otb,

Please supply us with evidence to your claims
regarding women and your sweeping statement
that - only men were against
the war in Vietnam. My facts and experience
don't agree with these statements of yours.

As for weasel words?
Which ones do you regard as weasel words exactly?
Afterall historical facts are recorded.

But it would be interesting to read your definition of
"weasel words," because our language reflects our view
of the world. And yours would tells us - more about you.

I'm intrigued Sir.

Foxy,

You can save that posturing for a newbie and I did not say that only men were opposed to Vietnam.

It is a historical fact that women voted strongly for Menzies and his Vietnam-supporting colleagues to follow (and for Joh), only dropping off a bit where they perceived a 'weaker', indecisive leader.

To add a bit more truth to the mix, it was much more likely the constant news of poor outcomes in the war and the photos of the child burned by napalm and injuries to villagers that influenced more women to change their vote. Arguably then, women did not respect leaders who were not firm in their policy and seemed to fail as well.

Women vote for strong leaders. What is probably at work again is their preference for continuity and stability and a weak, indecisive and probably unsuccessful leader doesn't guarantee that.

Maybe you should go back through the newspapers and women's mags like The Womens Weekly. Maybe too you only remember what suits your political ideology.

otb,

You can't keep claiming things as facts without
providing any evidence. It then becomes -
simply your version
of things as you see them.
And - these unsupported and
outright unsubstantiated fabrications tend to permeate your
comments regularly. It's simply not good enough.
Especially if you want your opinions to be
respected and valued and for you to be taken seriously
in a discussion forum such as OLO.

Unless you improve your tactics - and contribute
something of genuine substance - you shall be ignored.
I have better things to do with my time then continue to
talk to someone who seems to not be capable of mentally
processing the issues under discussion.

You also did not answer my question regarding your
earlier reference to "weasel words."

Surely you don't want to come across as a vacuous,
unthinking person

cont'd ...

otb,

You stated in your earlier post -
"No weasel words please, just honesty and truth."

Yet you seem to exhibit only "weasel words" directed
at females and no honesty or truth.

And when confronted, you deny you said the things that
you actually did, for example on page 10 of this
discussion you did state quite clearly,

"If you want the truth, it was men who were opposed
to Vietnam."

The truth was that the anti-war movement consisted of
people from both genders and more than 200,000 people
across Australia marched in the first Moratorium.

In October 1966 - over 10,000 demonstrators greeted US
President Lyndon Baines Johnson in Sydney. In Melbourne
the US President's cavalcade was dowsed with blood-red paint
and gained widespread international publicity.

The first protest action against the war was
organised by The Australian Student Labor Federation
in Australia in Canberra in May 1965.

http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/rp/RP9798/98rp03

The closest I can find to an analysis of voting patterns over time by gender. It admits the research material is sparse.

R0bert

Dear RObert,

Thank You for the link.

Very interesting indeed!