Leslie Cannold aggressively promotes abortion right up to full term babies.

She represents a very narrow band of extreme so-called feminism which does not have broad appeal in the community, much less Australian women who are largely grossly turned off by the thought of aborting full term babies.

Leslie Cannold...No thanks.

Assange is quite palatable all on his own, this article insults everyone.

I've tried to engage with Dr Cannold, but in general have found her to be facile and pretty shallow; great at expressing the currently fashionable topic, not so good at examining hard subjects.

If she gets elected I hope she manages to lift her game.

I've got a fracking female voice for you: Karen Straughan
'Feminism and the Disposable Male' is a good start.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vp8tToFv-bA

Let's talk seriously for a moment, virtually everyone recognises the feminist pose Tsitas strikes simply serves our plutocrats.

http://blogs.ssrc.org/tif/2010/03/17/orthodox-paradox-an-interview-with-john-milbank/
"In one sense, the freeing of sex from the law has always been implied by Christianity; the 1960s’ “liberation” remains an event within Christian history. At the same time, what one saw here was a kind of democratization and commercialization of “bohemian” morals, which had themselves earlier been newly legitimated and normalized for an elite, as Phillip Blond has pointed out. The problem here is that self-pleasure can become either explicitly or tacitly a goal in itself. When the romantics earlier spoke of the importance of marriage being “free,” that seems to me nearer the mark, as a goal. Human fulfillment lies more in the direction of faithful love and inserting oneself in the continuity of generations. Marriage and the family, for all their corruption and misuse, are at base democratic institutions. Fascism for me comes into the picture because I think (following Adorno, amongst others) that the gradual separation of sex from procreation is regarded naively if we do not realize that this is <b>what the state wants</b>. Covertly, it wants to secure “Malthusian” control over reproduction and to deal with the individual directly, rather than through the mediation of couples. Much of liberal feminism is actually, in practice, on the side of economic and political neoliberalism. It is too rarely noticed that sexual permissiveness has today become a kind of opiate that covertly reconciles people to the loss of other freedoms—both in relation to the state and to the workplace."

This is what our neo-liberal plutocrats say about us amongst themselves: [14min]:

'Plutonomy: The Memo Citigroup Doesn't Want You to See'
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xZ3-OWMa92E

I just can't believe, in 2013, this author is still trying this nonsense on. Leslie Cannold is a disaster, she's lost her window to profit from liberal-state patronage. Things have overtaken these people.

Why has every effort by Assange, his lawyers, Wikileaks and the Ecuadorian authorities to have the sex allegations dealt with by the Swedes with guaranteed protection from the Yanks been stonewalled? The Swedes already have form in the rendering of people to the Yank version of "justice".

No woman could make Assange 'more palatable' until he has gone though the court case and faced the rape allegations against him first...and found to be innocent.

Surely he can't run for the Senate when he remains under such a political and legal cloud?
And who in their right mind would run with him in his current situation?
What a load of rubbish...