Ahhh, that old chestnut, "position of power".
So when Sharapova acted inappropriately by sexualising a male reporter, who was in the position of power, the lowly news reporter or the international tennis superstar?
You see, if you are going to mount a case then you need to make sure there is no double standard. I think Gale was out of line BUT I also think Sharapova was out of line but many people don't think so.
Many believe women should be able to do things that men are criticised for.
Where were they calling for Sharapova's head for doing women a disservice when she flirted with the male journo?
Everyone should read the article about this in The Australian. "To coin (part of) a phrase from our first female prime minister, we need to call out hyperbolic accusations of misogyny when we see them. Alas, a man can’t call this out. If he does, he risks fuelling more emoting over fake misogyny. There are some things that only a woman can do safely. So allow me to call out a real doozy," writes Janet Albrechtsen.
She does an amazing job at pulling this issue apart. She concludes by say ... The Proudman brouhaha is not a lesson about how we should fear for the future of our daughters. They will be just fine. It’s a reminder of how hard it is for our sons to navigate a nonsensical world where old-fashioned common sense is being trumped by postmodern feminists who wail over a compliment.
It's well worth a read.
I wonder why there is silence on the issue? There are no posts at all. Why can’t women call-out other women?
If this was a man, there would be hundreds of outraged posts calling for “his” head. And rightly so I might add, but this is a woman and there seems to be silence ONCE AGAIN, showing that women do not call-out other women on sexual crimes or domestic violence?
Why is there no outrage about this? Even when mothers murder their children there is often pity and sympathy for the woman even with a dead child HOWEVER, the same pity or sympathy is not expressed if a father murders a child.
It seems mental illness is only applicable to mothers, and a father cannot suffer the same illness. If we want domestic violence addressed we must show the same outrage to female perpetrators as we do male perpetrators. There can be no lesser crime because the offender is female. Speak up my female friends against female perpetrators just as you would do against male perpetrators.
Andrea - July 25 - Another child dies at the hands of their mother, in Newcastle. This time his throat is slit. Yes it is true that more men commit DV than women, but does that mean we should see acts of DV perpetrated by women as a lesser crime?
The "easily-outraged" want us to believe so that there are two categories of DV and one (the female crime) deserves sympathy, pity and understanding while the other (the male crime) is much worse and deserves no sympathy, pity and understanding. The evidence is there all to see, female DV can be much, much worse at times than male DV. I just wish the "easily-outraged" would acknowledge that but if they do that perhaps some of the government money will stop flowing.
Did you see that the Victorian Government just announced funding to an organisation to provide shelter and care for DOGS AND CATS when their owners are escaping family violence – yes its true! – and yet groups dealing with men who suffer at the hands of female domestic violence cannot get funding!
Go figure!
Dear Editor Mamamia,
Once again we find another child has been
died, allegedly, at the hands of their mother, this time in Newcastle
(25 July). Almost every week now we see a mother commit filicide (child
murder) and if we take into account the horror of the mother who killed
her EIGHT children, it is astonishing. It is child carnage!
More children die at the hands of their mothers than their fathers, but there seems to be silence about this on your website.
For
example, compare the outrage over Mark Latham’s comments about Rosie
Batty (160+ on the other page) to the lack of outrage over this latest case (9 on here) or female child murderers in general. Yes, that is exactly
what these women are – murderers.
Why not review and compare the
outrage by your female readers on your own website over Mark Latham’s
newspaper article. It was just an article, words – his views as a
commentator on society – but there are hundreds of negative comments
about Latham.
Enormous outrage over someone’s opinion! ... And yet there is no outrage by the same female readers when women kill children.
Who
has committed the greater crime – Mark Latham with a newspaper article
or the many mothers who have murdered their own children?
Worse,
there is often sympathy from your readers NOT for the dead children but
for the murdering mother. Read your reader’s posts and you will see all
sorts of excuses expressed for and on behalf of murdering mothers.
Do the same people offer excuses for and on behalf of murdering FATHERS? No, of course not!
Latham might be a moron in some people's views while other's say he is
on the money! But why aren't the Fems equally outraged at the murder of a
child? They are silent. Why?
The “easily-outraged” on your
website go into meltdown when a man commits family violence, or writes a
newspaper article, but when a woman slits the throat of her child or a
kills her 8 children there is deafening silence.
And if there is
some commentary it is almost always expressing concern and sympathy for
the mother! Would that happen for the father?
The
“easily-outraged” are actively creating two category of domestic
violence crimes – those that are committed by men and those they are
committed by women; and the latter is seen as a lesser crime.
I
call on the “easily-outraged” to spend less time criticising people like
Mark Latham for expressing an opinion and be just as vocal against
women who commit family violence as they are when men commit it.
By
staying silent on murdering mothers or worse, offering excuses for
them, the “easily-outraged” are offering a distraction to the wider
problems. Yes, women can suffer from mental illness and so can men. But
the “easily-outraged” will not accept that.
But please, please
PLEASE, treat women who commit domestic violence exactly the same way as
men – filicide is murder no matter what we you spin it, and more
children die at the hands of their mothers than fathers. If we refuse to
accept that some women can be just as bad as some men (sometimes
worse!) then we will not rectify this child carnage.
Don’t blame men for that!
Dear Editor Mamamia,
Once again we find another child has been died, allegedly, at the hands of their mother, this time in Newcastle (25 July). Almost every week now we see a mother commit filicide (child murder) and if we take into account the horror of the mother who killed her EIGHT children, it is astonishing. It is child carnage!
More children die at the hands of their mothers than their fathers, but there seems to be silence about this on your website.
For example, compare the outrage over Mark Latham’s comments about Rosie Batty (160+) to the lack of outrage over this latest case (9 on the other page) or female child murderers in general. Yes, that is exactly what these women are – murderers.
Why not review and compare the outrage by your female readers on your own website over Mark Latham’s newspaper article. It was just an article, words – his views as a commentator on society – but there are hundreds of negative comments about Latham.
Enormous outrage over someone’s opinion! ... And yet there is no outrage by the same female readers when women kill children.
Who has committed the greater crime – Mark Latham with a newspaper article or the many mothers who have murdered their own children?
Worse, there is often sympathy from your readers NOT for the dead children but for the murdering mother. Read your reader’s posts and you will see all sorts of excuses expressed for and on behalf of murdering mothers.
Do the same people offer excuses for and on behalf of murdering FATHERS? No, of course not!
Latham might be a moron in some people's views while other's say he is on the money! But why aren't the Fems equally outraged at the murder of a child? They are silent. Why?
The “easily-outraged” on your website go into meltdown when a man commits family violence, or writes a newspaper article, but when a woman slits the throat of her child or a kills her 8 children there is deafening silence.
And if there is some commentary it is almost always expressing concern and sympathy for the mother! Would that happen for the father?
The “easily-outraged” are actively creating two category of domestic violence crimes – those that are committed by men and those they are committed by women; and the latter is seen as a lesser crime.
I call on the “easily-outraged” to spend less time criticising people like Mark Latham for expressing an opinion and be just as vocal against women who commit family violence as they are when men commit it.
By staying silent on murdering mothers or worse, offering excuses for them, the “easily-outraged” are offering a distraction to the wider problems. Yes, women can suffer from mental illness and so can men. But the “easily-outraged” will not accept that.
But please, please PLEASE, treat women who commit domestic violence exactly the same way as men – filicide is murder no matter what we you spin it, and more children die at the hands of their mothers than fathers. If we refuse to accept that some women can be just as bad as some men (sometimes worse!) then we will not rectify this child carnage.
Don’t blame men for that!
So today (20 July) we find another child has been killed by an act of domestic violence at home. His mother has been taken to hostpital, and Police are waiting to interview her. Where is the outrage on mamamia? None.
Compare that to when a man committs domestic violence?
The author says, “This sexist Super Bowl ad treats women as meat and men as meat-heads. Instead of women complaining, it’s time men stand up to being portrayed as idiots.”
Yep, perhaps they should. AND, I hope the author will have the same stance on ads that ridicule men in favour of women.
In fact, there’s a TV commercial for a dating site where the woman attacks the man and physically assaults him because she though he said something when he didn’t.
The ad is clear, the woman mishears the man (thinking he said something) so she physically assaults him and that is meant to be funny.
Can you image what would happen if the reverse happened in a TV ad?
Can you imagine what the “easily-outraged” would do if a TV ad had a man physically assaulting a woman and it’s meant to be funny?
Then there’s the TV ad for another dating site where two young women treat men as meat, having NSA sex with them for fun. I wonder whether the author will make some commentary about that ad too.
I love the “easily-outraged” fems, they call for all sorts of things but never look in the mirror. Yes it’s a dumb ad, but why not look at all the others too.
And why not revives why, in 2015, it’s still seen as funny (and acceptable) to kick a man in the testicles.
Oh, I know, it’s because all men deserve it.
Yeah and I completely agree with you ... a man should stay silent on this issue TOO and simply accept that if they piss a woman off that she is entitled to wipe him and the kids out without any cheeky back talk from these men.
Sheeeesh … Again the “easily-outraged” go crazy over a newspaper column and yet there is no EQUAL outrage against a woman who "wiped" her own EIGHT kids. ...
Why are the “easily-outraged” so offended by someone who puts forward a logical argument and the same people have no comment on the death of 8 kids?
Do you think it could be as simple as the person expressing the view is male, and the person who killed 8 kids is female?
If the people fighting against domestic violence (a just cause) continue to make it an exclusively anti-male fight – and ignore the fact the many women commit domestic violence too (sometimes to a greater degree) then the fight will be lost.
Both men and women perpetrate violence and even though men are more often the culprits, by ignoring violent women the cause becomes anti-male and therefore you are alienating the very people you need to reach.
Read these posts and you will see that nearly all are, or sound, anti-male, when in fact women can be worse than men. There are calls NOT to blame the mother who killed her 8 kids, so who should we blame?
If a father killed his 8 kids would anyone suggest not blaming him? I doubt it … and that is the reason why making the domestic violence issue an anti-male campaign is the wrong approach.
All violence is bad whether committed by a man or a woman and the truth is, that female violence is no less a crime but you would not have that view reading this website! Again, there is extreme outrage over someone's (a man) opinion and yet there is little (or no) outrage by the person (a mother) who killed 8 kids.
Worse, some say, don't blame the mother!!! .... Astonishing, TRULY astonishing.
And yes, that's right the “easily-outraged” get to determine who has an “informed opinion” and who doesn’t. They also have a monopoly on wisdom. Everything they believe is correct and everything other people believe is wrong.
The “easily-outraged”cannot be questioned and when confronted with an opposing view they call for censorship action.
How much outrage can a simple newspaper column cause??? It is interesting to note the difference in outrage over a woman who killed 8 children?
Mark Latham is a social commentator. You may not agree with his views but he is entitled to them. However, why is it that someone’s opinion can cause such outrage when a mother, who killed eight small children, does not receive the same reaction.
Indeed, if you read the posts here on this website, about the Cairns mother, some posters offer excuses, and one actually writes - “Don’t blame the mother”.
CAN YOU BELIEVE THAT????
The “easily-outraged” are getting all worked up about someone expressing their view while others say not to blame a mother who killed her own children.
That is most interesting isn’t it? I wonder why?
Oh ... wait ... I know ... one is a male and the other female. There is incredible outrage over a man who expresses an opinion but the same people calling for him to be “banned” make no comment about a woman who killed her own, EIGHT kids!
The “easily-outraged” never seem to express the same reaction to women as they do men, and until they do they cannot expect their views to be respected.
This is more evidence of women being TOTALLY outraged about men and yet there is no outrage when women commit far worse crimes.
Latham expressed aopinion and woman killed 8 kids and the latter gets less outrage!!!
I am completed amazing at how much outrage a simple newspaper column can cause! Where is the same outrage over a woman who killed 8 children? Why is it that someone’s opinion can cause such outrage when a mother, who killed eight small children, does not receive the same reaction.
Indeed, if you read the posts here about the Cairns mother, some posters offer excuses, and one actually writes - “Don’t blame the mother”.
The “easily-outraged” are getting all worked up about someone expressing their view while others say not to blame a mother who killed her own children. CAN YOU BELIEVE THAT????
I wonder why that is?
Oh ... wait ... I know ... one is a male and the other female. Until such time the “easily-outraged” express the same reactions to women as men, then I am sorry, you cannot expect your views to be respected.
Brian I hope you would also say, >women should take note that the cowardice of violence against children and men is not the mark of a real woman, or of a civilised community< By only addressing violence by men, I will give you the benefit of the doubt that you do not condone women killing children.
That said, where is the outrage on this site over the woman who slaughtered her 8 children? EIGHT kids in one go.
You see, Brian, women can be just a violent as men, sometimes moreso!
So, even your post is not clear, I am sure you are against all violence especially against kids, and you are equally outraged when women kill their children, which they might do more often than men.
Andy the post that I mentioned below relates to the issue you raise. You mention a father killing his son ... but other people are saying more mothers kill their kids than fathers do. If it is true that more women kill kids than men do where is all the outrage about that.
Try this link ... Google... "Mothers who kills their children + Mark Latham + Craigslist"
No parent should kill a child, no man should kill a woman and no woman should kill a man. But where are the "easily-outraged" when women kills kids or men?
Latham has a right to express his opinion. However, yes I agree ... the issue is much bigger than Rosie Batty too. I was given a link to another story that raises another issue about child murder. I don't think this site allows you to post links so you will need to Goo gle
"Mothers who kill their children + Mark latham" .
The post is on CL, and raises some very interesting issues that the “easily-outraged” ignore. BUT my point was that the best way to tackle a difficult issue is not to ban/censor everyone you don't agree with. Count how many people are trying to get him banned and getting a petition signed, and yet I am sure almost all of them have not read his actual article. Rather than censoring him deal with the issue.
Where are all the “easily-outraged” when a woman kills her kids?
LOL, yep that's exactly right isn't it? A group of like-minded “easily-outraged”, all say the same thing so no other view is relevant. LMAO
90% of replies here have probably not read Latham’s story they are just going by the other “easily-outraged” THINK he says, or worse, think what he THINKS!!!
I agree with Mark Latham. He is right. It is clear that the "easily-outraged" don’t want to hear an alternative view and want him silenced - so much for free speech! - why is it that when people (including other women) who have a different view they are attacked. The difference between Mark Latham and the "easily-outraged"is that Latham would never try to stop free speech. He might criticise or even “attack” other people’s views but he ALWAYS does that in logical and methodical approach.
You may not agree with him, but that’s OK. But he would never call for the "easily-outraged" to be banned from publishing their views however the "easily-outraged" will call for his views to be banned.
I am very much sick and tired of the "easily-outraged", social media loudmouths (or turgid media as I prefer to call it) calling for everyone who does not agree with their views to be banned.
I will paraphrase someone else ( a woman) by saying: too many women pile empty claims upon ridiculous assertions which produces politically motivated bunkum. These “easily-outraged” spread false claims about victimhood and anyone who attempts to offer an alternative view must be silenced and even better if you can organise a petition against them.