Billie “"Wedge politics" is a tool of neo-cons on the right. Howard turned Australia into anation of people who hated

- chardonnay sipping lefties
- muslims
- aborigines
- unionists

The left prides itself on its "social inclusion" agenda.

I see the Grand Prix doesn't grab your attention either.”





“Wedge Politics- why was Marx using it to separate the classes in Victorian England?

What is a “anation”, is it anything to do with “aretention”?

John Howard did not turn anyone into anything.

John Howard did his best to reflect the will of the nation who elected him, as was his duty.

It is you “lefties” who are doubled up with envy and hated of anyone who happens, through their own diligence and effort, to develop into more than you.

It is the socialists who need to ensure no one is allowed to have more than anyone else and who need to control everything, at the expense of everyone, because they know they lack the patent ability to perform and are thus suspicious of anyone who can.

It is called class consciousness and works both as snobbery and inverted snobbery. I would observe from the attitudes expressed in most of your sniveling posts that “inverted snobbery” applies to you.

The left’s idea of “social inclusion” is for us all to suffer, equally, the poverty and mediocrity which history has proved their failed economic and social policies deliver.

As for the GP, why should I pay particular interest to a bunch of blokes running around in fast cars, I would sooner cruise an art gallery and drench myself in the creative genius which comes only from the efforts of individuals, aspiring to their own potential, regardless of what the socialist tell them.

Vanilla,
Calling someone a "sleazy puritanical god-botherer" is abuse.

Feminists seem to have a fascination with abuse, but in overall terms, the most abusive posters on OLO would definitely be those who call themselves a feminist.

It appears that feminism = abuse

Whatever you say Horase. You bein' the orifice of wisdom an' all that.

Some great posts with interesting thought provoking points. Pity about some of the unhelpful antagonizing baiting comments of the 'usual suspects'.

Misogyny and Misandry are both equally unpleasant, regardless of the source. Violence against both men and women is unacceptable. Feminists do not condone one and condemn the other. The fact is that the vast majority of violence, physical injurious violence that at times causes death is perpetuated by men. Both men and women are the victims.

Tankard Reist is one of those women who makes me cross and frustrated. She articulates her points with little substance and lots of emotive language. But I have to say that this particular ad made me feel very uncomfortable.

Vanilla, though you made some excellent points I'm not convinced that advertising a product is necessarily a forum for art. Advertising surely is a mode of suggesting an idea that is desirable and is attainable by buying/using a product. That is what disturbs me about this ad.

Censorship is not the answer. Discussions like these certainly are. I have lots of discussions on these kind of things (ads, music, lyrics, language etc) with my kids who are generation Y and often have a very different take on issues to myself. Very illuminating for both of us! Quite amazing how language and imagery has changed. Though I do believe that some of the differences of what is acceptable and what is not is also because of differences in life experience.

Vanilla,

I often wonder if I am one of these infamous 'usual suspects' everyone talks about without having the guts to name...

'The usual suspects actually resemble super-rad fems of the Dworkin era. They both believe life is really tough for [insert relevant group] and much easier for [you].'

I hope I don't give this impression. I have tried to convince you previously that to refute an assertion of women as victims is very different to portraying men as victims.

I do like to reverse arguments around to show the other side of the coin, and challenge why an argument of say.. 'societal pressure' is valid in arguing oppression of women, but is not considered oppression when this 'societal pressure' affects mens decisions.

'Possibly the silliest thing I’ve heard on these boards is a bloke saying “I’d love to be a woman! You have the power. Men just desire you...etc.” '
I think this may be me, and if it is, I really am being misrepresented. All I intended to do was illustrate to a poster who lamented women becoming 'invisible' as they age, that there is a positive and negative side to this, and that most men don't get to enjoy this feeling of being desired whether old or young. I agree pretty much exactly what you have said in the same post... 'women court desire and then reject it, they resent it when they’re young and then mourn it when they’re old'. Is it so impossible to see being desired as a power and enjoying it while it is there? All I really said is that I can imagine seeing it as such and enjoying it if I were a woman.

Having said that I really enjoyed and agreed with your posts on this topic.

Vanilla

I agree with your condemnation of Melinda’s anti-abortion stance, but like Ginx I don’t think you should allow that to blinker you to the many good points she makes. I’m a leftist, atheist Green’s voter so she and I part company on several fronts but I still think she’s got a lot of good stuff to say.

I heard her on Difference of Opinion once and was impressed by her arguments then, as were a large number of the many people who posted after the show. She was calm and articulate and consistently presented a tight and compelling argument on the sexualization of children. I’m not familiar with all her stuff but I know she has done a lot of good work in this area in particular.

I think she is spot on with this one too. I respect your anti-censorship views, but I feel the world has changed to such an extent that while they may have had justifiable currency in the sixties and seventies, they really need to be re-visited now. The portrayal of violence as an accepted and acceptable part of modern life is so endemic in advertising, film, music and video games that to me it is very reasonable to make the link between this trend and the increasing prevalence of violence in reality.

If we don’t ban ads like this one, what’s the alternative?

I can’t see a consumer black ban ever gaining much traction. The only time I ever pick up a so-called women’s magazine is in a waiting room and I very rarely look at an advertisement of any sort, but I realise I’m very much in the minority. If we were all to shun this stuff though, the purveyors of the most mindless of this rubbish would soon lose their audience.

As consumers, no matter how discerning, it’s almost impossible to disentangle yourself, we're all feeding this stuff to some extent whether we like it or not.