'Social media now will never again be replaced as the most honest form of tapping public opinion.'

Yes and No. This 'viral' (hate the term) effect really facilitates jumping on the bandwagon. Mob mentality can be an indicator of support for the speech in political terms, but it can also be as you say in bully-victim terms, in simply raw emotion terms, in gender relation terms, in all sorts of other areas.

So you can see something take off and gain momentum, but the motivation is missing, and I think importantly, you don't know whether people watch the whole thing, whether they react positively (People 'like' out of politeness, pear pressure, habit, they may be more likely to like than not like, they may not even have the facility to not like either), and even then it's just a lazy pressing of a button. It's a very instant reaction kind of thing, where I reckon when people vote it's a deeper core belief thing.

Also I think with the scale of these things (and there are forces deliberately working towards pushing them along, lets not forget that political staffers hit the blogs every day to attempt to influence things), the demographic it comes from in terms of age and political leanings is lost. I guarantee in a months time people have moved on, and an election is in a year.

I fear for Gillard that women who already hate Tony may cheer along, but to a neutral sitting on the fence she may be inclined to empathize. Especially with the standing near signs rubbish and some of the far-fetched evidence.

Well, yes, Houellie,

I have to agree that it was great theatre, and it resonates with a powerful theme, that of the sniping and undermining party getting their comeuppance.

I think the misogyny tag is way overused too. It's all too easy to whip it out as a rhetorical rolling pin these days.

Then again, Tony did have the assistance of the animated indignation, tut-tutting and tisk-tisking of Julie Bishop playing out behind him in the chamber to offset the tirade from the other side of the table.

Houellebecq well said. I was left wondering after listening to the speech how often we will see Julia naming the sexsm which benefits women? Will we see her taking to the family law and child support acts to ensure that the practical outcomes are closer to gender neutral or will she continue to support their role in applying paternalistic family models?

Will we see issues such male suicide and lower life expectancy for men treated as serious issues? Willwe see higher incarceration rates for men treated as a something needs addressing?

Julia may be happy to name anything which looks like sexism impacting women but I really doubt that we will see much of the other side from her.

R0bert

We, all of us, do our selves no favors by ignoring a post such as runners, he used with intent, the word slut.
I am a modern man, not just gay enough, but a progressive modern Alpha Male.
But we must confront, even in this thread, a bigotry against Gillard seemingly based on her sex.
I growl with anger at PC attempts to place every woman on the Princess platform, look first for beauty INSIDE a woman.
But the dogged determination to not see, not understand, Abbott, his front bench, and his maybe speech writers AJ, FOR WHAT THEY ARE IS STUNNING.
Print media has sometimes given its pen, to such as runners post here, would any of us have our women folk spoken about like that.
Gillard and Abbott stumble like two drunks from mistake to bigger mistake,leaning on one another.
But for decency sake JG won hands down Abbott lost, he let the mask slip, I know the real Tony Abbott is behind it.
In time my country,s men and women will too, and see him as a far bigger lier than Gillard ever was.

Anybody notice that Julia has just taken $60 away from single mothers?
Shows her concern.

She certainly put a lot of raw emotiion into the speech...fed up with being attacked in emails etc...but I was annoyed particularly by the reference to her dead father because she made it sound as though it was Tony not Alan, who had uttered the words.
Guess she had just read the latest poll in which labour had slipped again, and was frustrated because they (and she) had gone up a little last time. No party can dish the dirst like labour, backed into a corner. Wonder what that union leader said about Tony that even she felt she had to apologise for. Anybody know?

Belly I went looking. Pretty much the norm in theme for runner if the post I found was the one you referred to.

Any particular reason why that comment would be worse than a lot of other stuff that gets bandied around? Eg if someone had referred to a group of men as sleezes would that have bothered you in the same way?

R0bert