Gillard labels Abbott a misogynist

[arthwollipot]

What for. We are dealing in facts here, not hypotheticals. Provide the context of the statement that was made with your argument as to why and how it constitutes misogyny and I will argue it if I disagree.

Since all your other questions have been thoroughly answered, I was wondering if you were operating under a different definition of "sexism" than the rest of us, and if so, what that was. I was attempting to foster greater understanding between us by seeing if we can agree on definitions.

So, if you please: do you believe that the phrase "Women are less suited to leadership than men" is sexist? Can you think of a context in which such a statement would not be sexist?

 

[Hallo Alfie]

Since all your other questions have been thoroughly answered, I was wondering if you were operating under a different definition of "sexism" than the rest of us, and if so, what that was. I was attempting to foster greater understanding between us by seeing if we can agree on definitions.

So, if you please: do you believe that the phrase "Women are less suited to leadership than men" is sexist? Can you think of a context in which such a statement would not be sexist?

We were not talking about sexism - we are talking about misogyny. Attempt to move the goal posts is noted.

In fact, I would agree that some of Abbott's comments are sexist in terms of some of the more modern or progressive views. He probably even holds a door open for a lady, or wait for her to offer her hand before he shakes it. These things do not however, make him a misogynist, now do they? If you think they do I would love to hear the argument. So the brioken record plays....
- quote
- evidence
- context
- argument in support of his misogyny.

 

[arthwollipot]

We were not talking about sexism - we are talking about misogyny. Attempt to move the goal posts is noted.

We are talking about both.

Thank you very much Deputy Speaker and I rise to oppose the motion moved by the Leader of the Opposition. And in so doing I say to the Leader of the Opposition I will not be lectured about sexism and misogyny by this man. I will not. And the Government will not be lectured about sexism and misogyny by this man. Not now, not ever.

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/po...ards-speech-20121010-27c36.html#ixzz29KxYzGls

If it makes you feel better, please substitute "sexist" for "sexist or misogynistic" in my question.

 

[Legend]

Alfie, it's frustrating when I do exactly what you asked way back in post #124, which is really something a big boy like you should've done for yourself, and you've just conveniently overlooked it. You've asked for it several times since my post and it's really the kinda hilariously biased apologetics that is something of a staple for desperate conservatives.

 

[Hallo Alfie]

We are talking about both.

Actually no. The OP is very specific in its claims on misogyny. I have been arguing nothing else and have been very clear about that all the way through.

If it makes you feel better, please substitute "sexist" for "sexist or misogynistic" in my question.

Let's just keep it to misogynist ala the OP; otherwise we are off topic apparently, and some people don't like that.

If you want to start a new thread on sexism I will happily join you there and would probably agree with much. In fact, as I have already said Abbott could be seen as a sexist in many ways - especially when we think of sexism in progressive/modern measures - he holds some old fashioned values - so does much of the rest of population believe it or not. That does not make him, nor them misogynists - the two words are not interchangable.

Alfie, it's frustrating when I do exactly what you asked way back in post #124, which is really something a big boy like you should've done for yourself, and you've just conveniently overlooked it. You've asked for it several times since my post and it's really the kinda hilariously biased apologetics that is something of a staple for desperate conservatives.

What is frustrating is that once again we have no evidence (say links), no quotes (in entirety), no context (e.g. what questions were asked?) or any argument (as to why it makes him a misogynist - under what measure/definition), huh?

You have not provided what was requested.

 

[lionking]

What is frustrating is that once again we have no evidence (say links), no quotes, no context or any argument, huh?

There is a link to his comments on abortion, from his own website. Please explain how abortion being the easy way out is not misogynistic?

 

[Hallo Alfie]

Extract the quote in full, the context it was raised etc and explain why you think that makes him a misogynist. Once you have made a case I will be in a position to respond.

 

[lionking]

Extract the quote in full, the context it was raised etc and explain why you think that makes him a misogynist. Once you have made a case I will be in a position to respond.

Just as I thought, you refuse to look at evidence. The link is there. You must know that if I post the whole speech, I would be spamming.

But this sort of childish apologetics is what I expected.

 

[Hallo Alfie]

No apologies here. You are banging on about a link, if that was all that was required we would have progressed long ago. I would be tempted to read it in full if you provide an argument as to why and how that proves him to be a misogynist.

So far zippo. It's not by job to make an argument for you then dissemble it too.

Back to you. I look forward to your submission.

 

[lionking]

Unbelievable. You have been carrying on about providing links, I do so, and you don't bother to open it.

Apologistics 101.

 

[arthwollipot]

If you want to start a new thread on sexism I will happily join you there and would probably agree with much. In fact, as I have already said Abbott could be seen as a sexist in many ways - especially when we think of sexism in progressive/modern measures - he holds some old fashioned values - so does much of the rest of population believe it or not. That does not make him, nor them misogynists - the two words are not interchangable.

Utterly beside the point. You are deflecting.

I amend my questions:

Do you believe that the phrase "Women are less suited to leadership than men" is misogynistic? Can you think of a context in which such a statement would not be misogynistic?

 

[Akhenaten]

No apologies here.

You might want to look up the word 'apologetics' and save yourself further embarrassment should you encounter it again.

You are banging on about a link, if that was all that was required we would have progressed long ago.

Plenty of progress has been and continues to be made.

The whole point of both the Prime Minister's speech and this thread is that Abbott's attitudes and the way in which he expresses them are indefensible.

Your flailing attempts to defend the indefensible have only reinforced that point to the extent that if you make much more progress with it you'll earn yourself a spot on the Labor payroll..

I would be tempted to read it in full if you provide an argument as to why and how that proves him to be a misogynist.

The decision to continue as you have been without informing yourself of the evidence is yours alone to make. I can't imagine why you'd believe that it's anyone else's responsibility.

So far zippo. It's not by job to make an argument for you then dissemble it too.

Then perhaps you should stop making feeble attempts to do so.

Back to you. I look forward to your submission.

You really should save the supercilious condescension up just in case of the unlikely event that you might one day win an argument.

 

[bit_pattern]

Unbelievable.

No, its entirely believable and absolutely in line with an ongoing M.O

 

[Legend]

Hahaha! Okay.

"Mate, your wife just kissed me."

"SHOW ME THE EVIDENCE!"

"Well, I have her underwear in my backpack."

"THAT COULD BE ANYONE'S UNDERWEAR!"

"Well, there's lipstick all over my face and I can still kinda taste her mouth."

"NO THAT'S THE TASTE OF DEFEAT!"

"What?"

"I WINNNNN! SUPER SKEPTIC!"

 

[Legend]

You really should save the supercilious condescension up just in case of the unlikely event that you might one day win an argument.

I literally laughed out loud.

 

[Hallo Alfie]

Unbelievable. You have been carrying on about providing links, I do so, and you don't bother to open it.

Untrue. Do you have an argument to make in support of your link?

The whole point of both the Prime Minister's speech and this thread is that Abbott's attitudes and the way in which he expresses them are indefensible.

How would we know? There have been no actual arguments made here or by Gillard....Ohh I get it..... I think I'm starting to see...... she said it so must be true.
And here I was thinkng we were on a skeptics forum where evidence and critical thinking were being promoted. Silly me.

The decision to continue as you have been without informing yourself of the evidence is yours alone to make. I can't imagine why you'd believe that it's anyone else's responsibility.

It's your claim, you get to support it.

As I understand it, this has always been the case around here.

So....
Links (and)
Quotes (and)
Context (and)
Arguments.

Then I might be in a position to debate it with you.

The inability to actually articulate a case by the Gillard supporters here is telling indeed.

 

[arthwollipot]

The inability to actually articulate a case by the Gillard supporters here is telling indeed.

 

[Akhenaten]

I literally laughed out loud.

His argument appears to be nothing more than a pretence that the entire discussion only consists of the fragments of other people's posts that he cherry picks and what he sees as his rapier-like responses to them, and that the rest of the thread is as invisible to others as it is to him.

 

[MG1962]

The inability to actually articulate a case by the Gillard supporters here is telling indeed.

The inability of non Gillard supporters to recognize the articulation of a case is even more telling

 

[Akhenaten]

Then I might be in a position to debate it with you.

You wish.