I must say I'm a bit bemused at the author's inability to identify why saying a girl's virginity is her greatest gift is offensive. It may not be up there with Abbott's worst comments, or his pernicious actions as former Health Minister, but it's certainly am outmoded, inappropriate and parochial sentiment. And this isn't about the modern acceptability of sexually permissive ways of life either. Indeed, you can have a rather conservative attitude to the whole subject of youth sex and still think it is a ridiculous thing to think let alone say.

Quite plainly it suggests a commodification of women's sexuality - teleological purposing them for male appreciation. Why else would it be her greatest gift? Calling it a 'gift' is degrading because it devalues the mutually of the relationship formation and intimacy, and completely ignores the women's own personal sexuality.

Also, your comments denigrating Gillard for being childless are pretty pathetic. Do you honestly think as a modern women she knows less than you about the issues encountered by young Australian women? The Liberal Party has got into trouble attacking this before, and I doubt you will convince any modern person with this attack who isn't already a highly conservative. religious hater.

Suffices to say I find it difficult to accept moralising on sex before marriage from a man who got a girl pregnant and then dumped her.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tony_Abbott#Early_life_and_family

"What exactly did Tony Abbott, father of three beautiful teenage girls, say to get him into so much trouble?"

Tony Abbott, like any of us are entitled to his opinions about all things. I think the comments he made that caused the most flak was the idea that a girl's virginity was a "gift" to a male and should be perceived as precious (for him). The idea that virginity was still viewed under some sort of paternalistic ownership of a woman's virtue. We were discussing this at work today and it was the men who spoke up most against Tony Abbott's comments.

Personally, Tony Abbott can think what he likes, it is a free country. His daughters will make up their own minds regardless of dad's personal opinions.

I am not sure how or why Marsh has turned this debate into a discussion about villification of fatherhood just because someone disagreed with Abbott - they are free to do so. For me, Abbott's comments were a personal opinion, nothing to do with fatherhood in the broader sense.

Strangely when reading this article all about "villification of fathers" the only villification I could detect was towards single mothers or single mothers living with or re-married to another man who was not the biological father. I agree with the statistics in regards to non-biological fathers and sexual abuse of children, however, one thing seems forgotten. There is a strong implication, unless I am misreading it, that somehow women or mothers are to blame. This is regardless if the biological father was the one to take off and abandon their families.

Where is the discourse about the lack of responsibility of those fathers who have run off and don't seem to give a toss about their kids? Or the praise for step-fathers who have taken on the financial and emotional burden of raising another deadbeat man's kids.

What about those fathers? Biology does not necessarily define goodness or suitability for parenthood for either gender.

Tony Abbot as a father certainly has more rights as a father to speak to his daughters about morality that the godless secularist who want to impose their amoral views that lead to cheap nasty sex, bitterness, divorce, suicide and many other nasty things.How quickly the feminist who claim no absolutes are quick to demonize a man for being a decent father. They fail to see their own hypocrisy claiming they are absolutely within their rights to spew their venom. At least Mr Abbot is man enough to admit his mistakes unlike many who gloat over their sexual trophies and pass on their immoral ways to a lost generation.

What Abbott said had nothing to do with fatherhood.

Would you publicly embarrass or use your children's personal decisions as a political marketing tool.
Suppose, one of his daughters has already slipped the light fandango made a mistake. What sort of pressure is she now under? And the boyfriend , money in the bank and who suffers? The Mad Monk? no the teen aged girl.
One can only imagine some of the probable comments they may get.
He is entitled to his private views but in private.
As I said elsewhere, his probable motivations are limited. I choose to think, after all those years in parliament a rush of blood an unguarded moment, isn't credible. I favour ambitious political grandstanding at the expense of his family and ask either way is this Possible PM quality hmmmm. You decide.

What mother wouldn't also advise her adolescents and teens to be cautious about those who might take advantage of their innocence, vulnerability and trust? Would the advice of mothers or that given in women's magazines always pass the political correctness test of feminists?

Of course young women should have their first (and every other) lovemaking with someone who cares for them and will not betray them. Caring, responsible parents also wish the same for their sons.

It is a joke that Tony Abbott's critics are accusing him of sexual politics, when that is precisely what they themselves are up to in their personal attacks. It is reprehensible that in their eyes there is no forgiveness for Abbott's mistake as a student, notwithstanding his repentance and will to do better himself and have better for his children.

The Victorian Labor state government is admonishing its electorate and youth about showing respect and has even appointed a Minister for Respect. Meanwhile at the federal level Ms Gillard, the star woman of the Labor Party and Deputy Prime Minister of Australia, is vilifying an opponent and disrespecting him for showing fatherly concern. They can get away with hypocrisy where commentators are partisan and play to the peanut gallery.

The media should be upbraiding Ms Gillard for hypocrisy and opportunism, but in the case of tabloids like The Australian where daily circulation is the first priority, that is not very likely.