There is an interesting book titled;

Spin Sisters, How women of the media sell unhappiness and Liberalism to the women of America.

Myrna Blyth

Quote;

"Blyth admits that, as editor in chief of Ladies' Home Journal, she helped create "the negative message of victimization and unhappiness that bombards women," complete with attention-grabbing headlines about weight problems or sexual dysfunction. But she is not taking the blame by herself: "I am certain that there is a liberal tilt in the media aimed especially at women"; that tilt, Blyth argues, helps make modern women unhappy. She explains that women's magazines (and TV) have a vested interest in female discontent because an unhappy woman is more likely to spend a few bucks in search of a panacea for her psychological, sexual, or physical ills. Further, Blyth bashes the Left on grounds that the Spin Sisters (her name for the female media elite) need women to think of themselves as victims if they are going to look for help from a liberal government." Unquote.

Plus the women of the media also believe that every other woman thinks or should think the same way that they do.

There are at least five regular female contributors in The Australian. They are mostly more hard nosed conservative or free market anti-union than the usual run of male contributors.

I do agree that the females write on average better considered artlcles. I always pause to read an article when I see their name at the top, although often I don't agree. But far better than the slop put out by many of the female contributors to the Fairfax press.

Instead of "female opinions count", this is itself a flaw, as really all opinions count, regardless if a person agrees with a viewpoint or not, as what flows from that, is that there will be a viewpoint of "male opinions count", in where:

"The Australian will be renowned for both its ideological and political uniformity being a national newspaper in which male voices often dominate the opinion pages."

Many people I know don't buy newspapers anymore, and would rather put a view on this page, be that person female or male (after all there are only so many letters, you can cram into a letters to the editors page) and with newspapers, advertisements win over stories. This site does not discriminate and many people also express an opinion elsewhere.

So referring to the Australian newspaper (owned by a major corporation), and using that piece of paper as some sort of case for winning an argument, is irrelevant in the context in terms of viewpoint expression.

After all, isn't the author here (Sarah Russell), putting a comment on this site - to encourage further discussion? I would argue that is a lot better (and intelligent) in terms of scope, than using mainstream media.

Without a doubt female opinions count. In a married relationship, it is her opinion about the which house to buy, or which car to drive, determines the purchase.

There as been a trend by female commentators, to deride, or to discount male opinions. They use the word "Mansplaining".

Seems like a plausible thesis to me.
Remember too that most of the Oz propaganda hacks are fully paid up supporters of the Orwellian open ended "war on terror". And many of them are right-wing "catholics".
The intrinsic greatness of woman in the guise of Shakti or She has been essentially destroyed by the patriarchal "culture" promoted by the the dreadfully sane essentially psychotic ghouls that now control the social and cultural agendas of the entire world.
This destruction has reduced all of life to scandalous garbage - male-reduced, monotonous, petty point-scoring exchanges concerns and rivalries.
Everything to do with Shakti or the domain of feeling and the senses, and pleasurable association with the feeling sensuous domain has been corrupted and aggressively opposed. WOMAN is opposed - that which woman IS, that which she incarnates, that which her pattern is about.

What is needed is the restoration of the Pleasure Dome Principle as the principal context of human life. The complete restoration of it. The liberation of the human disposition from the opposition to woman, to Shakti, to feeling, to art of all the senses, glorifying and turned toward the Divine condition of existence. Done in temple, done in bed, done at meals, done in community.

If you are full of Shakti, full of love, full of art, and all the yin that woman IS, combine with it, then the male of yang force is made whole, is gentled, is integrated with what it refuses via its dramatization mentalizing and physical hardness, and brute intents relative to what appears to be the controlling force, the force of nature, the force of the cosmos, the force of what is simply arising in each moment. The talking heads at the Oz are all male-like, utterly defended against it. All those grim and monotonously thinking or bullying their way through life.

The usual male sexing is a destruction of woman, a denial of the feminine force, of Shakti, of energy, of delight, of feeling, of Happiness Itself.

'Remember too that most of the Oz propaganda hacks are fully paid up supporters of the Orwellian open ended "war on terror". And many of them are right-wing "catholics".'

obviouusly Daffy never watches the tax payer funded national broadcasters who are apologisist of Islam, promoters of porn and haters of anything decent.