Here I was all set to knock out a Christmas column full of cheer and bonhomie but life, or more accurately, Daily Life has intervened.
I normally disapprove of intra-media byplays but Fairfax Media’s Daily Life section has become so full of cranky third wave feminism that someone needs to hold it up to the light. Among this waste of ink and kilobyte street corner psychobabble, comes a contribution from self described feminist Polly Dunning who tells her harrowing tale of giving birth to a shame boy. The good news is she’s slowly getting over it.
I’m not allowed to swear anymore, at least not at volume but this is sorely testing my already fragile grip on self-control.
At first blanch this was merely another addition from women who have recently given birth and have come to believe that having done so, they have unlocked the secrets of the universe. But on further reading this is a tale of a woman not just at war with men but also her own male child.
Full column here.
RE: BASSMAN says:
January 4, 2017 at 1:03 pm
B’Man,
I hope these facts might not be too ‘confusing and full of bewilderment …. defies logic and understanding’.
As I attempted (and obviously failed) to point out previously, your hyperbolic generalities do little to add credence to your arguments.
https://www.border.gov.au/ReportsandPublications/Documents/statistics/immigration-detention-statistics-31-mar-2016.pdf
wraith says:
January 3, 2017 at 2:11 pm
“I have a beef with the worldwide religious practices if you want to have a shot.”
If your comment was directed at my earlier post to Dismayed, I’m not qite sure what triggered the latter part of your above sentence. I was not intending to shoot anyone.
Regarding the opening part of your sentence, we are so fortunate to live in such a lucky country, you can”beef” away to your heart’s content. Whatever floats your boat Wraith.
But not so in a few other jurisdictions, eh.
@ Carl
“I was not intending to shoot anyone.”
.
No possum, no. Having a shot is a bit of aussie slang, it means, you can have a turn, get a chance to do it, speak up if you must.
You know, have a shot, give it a bit of a go.
.
Nobody was shooting anyone. 🙂
.
As for other jurisdictions where we cant have a beef, thank goodness we are not stuck in one of those, it wouldnt be nice for either of us.
cheers
wraith
January 4, 2017 at 10:27 pm
Says: “No possum, no. Having a shot is a bit of aussie slang …”
Strewth, I stuffed up, you’re spot on sport, no bones about it. There’s no flies on you Wraith.
I’m stoked, av a good one.
Carl
.
BASSMAN (January 4, 2017 at 1:05 pm)
says: “Groan! Another post so confusing and full of bewilderment it defies logic and understanding.
Crawl back.
Your response to another one of Plmo’s well considered posts belies your absolute and obvious ignorance of the issues. You do yourself no favours mate, claiming to be a retired educator, and all.
The scrapbook was bare on this occasion, eh Bassy.
I make no claims Bald.
Yvonne 11:49am.
That is a good point you raise with Bob Hawke even agrees with , go nuclear being clean and very efficient energy in time ahead.Hydro another clean energy with abundance in this country the Left are against having many billions of tons flows out into the seas with upper monsoons alive 6 months of the year.
Bob Hawke recently said SA would gain surpluses storing nuclear waste under the desert in deep bunkers taking on from other countries their waste.
This in a over populated planet and food shortage plus energy , should be considered.
Jean Baptiste (4/1, 8.38am)
Enquires: “If you consider this reply out of context or inappropriate “….. etc, etc.
When you write this stuff JB, you’re either having a laugh, or you’re dribbling out bits and pieces of a fictitious comedy sequel you’re drafting for ‘Casper the Friendly Ghost’. I twigged you were up to something like this a while back when you penned ‘the end is nigh’ chapter. You’re obviously seeking input you old fox.
Let me know when the manuscript is nearing completion and I’ll run a slide rule over it for you me old mate.
Don’t come the slippery eel with me Carl. You are in the frame, he’s got your number, dead to rights, you’re nicked sonny.
https://underground.net/the-world-will-not-be-destroyed-by-those-who-do-evil-but-by-those-who-watch-them-without-doing-anything-%E2%80%95-albert-einstein/
My postcard from Utopia.
No paradox of contemporary politics is filled with a more poignant irony than the discrepancy between the efforts of well-meaning idealists who stubbornly insist on regarding as “inalienable” those human rights which are enjoyed only by citizens of the most prosperous and civilized countries, and the situation of the rightless themselves. Their situation has deteriorated just as stubbornly, until the internment camp – prior to the second World War the exception rather than the rule for the stateless – has become the routine solution for the problem of domicile of the “displaced persons. (Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism (1951), 2004 Edition with Intro by Samantha Power, p355.
It’s lonely here.
That’s some nice work, HU.
thanks HU
Was not aware of Arendt, thanks HU. From my brief skim of her work, I gather her position is not opposition to human rights, but rather a belief that they only work in a practical sense if incorporated into domestic law. I agree with that.
But your quote illustrates two things that haven’t changed in 60 years: the treatment of refugees, and the blaming of “idealists” for failing to completely stop that treatment, rather than pragmatists for actually meting it out. I wonder how refugees would be treated without the stubborn insistence of idealists that they have rights?
Funny too, that no-one ever blames the “unalienable” rights in the US Constitution — like speech, due process, and private property — for the “situation of the rightless” in those regards. After all, how are those rights different in principle from other human rights? Well, according to Conservapedia:
“‘Human rights’ is often used interchangeably with the term ‘unalienable rights.’ The difference between these two concepts, however, is that unalienable rights are those authored by God. They are thus both irrevocable and nearly unlimited in scope.”
Uh-huh.
Dismayed (3/1, 5.42pm)
says/accuses: “You have previously told me to just “conform”. Faith and religion are 2 Very different concepts. It is only those who have given up thinking for themselves and taking responsibility for their own actions that mix the 2 up. You like the other cons here are always looking for enemies where none exist. Group think fantasy is the enemy not thinking, questioning people.”
Dismayed – my dear fellow poster, mate, friend, comrade and compatriot, I wilt at the very thought of you even thinking that we are enemies. Can we not have even the slightest of robust exchanges without you simultaneously jumping at shadows and jumping down one’s throat?
Regarding your opening claim above, I am completely unaware of ever having told you (of all blokes) to “conform”. If you point me to the passage where I have, I will immediately and unreservedly withdraw. Couldn’t be any fairer than that. In fact I dont believe I have ever instructed anyone to take such action. Its just not me, mate.
Regarding the other matter that appears to be a bur under your saddle, it is my view that religion and faith are very much interrelated. They are not “2 very different concepts” as you have posited. In a world of religion without faith, one cannot be a follower of any religion.
You obviously have a contrary view and you are welcome to it Dismayed. Just dont let it raise your BP mate. We need you around to keep us group thinkers on our toes comrade.
Don’t defame me Carl. BP 115/65 has been for years. Maybe after a big week on the drink (not very often) it goes as high as 125/75. The only time it has been higher is when the Dr used the smaller cuff. Once the larger cuff was applied it was as above. I have noticed in several of your posts you seem to “wilt” regularly, perhaps you should have yourself checked out. It may be why you fail to remember things. I wont go back through the ages of the blog but I have very good memory recall. Goodness help us. Now that is faith.
Puts “Where the bloody hell are you?” in the shade:
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/media/marketing/cu-in-the-nt-campaign-slogan-obscene-says-advertising-watchdog/news-story/42fa51c273b53e88d204992a9ccaca60
Nice one TBLS.
The insurance company Commercial Union was known by its acronym as CU. always had trouble finding someone to take the job as manager NT.
Just disgusting TBLS.
That word seems to be replacing the f word these days amongst the youth too.
Is this the one that Hillsong is still so proud of?
Are we keeping this blog going just for Rodent and Bassman to engage in arguing with each other? Come on guys, we know you go way back, but can’t you argue over the phone or Facebook or email……anywhere, but here! It’s boring, rude and totally ignores the tacit rules of blogging…..i.e don’t flood the blog with your posts. Wake me up in a few weeks when someone else is allowed a turn.
I have been wondering the same thing, Penny.
Apologies…it must STOP!! Well sed.
Au contraire! I find the exchanges between Bassman and Rodent fascinating , entertaining, fun and sometimes informative. They are a quirky ornament that adds interest to the blog and I’m not being sarcastic. They may even serve as a salutary warning on the risks in long term exposure to rock music.
I cant see how hey inhibit the free flow of opinion between those that don’t appreciate them.
And some of the comments by others are so pedestrian and tedious and simply pointless they only serve notice that the correspondent is still breathing, but so what? As long as they think they are interesting, thats all that matters.
Buck up buttercup,
and
Give ’em heaps.
Hear! Hear!
About as interesting as watching paint dry.
Jean Baptiste (3/1 4.09pm)
asks/mind-reads:
“So you are reading Einstein’s mind now?
Regardless of what Einstein had specifically in mind, there may have been a lot of other things ….. Very possibly he considered the possibility of AGW a danger to the future of the planet.”
No more than you are JB, but have you considered he may have also been warning about chooks getting eggbound me old mate?
It would seem unlikely that Einstein considered ordinary citizens ignoring egg bound chooks would be a significant factor in destroying the planet. I admit I had not even considered that possibility. ( My apologies to the word “possibility” for wielding it like drug crazed lunatic. )
You’re obfuscating. Einstein’s got your number.