Dear runner,

Ah yes the good old '50's, when a bloke could have a skin full and drive home, give the missus a fat lip or worse if she complained, and the cops couldn't do a bleedin' thing about it.

That's when a woman knew her place, and if she didn't she copped a hiding. And if she wasn't up for a bit of kiss and cuddle you made sure she got it anyway, I mean what are marital rights for.

From the ABC's Law Report where Damien Carrick is talking to Austin Ashe, a retired Family Court judge, about family law in the 50's;

Damien Carrick: In terms of the violence in the relationship, presumably there was no rape within marriage, too, so that must have been a huge issue, and in terms of women saying, 'Look, I demand my physical autonomy, and my physical choices'.

Austin Ashe: That was something which grew in strength from the '50s onwards. The feminist movement is to be given full marks for this because there were lots and lots of cases where the fact that the wife was bashed about really didn't affect much, it was almost a feeling that-what was the old Yorkshire proverb, or an old proverb in England anyway, 'A woman, a dog, and a walnut tree, the more you beat 'em the better they be'. There really was a feeling around that it was man's duty to keep his wife in order, and if he slapped her once or twice, provided it didn't do any great harm, that was part of the marriage set-up.
http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/lawreport/1956-and-no-fault-divorce/3347626

And you want to point your daughter to that?

I think I will stick with Prime Minister Gillard's speech.

It is being covered in two active threads.
All sides have been pegged out and the verbal tennis well under way.
No fan of Gillard her speech was nothing short of brilliant.
She gave both AJ And his speech writer Abbott a verbal flogging.
Our middle aged men dominated media put on display why it is failing to sell news papers.
Of far more importance?
Social media now will never again be replaced as the most honest form of tapping public opinion.

I duno csteele,

That to me seems a pretty black arm band view of history. I have talked to a lot of old ducks in my time and none of them have these kind of attitudes. In fact I would describe the relationships and families as fairly matriarchal.

Not saying it didn't happen or that the new protections in place aren't a great thing, but people (mostly feminists) do go on with this singular hyperbolic narrative that every marriage was one of abuse and alcoholism, and the truth is things are rarely so black and white, and men have loved and cherished and supported women, and vice versa throughout the ages.

It's such a well worn cliche this abusive raping husband Shtick that people trot out, and it's just as unrealistic as everything being great in the good ol' days as runner bangs on about.

Whether you like to admit it or not, rape withing marriage in the 50s was 100% LEGAL.

No denial from you can alter this FACT.

End of story.

Dear Houellebecq,

You probably have a point. I'm more than likely a touch jaundiced as my grandfather was a policeman in a small Victorian town and I have undoubtedly heard some stories that would not have made the rounds back then since it just wasn't talked about in polite company. That 'age of innocence' was undoubtedly just as much an 'age of blissful ignorance'.

Social media has certainly played its part in exposing the dirty linen in a frighteningly efficient, speedy and pervasive manner. But it has its up sides. The propagation of Julia Gillard's speech is one of those. I am reliably informed that the link to the video is making the Facebook rounds of otherwise politically disengaged and disinterested teenagers.

As someone who counts himself as being reasonably apprised of the political currents in this country I'm wondering if that has had an impact on how many of us, including those on this site, have missed the impact of the speech. It seems to have really struck a chord with those who are not encumbered as we are such as our youth and those viewing from overseas. Of course gender would play its role as well.

I will be interested to see how many hits it ultimately receives.

i watched the same thing as you
only i saw a prepared dirt file..in lue of a cogent reply

to think that she defends slipper
by attacking tony..boy was i ever surprised slip[per even got the two mentions in her prepared ...red flag dirt unit..but i note she didnt cut back to the PREPARED DIRT FILE*..to name drop.

the poor precious thing..

ok lets saay for the sake of boosting woman..esteem
its yet built on a lie and a dirt file..then qwuickly marketed..in news grabs

ommitting the fine detail of her defense of that fine upstanding speaker who isnt musso\ginist

lol

it defies belief
prooves we onkly hear what we want to hear

all the while
al was being sleazy..was doing his bit..behind the scenes
helping out a sleeze..defended by a tart..who poor her.. cant handle the oppisition leader without the dirt file prepared via public servants

plus the civil 'in house'..missoginists ]
guiding her every utterance...step as she
and her party fall from grace..into discrace.

so sad..then that one that nomin ated him for speaker

sad sad sad
yes its chalked up by youtube..as a response to missognoy..yet defends a missoginist via villifying a man..

yep bring on the handbag brigade..now the dirt unit has shopveled yet more mud

but juliar..watch the poles my dead
you just lost a big wack of femails VOTERS..not impressed by the sin/spin...that will soon set missoginy in stone ..equally to both sexes..plus the others.

daddy will be so pleased
shame same same shame

but heck ya knew that..
ya missoginist dirtfilers .*knew it was despirit
but it was allways doomed to fail ...hugely..

see ya in monday's polls

when does caw-cuss meat?