View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
David
to wish impossible things
Joined: 27 Jul 2003 Location: the edge of the deep green sea
|
Post subject: | |
|
The Liberal backbenchers' tantrum has gone full toddler after their own party's review failed to uncover any dirt on Safe Schools whatsoever:
https://www.pedestrian.tv/news/arts-and-culture/coalition-mps-crack-it-after-review-of-safe-school/9a92038d-fe99-4e9f-9b89-0a5fa0ee3a43.htm
George Christensen has probably worked out by now that, while a charge of 'cultural marxism' might raise the blood pressure of subscribers to The Australian, pretty much no-one else cares about '90s culture wars. Instead, he's gone for a far safer bet: paedophiles.
http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-16/george-christensen-links-safe-schools-program-to-paedophilia/7252476
This is really cynical stuff from Christensen. Don't get me wrong: Dowsett does seem to have, at least at one point, held some rather alarming views about child abuse (you can read the whole article that Christensen quotes here). Some may think that, regardless of one's status as a respected academic with decades of experience as a researcher, such views should disqualify one from continuing on in an academic position – personally, I take the Voltairian view that the academic space should have the capacity for the expression of any and all views, no matter how outrageous. But this has nothing whatsoever to do with the validity or otherwise of the Safe Schools program.
Whatever opinions Dowsett has held or might still hold, the idea that a committee-produced school resource in 2016 could contain even the remotest endorsement of sexual abuse, or that those views could have informed its development, is ridiculous and insulting.
Still, Christensen may be on to a good thing here; there's nothing more guaranteed to whip the tabloids and shock jocks into a frenzy than an association involving paedophilia (no matter how tenuous), and it's hard to imagine that Dowsett's academic career will be unaffected by this. But it would be a disgrace if, after getting the review they wanted, the Liberal Party's homophobic bloc were permitted to damage this program in any way. _________________ "Every time we witness an injustice and do not act, we train our character to be passive in its presence." – Julian Assange |
|
|
|
|
stui magpie
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005 Location: In flagrante delicto
|
Post subject: | |
|
I read about the outcomes of the review a couple of days ago, all looked fair to me.
A few tweaks and adjustments were recommended but overall to keep it as is. I'm happy with that and yeah the full on throw the toys from the cot reaction of the far right dickwads is as funny as it is predictable. _________________ Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down. |
|
|
|
|
Jezza
2023 PREMIERS!
Joined: 05 Sep 2010 Location: Ponsford End
|
|
|
|
|
Wokko
Come and take it.
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
|
Post subject: | |
|
Scumbags. Did any of them get arrested? My guess is no. |
|
|
|
|
stui magpie
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005 Location: In flagrante delicto
|
Post subject: | |
|
Kudos to Christopher Pyne for his defence of the program. _________________ Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down. |
|
|
|
|
David
to wish impossible things
Joined: 27 Jul 2003 Location: the edge of the deep green sea
|
Post subject: | |
|
^ Agree. Seems like he held Abbott back from screwing with it "back in the olden days", too. He's gone up in my estimations.
As for Bernardi's office, looks fun, but I'm not sure it will hurt his cause much. _________________ "Every time we witness an injustice and do not act, we train our character to be passive in its presence." – Julian Assange |
|
|
|
|
David
to wish impossible things
Joined: 27 Jul 2003 Location: the edge of the deep green sea
|
|
|
|
|
swoop42
Whatcha gonna do when he comes for you?
Joined: 02 Aug 2008 Location: The 18
|
Post subject: | |
|
Turnbull has turned out to be a spineless leader.
He's actually worse than Abbott because the decisions tone made he actually believed in however bat shit they were.
As for Bernadi that couldn't happen to a nicer c$#@.
Who voted for him by the way?
Excuse my ignorance but are senators actually publicly elected or are they just party selected to fill a position.
Bernardi is just plain foul and like Harradine before him yields way to much power in comparison to how little primary vote they actually receive.
His extremist homophobic religous view point would at a guess represent 2% of the population. |
|
|
|
|
swoop42
Whatcha gonna do when he comes for you?
Joined: 02 Aug 2008 Location: The 18
|
Post subject: | |
|
http://blogs.abc.net.au/antonygreen/2016/03/first-preference-votes-for-elected-senators.html
I'm still confused.
LOL.
Personally I don't really like that individuals from all sides of politics get to hold so much power without being popularly elected to represent a certain region of a state.
It often feels like also that the people who end up in the senate are the members of that party who would be more divisive for the general public whether they be a Bernardi or Wong. _________________ He's mad. He's bad. He's MaynHARD! |
|
|
|
|
David
to wish impossible things
Joined: 27 Jul 2003 Location: the edge of the deep green sea
|
Post subject: | |
|
Actually, as a rule, the number one Senate spot for each state tends to go to corrupt factional hacks. Wong was an exception; she only got it after a popular outcry within the party when (as an established senator) she was dropped for some right-wing union ring-in. Because each major party is guaranteed of winning at least one upper house seat in each state, it's the easiest path to politics you can get, and you can pretty much only lose your plum position when your party gets sick of you (or when the next back-room factional deal takes place). So, yeah, we may be stuck with Bernardi and Abetz for good, unfortunately. They'll never have to face a one on one election like Sophie Mirabella or Wilson Tuckey did, where their dinosaur views could actually be rejected by the electorate. The only way to vote against them is to join the 3% of us who vote below the line and put them last. _________________ "Every time we witness an injustice and do not act, we train our character to be passive in its presence." – Julian Assange |
|
|
|
|
HAL
Please don't shout at me - I can't help it.
Joined: 17 Mar 2003
|
Post subject: | |
|
Next question? What was the question again? |
|
|
|
|
Pies4shaw
pies4shaw
Joined: 08 Oct 2007
|
Post subject: | |
|
David wrote: | Actually, as a rule, the number one Senate spot for each state tends to go to corrupt factional hacks. Wong was an exception; she only got it after a popular outcry within the party when (as an established senator) she was dropped for some right-wing union ring-in. Because each major party is guaranteed of winning at least one upper house seat in each state, it's the easiest path to politics you can get, and you can pretty much only lose your plum position when your party gets sick of you (or when the next back-room factional deal takes place). So, yeah, we may be stuck with Bernardi and Abetz for good, unfortunately. They'll never have to face a one on one election like Sophie Mirabella or Wilson Tuckey did, where their dinosaur views could actually be rejected by the electorate. The only way to vote against them is to join the 3% of us who vote below the line and put them last. |
Ah, yes - the "some politicians who have different views from mine are corrupt but the ones I like couldn't possibly be" theory of politics.
It's usually more accurate to say that "There are some factional hacks who have determined that their best strategy for gaining power is to back values and views with which I disagree and there are other factional hacks who have determined that their best strategy for gaining power is to back values and views with which I tend to agree". |
|
|
|
|
HAL
Please don't shout at me - I can't help it.
Joined: 17 Mar 2003
|
Post subject: | |
|
Yeah that's right. What was the question again? |
|
|
|
|
Pies4shaw
pies4shaw
Joined: 08 Oct 2007
|
Post subject: | |
|
^^^ Something about "Four legs good , two legs better", HAL. |
|
|
|
|
HAL
Please don't shout at me - I can't help it.
Joined: 17 Mar 2003
|
Post subject: | |
|
Enough about me, let's talk about the Pies. |
|
|
|
|
|