2. the High Court of Australia
is a men's organisation that receives government funding.

like the Parliament with men's legislatures only,
as mandated by the Constitution,
the High Court has a men's jurisdiction only.
there is no women's legislature
and there is no women's jurisdiction at law,
inequity a Republic of Australia can remedy.

Hey, PP,

Did you read Pynchme's links to xy? I know you're pressed for time but, if nothing else, reading the first one might help you understand why posing questions to people like Antiseptic, JamesH, Vanna etc. is simply extending their reach, as it were.

Actually, I think that document should be required reading to anyone who is ever tempted to engage with them! Though, yeah, we all give in to temptation at times, huh?

Responding simply allows them another platform to distribute disinformation. Remember the oft repeated maxim that there are more Lurkers (people who read but don't contribute to discussion) than posters? Every time we respond, it allows more opportunity for repetition of the rhetoric of the organisations Anti & Co support.

Master's discovery of where most of their posts come from has, over the time I've been on OLO, been publicised by different people many times here. But, as old posters drop off and new ones arrive the message gets lost.

Its not that Anti & Co.always cut and paste from these sites: they are so steeped in the rhetoric ( "feminazi" "misandry" – which aren’t even legitimate words -; women's take-over of acadaemia; men's suiciding at figures ranging for 3 to 5 per day as a result of living in a feminized world; more women than men causing DV; boys doing poorly at school due to women usurping power; yada, yada, yada) that, like a communist manifesto, they are inculcated with these same tropes and repeat them incessantly. Which is kinda scary.

People who read these threads, therefore, see this same misinformation being repeated time and time again and, eventually, come to think there "must be something in it". Look at the length of all the Antiseptic threads for example: how many opportunities for constant repetition by him and his supporters of the same misinformation do they provide?

Which allows me to segue seamlessly into your query re media. Yep. It’s the same all over and works on the same principal: - repeat something often enough, confidently enough, and people will begin to accept it unquestioningly

Thanks Pynchme for those first 2 posts on the previous page. You have eloquently demolished Antiwomen's anti women agenda.

He's now "trying", over the last several pages, to launch into "another" generalised anti women attack, after he was thoroughly discredited regarding his ridiculous NRL/Channel 9 management conspiracy theory.

The desperate neanderthal basically wants his men vs women agenda to get attention.

It's all about his obsessive agenda for him. Just look at the past 50 or more posts from him in his "history" here. Virtually all of them, with only several exceptions, are concerned about ONE THING - - -

His ANTI WOMEN AGENDA. He suffers from obsession.

Keep in mind people, Antiwomen will NEVER admit he's wrong and never give an inch - - - - that's of course a weakness and a sign of immaturity. He's so obsessed with his agenda and self righteousness. God help his poor daughter.

Romany, your post makes a lot of sense. I never thought of it that way, but upon reflection I can see that simply by responding to the misogynist's posts I am giving him a platform to REPEAT and REPEAT and REPEAT and REPEAT his agenda.

Maybe we should just simply let the misogynist have his much desired "last word" and then never respond.

“Did you read Pynchme's links to xy?”

Hello Romany, I read through some links but not sure what the xy one was? I read some of that dad site, wow.

I get what you’re saying though, I am on some sites where they have created some amazing stories and then fed them back and forth until it all becomes fact and never questioned. I think it might be some weird human trait, if a person is treated badly or unfairly they have to turn the situation in to something big, scary and most of all “organized” so that their ego copes better with the defeat.

They get very cross with anyone suggesting what they believe is incorrect or even the suggestion that it wasn’t personal.

Seems they cannot clearly see any individuals either but always a collective out to get them.

But in Anti’s case… is he believing that half the world’s population is out to get the other half? Is Master correct that it is an obsession with Anti?

I remember my mum coming up with an absolute gem once, something about how a kid being left handed is about bad parenting, apparently the bad parent didn’t place the child’s first spoon in the right hand. We had a chat about this; she was amazed that she had not questioned this belief in about 50 years of first hearing it. I am scared of being like that and plan to annoy everyone forever with questions!

So what about a government funded newspaper, no adverts – or is that just as bad, been done before and not worked?

Claims about how many powerful people are male are accurate but ignore an important issue. You might want to consider which men are rewarded with these jobs and what qualities got them there. The very qualities that make some men so irritating are the very qualities that get people promoted in many fields of our society. The one gem of truth in Antiseptic's original claim is that skill at playing football is more highly rewarded than many more useful abilities, though it won't get people right to the top of the corporate ladder.

A discussion about how to change this would have been more useful than the spiteful sniping that this thread has produced. If we really want these particular blokes to change, then society needs to ensure that they stop getting the good jobs, the adulation, the women, the money etcetera. These blokes are-not as stupid as you think they are.