Houellebecq wrote:

"[She was fired] because she had run out of tricks and was resorting to cheap shots in a stale routine that had past it's use-by."

In other words she was fired because she was an unfunny comedienne.

Can anyone think of a better reason for firing a comedienne?

Actually Graham I don't think I have ever been suspended. I've had 1 comment deleted though in May last year (I checked my email, and it was only for jovial stupidity with Ginx and Col R. On probation I was I think). I was so proud that the saintly Severin was suspended when I have never been. I suppose I am just a little bit better behaved.

I'm damned sure if I am mistaken and I was suspended at some stage I didn't question the umpires decision.

steven,

Yes, I think that's what hurts her the most really.

Jay,

Interesting. That's the impression I got out of that rant, though I must admit I've not read much of her stuff and didn't know how famous she was. It must be a Melbourne thing.

Proxy,

Haha. I really cant believe that was published. I cringe in embarrassment for her. It reads like a drunken text message to an ex lover.

Houllie

"Oh man Nina, I was waiting for the bit about misogynist boy club conspiracy that we got from Deveney."
Whatever Nina has written in the past, there was nothing wrong with this piece. She has added something to our understanding of where the boundaries of polite conversation lay. Steven raised an interesting point, in that people might be a little more forgiving, had she actually been funny.

Deveney's rant, on the other hand, was utterly repulsive. It is the self-serving nature of what many women attempt to pass off as feminism that repulses me. She is claiming the right to say anything, no matter how repulsive, to prove that women have a right to have an opinion. By a similar logic, she could attempt to justify absolutely any action with the rhetoric of choice.

I can easily believe Jay's claim that she is equally revolting in real life. the rest of us couldn't be more offensive if we tried.

I was attending Murdoch University in 1988 where it was compulsory for all first years to plough through a course called Structure of Thought And Reality (STAR- but we won't go there).
One of the (rotating) lecturers started off by making a big song and dance about her wearing a short skirt and lipstick and still being a feminist. As she power-strutted around the stage two lads walked in late. She confronted them by shouting through the microphone "If you ever come into my lectures late again I'm going to cut your f'ing (she used the actual word) balls off!" to the uproarious cheers of the other women in the audience.
Same mentality.
Anybody else would fully expect to automatically lose their jobs but these ignoramuses are genuinely shell-shocked if and when they eventually do.
These behaviours seem to arise out of a repellant blend of narcissism,
a distorted sense of entitlement and an acute sense of victimhood.
Let's just call it pathological feminism.
Like the tantrums of an indulged child, the behaviours are clearly reinforced in the patient by the tolerance of others.
This provides a hint to a solution.

@ Individual, see Proxy's post, I'd imagine ANY University humanities department would pass her with flying colours these days, my experience with her was in a social situation, a "Northcote Thing".

I find myself writing about myself writing about writers writing about themselves writing about other writers writing about themselves.
Signed,
Narcissus.