Good Afternoon Spindoc,

I've just realised that I didn't reply in
my previous post to your assertion that
I wanted you to defend me and Poirot
against otb.

That is not correct. Your defense on our
behalf was not what was wanted at all.
We are more
than capable of responding to otb - which
is what we regularly to his sweeping generalisations
and personal attacks. The point being made was -
you criticise us for our reponses but not otb -
for his attacks on us when we respond to his
assertions. A bit of a double standard.

I thought it important to clear that up for you.
Also, if you want to debate any topic - its best
that you also not begin your posts
as Poirot has pointed out to you
using derogatory words. That is, if you want a
response. Because logic should tell you that
you will be subsequently ignored or not taken seriously.
No one likes or appreciates - an illogical or abusive poster.
As this attempt at interaction with you has illustrated.

Poirot,
And who says capitalists don't value female achievement?

Julie Bishop is a strong, independant woman who has earned her place in cabinet through hard work, Julia Gillard is an empowered woman, ie she was empowered and enabled by others throughout her political career.
Don't forget, Julia Gillard was not elected to lead the Labor party by the people and she was elected to lead the country by the Greens and independants, not the voters.
Feminism can only produce these larger numbers of empowered women by bullying, affirmative action and rent seeking, neoliberalism produces far fewer women candidates but they're of far higher quality than those on the left. Julie Bishop isn't the only one, Amanda Vanstone, Bronwyn Bishop, Judy Moylan, Sharman Stone, the list goes on and even though people may not agree with these women they do respect them, this is not the case with Labor's "empowered" Feminists.
Formal equality produces mediocre people and mediocre achievements, one analogy is that in the 1940's the Soviets could produce soldiers at a rate of seven to every one Axis recruit but they were so poorly trained and brutalised by their service that in order to beat back the Fascist advances they had to throw their "Bolshevik Robots" onto the guns in human wave assaults and shoot anyone who faltered in the back as an example to the next wave.
More women in parliament of the board room isn't necessarily better if the only way you can place them there is by shaming, bullying and even terrorising the the institutions and their present staff.

Dear Jay,

Just to set the record straight for you.

Julie Bishop and the others you mention have risen
and been accepted in the
LNP because Julie Bishop, et al - continue to
comply with the structure of power. They toe
the Party Line. To do otherwise would be
disastrous for them. As Amanda Vandstone once
let it slip on "Q and A," - "I want to keep my
job." Of course complying with the structure
of power is the activity of re-inforcing powerlessness.

Julie Bishop seems to exhibit the competence her
Parliamentary Leader lacks, without agitating
against the structures that promoted his lesser talent
over hers has the endgame of feminist disavowal - which
does not leave much beyond a place to sit and do as you're
told in the general scheme of things.

Still, as can be seen from Ms Bishop's former life -
where she chose to defend James Hardie - for money, thereby
climbing over the corpses of asbestos victims - Ms Bishop is
only interested in looking out for No. 1.

It will be interesting to see where her future and those
of other women in the Party lies.

JoM,

"Poirot,
And who says capitalists don't value female achievement?"

Not me.

yada, yada... I'm not going to get into who produces the best/most women in this or that.

My point was that female empowerment is achieved within a masculine system..ergo...is bought into for a share of the spoils - as one would expect.

Mr related point is that Western feminism isn't about creating another system based on feminine principles. It's about trying to get a share of what's on offer within a masculine system. That's why feminists are seen as loud-mouthed bullies. In a system that doesn't pay dividends for the meek and mild, it's a given that to wrest power one needs to play the game.

Julie Bishop succeeds by playing the game, representing with aplomb the capitalist agenda, just like the men. She wears tailored clothes, just like the men, but dyed a more feminine hue, just like all the other women who represent the system at govt or corporate level. They emulate the men as closely as they can while still differentiating themselves as women.

It's fascinating to watch.

Foxy, Poirot.
Exactly, strong women vs empowered women.
In general terms the Liberal women gained influence,prestige and wealth through work and playing the game, the Labor women gained empowerment through affirmative action and making demands upon the party.
Empowerment isn't real power and Feminism robs women of real power by it's tactics of bullying and rent seeking whereby it seeks to insert people into positions of influence based on gender, not talent or their good reputation.
Feminists actually do have a considerable amount of power in society because they've targeted and successfully taken over key sectors such as the education system and state media and they're adept at both driving men out of their territory and protecting their monopolies.
Yet what are they doing besides promoting their long outdated fourth wave rhetoric and bogus talking points like "wage gap" and "rape culture"?

If feminism was supposed to be about equality it certainly hasn't been in the last several decades and feminism IS what feminism DOES.

Feminism is radical feminism, radical feminism is feminism - there is no other brand.

The brand IS anti-humanism. They DO hate and sneer at men and boys and they are gynocentric. Feminists are the elite of educated middle class white women and NO, they do not care a fig about what they perceive as lesser women who make other choices, or are not one of them through not having the $$ they had to make the most of life's opportunities.

It is worth acknowledging at this juncture that just as many men as women do not have the $$ behind them and the cleverness, street smarts and contacts to reliably attain higher incomes.

It will be a long, cold day in hell when any of those feminists who are forever whining about their own entitlement ever volunteer to help anyone else. They just do not do that.

While the educated middle class feminists are forever hitching a ride on indigenous for example, their concern about them is superficial and it is very soon back to their taxpayer-funded knees-ups in five star hotels disrespecting the legions of men and women who do not always choose career above all else.