Dearest Foxy,

"It now appears that it was illegal for someone to lose their job over personal political views posted on a private Facebook feed."

I applaud this: nobody should be dismissed for expressing themselves, and most critically, not academics. Provided that in return, they expect criticism, ridicule and probably demolition, anybody should have the freedom to express themselves - which would mean, of course, that they would offend someone with a different point of view, and have the right to do so.

They certainly shouldn't lose their job over it. There are so many other, dirtier, ways of forcing people out of jobs, believe me.

Joe

Hi Foxy,

Yup...turns out the whole thing was a pointless exercise.

Except perhaps to highlight right-wing intolerance....at least it brought all the usual hysterical howling out on this forum.

How do you mean, ' right-wing intolerance' ? La Trobe University ? Islamists ? perhaps yes, you couldn't get much more right-wing that Islamism, it's sort of off the scale. But I guess you and your mates are stuck with them. How are you going, by the way, with your advice to them about gender fluidity ? What, no more gays tossed off tall buildings ? For the record, I think that no-one should be tossed off tall buildings because of their sexual orientation. Or stoned for looking at a bloke. Or had their right arm and left leg hacked off for not believing (Surah 32). Interesting bed-fellows, Poirot.

The IPA and Andrew Bolt have written in support of her/his/its/their (M. Ward's) employment. Are you suggesting that the IPA and Bolt are left-wing ? Or just 'tolerant' ? I certainly welcome the tolerance of the Right, up to a point: for instance, I wouldn't support their 'tolerance' of chucking gays off tall buildings. You may have to be more specific.

But if you don't want to hear 'hysterical howling on this forum', just stick your fingers in your ears.

No worries, Poirot, just trying to help :)

Joe

Loudmouth: I think that no-one should be tossed off tall buildings because of their sexual orientation. Or stoned for looking at a bloke. Or had their right arm and left leg hacked off for not believing (Surah 32). Interesting bed-fellows, Poirot.

Would you call that bullying?

Loudmouth - why don't ya have another drink.

You're spitting and gyrating there like like you're having an extended spasm.

Watch that sarc, mate, it'll take yer down eventually.

This place is a lost cause - 90% pure loon.

Lol!....

Hi Poirot,

Was that snide rhetoric, or measured argument ? Is it possible to have a calm discussion about bullying, which seems to have suddenly become a major problem in Victorian schools or, a quite separate issue, another discussion about the promotion of pro-homosexual material in Victorian schools ?

Would it be possible to bring these disparate issues together somehow ? After all, on one hand, bullying is wrong; and, on the other, discrimination against homosexuals is also wrong. It would be good to be able to somehow relate the two issues. Good luck !

Hi Jayb,

In a very loose way, yes, I suppose one could call throwing gays off tall buildings a form of bullying. More likely though, a form of killing. Bullying usually involves (or at least it did when I was a scrawny little kid) teasing, taunting, the imminent threat of pain, humiliation, but not death. When I got my arse rubbed in a filthy urinal in my first weeks at high school, I think that was bullying: it had all the criteria, but it didn't kill me, nor was it meant to: the intention of bullying involves an ongoing sense of shame, fear and dread. You have to be alive to experience those feelings.

So I'm still trying to understand any link between bullying and gender fluidity. But I suppose you can't teach an old dog new tricks.

Cheers,

Joe