see it.

From Tony Abbott dot com

...The problem with the Australian practice of abortion is that an objectively grave matter has been reduced to a question of the mother’s convenience...

....abortion is the easy way out. It’s hardly surprising that people should choose the most convenient exit from awkward situations....

http://www.tonyabbott.com.au/Latest...F-ABORTION-HIGHLIGHTS-OUR-MORAL-FAILINGS.aspx


Context: It was a speech on the trials of being a Christian politician.

From the same speech. Just for context, a statement to prove his Christian values in opposition to the government he represented at the time.

.....Christian politicians are not required to promote policies for which there is no demand in the community. As it happens, the Government gives nearly $1 million a year to pro-life family planning groups (but $13 million to pro-choice groups).....

These quotes are from a written speech made in 2004, which Abbott himself has edited and archived on his own website. How much context do you want?


Now remember Abbotts statement, it's the Gospel Truth.

I know politicians are going to be judged on everything they say but sometimes in the heat of discussion you go a little bit further than you would if it was an absolutely calm, considered, prepared, scripted remark. The statements that need to be taken absolutely as gospel truth are those carefully prepared scripted remarks.

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Tony_Abbott

ETA, Why does that prove he's misogynist? Sorry that's been answered and besides... it's obvious, and I'm feeling lazy again.

 

[HoverBoarder]

The author of that article, Peter Hartcher, is a supporter of the previous PM Kevin Rudd who was deposed by Gillard. One of the side affects of this episode has been to highlight the way politics is reported, often in a partisan way, by the MSM and the Canberra press gallery in particular. My earlier post included links to some interesting articles on this and there've been many more since.

...


Did you read/listen to Abbott's speech in full? It's one long attack on Gillard (and Roxon). Hansard available here. Also, I think Abbott made a serious error of judgment in using the now toxic phrase "died of shame".

Abbott's motion (without notice) to have the Speaker removed was not motivated by any high moral principle. It was purely a wedge tactic to damage the government and one which backfired spectacularly. The options for the government were either to allow the opposition a win by voting to remove the speaker on the basis of vulgar text messages (probably not a good precedent to set) or to vote against the motion and afford the speaker the chance to resign and exit with some dignity. By the time Gillard gave her speech, moves were already afoot to get Slipper to resign. (See Laura Tingle in the AFR.) I don't doubt that the opposition will continue to raise the Slipper affair (rather than show some positive reason why they are a viable alternative government) but I suspect Gillard's speech will be remembered much longer.

Excellent post, very interesting, thanks for the info.

 

[Shiner]

Excellent post, very interesting, thanks for the info.

+1. It actually made me care a little.

 

[HoverBoarder]

Ultimately Slipper has resigned anyway because they are not disputed and he "understands the arguments of those against him".

So
Can we please have the exact statements of Abbotts (in context) tthat damn him and the reasons why that proves him misogynistic - which is after all the claim that needs to be supported. If that can't be done, the accusation is a lie (and she does have form you know)

The most prudent question about this whole situation is that if, as many people have concluded, and as Gillard mentioned in her speech, that Slipper's comments via texts were indeed offensive. Offensive enough to have him resign from his post, than should there not be a major motion to call for the resignation for the more offensive comments from Tony Abbot if an investigation finds those comments to have merit?

Granted there most definitely needs to be an investigation to assess the merit of the comments that Gillard attributed to Abbot, as well as subsequent offensive comments that have been attributed to him. However, were an investigation to find that even a portion of those comments attributed to him held merit, it would be much more grave than the comments from Slipper, as it would represent a complete inability of him to represent around half of his own constituents.

I think it would be good if Australian citizens assisted the investigation by creating a list of comments and reasons why Tony Abbot should resign. Possibly by creating a Twitter account with the name '#Abbotshouldresign', and posting one offensive comment from him every day. And/or assisting with the web sites that have been pulling together list of offensive comments from the opposition leader.

If even one of the comments or actions attributed to him were found to be true, it would present more than enough reason that he was nowhere near fit to hold office.

 

[Morrigan]

I would agree if that was the whole story; but it is not.
What was being discussed when Gillard made the speech? Whether to oust Slipper or not. Correct?
Rather than address the issue, she used it as an opportunity to smash Abbott around the ears. She used her attack on Abbott as defensive measure for Slipper (strategic defense would perhaps be a better term).

And she was right to do it, because it made no sense to oust person B when person A (who prompted person B's ousting) was much, much worse.

It's as if Jean-Marie Le Pen came out and said that that François Hollande* should resign as the president of France for having made a few minor racist and xenophobic comments... despite Le Pen being far, far more racist and xenophobic himself. It's not just hypocritical from Le Pen, it's downright absurd and Hollande would be right to tell him to piss off.

* Unlike Le Pen, Mr. Hollande has not made any such statements that I'm aware of, I'm using a 100% hypothetical example here.

The reluctance of one and all here to address the actual argument is very telling. It suggests to me that in context his comments are reasonable or, you guys are just very lazy. If there is another, I can't think of it.

LOL, unbelievable. The context was given, you just refuse to acknowledge it. The evidence was posted, you just refuse to click it. If anyone is lazy here, it's you, you have just repeated the same thing ad nauseam without ever providing a single shred of evidence (despite the onus being on you) and others have done all the work for you.

So blinded by your anti-Gillard partisan that you won't even admit that stating that women are less suited for leadership than men is sexist, and that's in any context.

No, wait, okay, there is one possible context that would make this statement not sexist. If John Abbott had said, "Here, let me say a very offensive and sexist statement that I do not believe in: " prior to his quotes. Or, if he had a gun pointed to his head and was forced to say it. Yeah, that's plausible.

Given the constant sidestepping... Back to you for some more dodging.

Bahaha Pot, kettle.

 

[Hallo Alfie]

This is all from links in this thread Alfie. You're right at least about me. Too lazy to point out the obvious to someone that can't see it.

Thanks. If I can't see it because it's only because it's not been presented, it is not my job to prove anything for you.

So..
Exact quotes please, context and the reasons why it is misogynistic.
(I know you won't find them, so this is for others)

The most prudent question about this whole situation is that if, as many people have concluded, and as Gillard mentioned in her speech, that Slipper's comments via texts were indeed offensive. Offensive enough to have him resign from his post, than should there not be a major motion to call for the resignation for the more offensive comments from Tony Abbot if an investigation finds those comments to have merit?

They won't do it because they know it won't stand up to scrutiny.

Granted there most definitely needs to be an investigation to assess the merit of the comments that Gillard attributed to Abbot, as well as subsequent offensive comments that have been attributed to him. However, were an investigation to find that even a portion of those comments attributed to him held merit, it would be much more grave than the comments from Slipper, as it would represent a complete inability of him to represent around half of his own constituents.

Again, I doubt any of Abbott's comments show anything more than some values that some deem old fashioned. Hardly a hanging offense and certainly not evidence of misogyny.
But I look forward to seeing some actual evidence that does.

And she was right to do it, because it made no sense to oust person B when person A (who prompted person B's ousting) was much, much worse.

And this is the point I guess.
Please show us comments attributable to Abbott, in context that are "much much worse" than Slipper's. From there you could explain to us why they damn him as a misogynist.

Thanks in anticipation.

 

[lionking]

The speech he made about abortion is linked in its entirety.

Mark Corrigan's comments are very relevant. Would you mind responding to them?

 

[Hallo Alfie]

Sure, show me them and tell me why they are misogynistic rather than a value he holds around being (say) pro life. They are different you know.

Once you make a case - only then - will I be in a position to dissemble it (assuming I disagree with it). This seems to be the rules around here, no? I thought you would have known that by now - you have been here at JREF some time now, after all.

 

[lionking]

Fingers in ears yet again.

 

[Hallo Alfie]

No case presented. I can't hear what has not been said.

Back to you.

 

[arthwollipot]

So blinded by your anti-Gillard partisan that you won't even admit that stating that women are less suited for leadership than men is sexist, and that's in any context.

Quoted for truth, since A. A. seems to have ignored it.

Direct question to A. A.: Do you believe that the statement "Women are less suited to leadership than men" is sexist?

 

[Hallo Alfie]

In my opinion, yes it appears sexist taken in isolation - there is a thing called quote mining you know?

But is the statement factually incorrect? And what are the arguments that make it incorrect? (I am not stating this one way or the other - just suggesting how a case might be put up).

In what context was it said (please provide same). And does it mean misogyny or just that he is wrong or simply old fashioned?

Remember, the charge here is that Abbott is a misogynist not that he has some old fashioned values. Nothing provided suggests in any real way he is misogynistic. But I await to be enlightened.

 

[arthwollipot]

Can you suggest a context in which such a statement would not be sexist?