Isnt that the image that John Howard has been promoting for the last 10 years with lots of help from his one-dimensional cronies at the IPA.
A systematic dumbing down of everything via the sophisticated use of "framing" button words and phrases which enclose the parameters of the "debate". Everything reduced to meaningless manipulative sound-bites and inoffensive blandness. All in the name of "freedom". No exercise of discriminative intelligence allowed.

See the work of George Lakoff at the Rockridge Institute.

Thanks. That's worthy of serious consideration I reckon.

You forgot "mums and dads" one of the most immature demeaning appellations from our PM the jingoistic jingler.

Enjoyed this piece Greg, particularly the observation regarding the social triangulation aspect of "mateship".

Indeed, how easily the term can be lifted by third-parties wishing to exploit others for whatever purpose, for better or for worse.

Prior to reading your piece, my preferred definition of a mate learnt during my teens and carried through until today was that a mate was "yourself in someone else's skin".

Perhaps it was just an overpaid copywriter who came up with that, or, some unknown academic however there's an unconditional steam within that defintion which could also be very easily abused.

To carry your analogy, perhaps the defintion of a mate being "yourself in someone else's skin" might touch on the super-ego of the infant.

Anyway Greggers, mate, enough of this poofter talk.
I've got hungry cattle to feed.

Simon Bedak
"Lorraine"
Wagga Wagga NSW 2650

simon wrote 'Anyway Greggers, mate, enough of this poofter talk.'

So, talking about ways to improve male bonding for a happier, selfsupportive, and street smart male population is 'pooftish'

simon...buddy, if you are married or in a relationship...if a major stress hits, your lady person now who is she going to turn to,... you?...yeah, maybe that what you will hear from her, but watch carefully and the usual is she will turn to her group of ' female-friends' she carefully keeps on the good side with her for all the support, advise and names of useful connections...if she comes to you it probably because you are needed to do something for her...so seems this then is women acting 'pooftish'

Well...I dont mind acting 'pooftish' if it will lead to what women have among themselves, happening with us men as men...I would like to think the proper word is being a 'brother', which is one good male soul recognizing the soul of another good male soul to link, bond and form a 'enlarging-supportive-family'...

Sam
Ps~I think a men obeying commands of women as a personal or group authority out of fear or benefit is what it really means to act 'pooftish'...

Dear Sam

Thank you for your kind instruction however if you re-read what I've written, possibly you'll come around to the idea that my final comment was entirely tounge-in-cheek and echoing the nature of Greg's fine observations.

Permit me to apologise to you Sam and anyone else overly keen to rip my head off if the humour was lost on you and if any offense was taken.

Yes, I am orgasmically happily married, thank you for asking, and spend every single working day with my wife/woman-person on our drought stricken farm where we deal with life and death problems each day.

And, before you ask, I also support Gay and Lesbian marriages whole-heartedly as well as the right to use the words "mate", "poofter" and "cattle" in the same ironic utterance.

I'll have the Bovine Republican Army after me next.

Simon Bedak
"Lorraine"
Wagga Wagga NSW 2650