When I read stories written by Andrew Bolt I generally have two different types of reactions. Either I suspect that he's lying or wrong OR I know that he's lying or wrong. Sometimes he's not even making sense and very, very rarely do I think that he's actually right.
The story he had out yesterday was called 'Prime Minister Julia Gillard can't hide behind a skirt'.http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/opinion/prime-minister-julia-gillard-cant-hide-behind-a-skirt/story-fni0ffxg-1226666505054 It was about how he thinks that Julia Gillard is putting off male voters by unfairly accusing men of sexism. I'm not going to address everything here, just the blatant nonsense. Here it is...
Even this week, Gillard ally Nicola Roxon still hadn't learned that lesson. First the sanctimonious former attorney-general complained: "(Gillard) has been subjected to some of the most crass, silly, petty, sexist and just plain rude behaviour for years."
But in that same speech she boasted of her own sexist baiting of Opposition Leader Tony Abbott - how she'd accused him in Parliament of being weak, before holding up golf balls and leering: "I am prepared to offer him some balls."
Do Gillard's team know how such stuff grates on men? Do they realise many men would privately think, "But if I did that to a woman, my God ... "
HOW is that sexist against MEN? It sounds like she's implying that anyone who doesn't have balls also doesn't have courage. That includes all women, not men, so if anything that comment is sexist against women. The comment also implies that all men except Tony Abbott having balls is a fantastic thing. The comment was pro-balls, therefore pro men! And you're still whining about sexism against men?
As for the last paragraph where you say men are thinking 'if I did that to a woman, my god...' I don't even know what you're talking about. If I did WHAT to a woman? There's no area of the female anatomy symbolizing courage, and if there were, it would mean something different in this sociological context to accuse a woman of lacking courage than to accuse a man. There's no equivalency here.
Perhaps Bolt was saying that if a man insulted a woman and brought her body parts into it, it would be considered worse. But this ignores the fact that this 'sexist' attack only brings Tony Abbott down onto equal footing with women. Poor Tony. He was feeling so superior to women until Nicola Roxon said that. What'll he do about his dignity now?
The irony is that this article was supposed to be about Gillard and her supporters unfairly calling people sexist, and you make THIS ridiculous argument where you take a comment sexist against women and try to argue it's sexist against men, like a brazen hypocrite. The fact that you missed that concept seems to imply that don't care about sexism against woman and only care about sexism against men. That makes you a sexist.
As you are a sexist, I feel I can now comfortably ignore the rest of your stupid article as a sexist is not qualified to comment on sexism.
No comments:
Post a Comment