What an odd concept of non-sexist disparagement you have, SPQR.

From the comment in question:

"...will you never learn old mate?
...that twit Carr,... him buzzing... he was crowing... his election win. His ego... makes him...
The man is...
Besides, you can never trust someone who does not have a drivers licence. In this day & age, that alone makes him a bit strange.
He's a good match..."

The only way I can see to make it non-sexist would be to alter the penultimate sentence to, 'Besides you can never trust anyone who does not have a drivers licence. In this day & age, that alone would make them a bit strange.'

Which wasn't the point Hasbeen was making.

No risk of anything else being passed on other than your warm hellos to Poirot. Moustache's tickle, wherever they touch.

On the bright side I've found a new word to describe a false claim of changing the sense of a comment - an ediot.

WMTrevor,

All that toing and froing about Carr was just the entrée.

The pièce de résistance was that penultimate sentence:
<<Besides you can never trust *ANYONE* who does not have a drivers licence>>

And it was that sentence which your moustachioed mate had (like a blow fly) alighted on.

Well, we can't go on like this toing and froing all day --besides I think I've used up my quota of responses on this thread --so we'll just have to agree here and now that, you are wrong and I am right –and leave it at that.

(you watch, any moment now Poirot is going to buy into this on your side –which will show (beyond doubt) I WAS RIGHT all along)

PS: I’m rather fond of Barry Humphries take on Bob Carr: “He looks like an undertaker"

SPQR,

"You watch, any moment now Poirot is going to buy into this on your side..."

(Who can resist such an invitation?)

...but you ignore the crowning glory of the whole sentence, as in: - "and that alone makes him a bit strange."

(That is "him", btw)

And who did that make (in Hasbeen's opinion) a bit strange?

It made Bob Carr a bit strange.

And who is Bob Carr?

Bob Carr is a politician who happens to be of male gender.

And how does my buying into this conversation at this juncture "prove" you were right all along?

WmTrevor,

Merci beaucoup, mon ami : )

SPQR I am sorry that you don’t understand how to use the word misogyny. But ignorance is not a permanent condition you know; you can rectify your deficits by reading widely and being interested in what is actually happening in the world of ideas and solutions to problems.

Understanding the difference between misogyny and sexism and how to use the words appropriately is an important issue to talk about because there aren't any 'rules' that exist somewhere - not even on the internet - that tell everyone what is true and what is not.

We, that is everyone who is interested in making a better world, need to talk about the issue and construct rules for today, since the old ones are not working. The old white male rules may have and continue to work well for you, but they have never worked well for me and, many people I know both male and female and in-between.

I have a choice now, because of those 'white male' rules, in particular the rule of law - fantastic, wonderful men who fought for human rights. So now I can have a say and I'm saying clearly that I don't want the old rules. I think we can do better.

I am also grateful for the internet. I have never found it to be 'safe' to argue face to face with a man so I love this way of interacting. I don't have to be scared of the usual response - violence verbal or physical that I have experienced and seen so much of in my work - when a woman fails to defer to a man.

Can I ask why you spoke/typed to Poirot about me rather than address your criticism, or was it an insult? to me? And why would you judge me to be 'showing off'? What do you think I am showing off and is it not a good thing to show off the things you do well

Mollydukes,

Nice to see you back here - and kudos for your insightful posts.

Perhaps SPQR finds you a tad more imposing than [he?] does Poirot?

thank you Poirot. I am pleased that you appreciate my input. So SPQR is 'scared' of moi? I did briefly imagine myself as Eleanor of Aquitaine while watching that doco on SBS the other night - about the queens of England

SBS http://www.sbs.com.au/ondemand/video/2292101620

I am reassured that there are several commenter's who have read and understand the article and agree that there is a real need for some changes in our economic paradigm and that it is imperative to do something about climate change.

Oh and SPQR, you missed the real example of sexism in my comment. To call you blokes 'boys' is an insult, as it devalues your maturity and ability, no? It is sometimes an insult when men call women, 'girls'; but only sometimes.

Context is everything or at least a big part of the thing. But you won't understand that; you will say you just disagree with it but really you don't understand it and it is easier not to do the 'work' involved in understanding something that doesn't come easily