Prev
Next

Women can critique each other without a catfight

Lauren Rosewarne

by Lauren Rosewarne

01 Mar 05:50am

Must Reads

Abbott’s crass logic: trash the Parliament in order save it - this is a caption

Abbott’s crass logic: trash the Parliament in order save it

180

Our special forces don’t always need special treatment - this is a caption

Our special forces don’t always need special treatment

27

A good holiday is about unrest, not rest - this is a caption

A good holiday is about unrest, not rest

3

Filed under: Afl, Feminism, Ricky Nixon, Scandal, Sex, Society, Women

106 comments

From the very second those stolen/borrowed nudie rompin’ footballer photos were released, the “St Kilda schoolgirl story” has had me biting my tongue.

Photo: Herald Sun.

I bit down through the girl’s distribution of those handwritten “Women’s Rights” and “Fight the Power” flyers at the training session. Bit down a little more watching her YouTube testimonials. And while reading her Tweets. And her blog. And I bit down a whole lot more through her drip-drip video releases.

I bit down because biting down is exactly what’s expected of me. Women just aren’t supposed to criticise other women. Least of all not 17-year-old girls.

This article isn’t really about the St Kilda debacle. It’s precisely not about the scandal because stronger than my compulsion to write about it is the pressure I feel to zip my lips. Instead, this article is about the silence that many women – many feminists – feel we need to uphold when it comes to the curious behaviour of our sisters.

A couple of weeks ago I wrote an article about what I considered to be the PM’s parliamentary crocodile tears. Among the reader comments were digs about catfights. About women apparently revelling in the opportunity to slag each other off. Strange comments about the addiction we all apparently have to bitching. To mocking. To showing scorn.

Evidently, there’s only one possible reading of one woman criticising another and that’s the catfight angle. A narrative we’re all too familiar with.

Women are continually told that we’re our own worst enemy. In my private life men have repeatedly dared suggest to me – completely unsolicited - that only women care about skinniness. That only women remember what anyone’s wearing. That only women call each other sluts.

This kind of rubbish, this kind of hideous perpetuation of the worst gender stereotypes, works to serve one very insidious agenda. One that involves silencing women, one that involves punishing them for expressing an opinion and one which works to reduce women’s commentary to schoolyard dribble.

As I expressed in a dozen or so media interviews back in June, I am thoroughly delighted that we have a female PM. But. Our PM’s gender doesn’t dilute the fact that I’m a media commentator. Her gender doesn’t make me less of a writer, less of a political scientist, less readily inclined to criticise her manipulation by image consultants. Even when we both possess a vagina.

Not everything is a gender issue. Not every criticism made by a woman is grounded in bitchiness, jealousy or vitriol. Not every comment is motivated by an innate need to jump into a vat of jelly and wrestle until we’re spent.

As the St Kilda schoolgirl story unfolds, I’ve been biting my tongue and cringing and watching coverage through slightly parted fingers.

My behaviour is underpinned by being all too aware that the very second I dare speculate on motives, dare use words like entrapment or media pimps or men’s magazine covers that I know exactly the direction that reader criticism will head.

Even if I’d just be saying what a good lot of us are thinking.

So instead, I play a different game. One that involves reminding myself that the St Kilda schoolgirl is only 17. Reminding myself that she probably was screwed over by some halfwit players. I keep reminding myself that wanting a cover shoot with Ralph for one’s 18th birthday is as legitimate an aspiration as any other. I keep reminding myself that feminists fought for her right to make her own choices. I keep telling myself live and let live.

Sending myself such memos is no easy feat.

The same zeigeist that encourages detractors to pounce on any woman daring to criticise another is the very same one that dictates that today choice reigns supreme. That to dare suggest some choices might be a little dodgy is nothing short of wowserism.

I say this precisely because I am exactly the kind of female writer who constantly advocates choice, even those choices which conflict with my values and politics and sense of taste.

My criticisms of the PM’s waterworks were underpinned by my own distaste for orchestrated emotion. It wasn’t a gender issue.

The St Kilda scandal is a gender issue. A gender issue just as much as it is a junk news issue, a new technology issue and a spurned love issue. I’ll just need a little longer before I can brave the wrath and the anti-feminist clichés that will follow any critique I dare write.

Most commented

431Australia, you have nothing to fear but fear itself
390There's no one Thomson won't burn to save his skin
336Animal experiments won't cure me from cancer
313Thomson didn't answer the question everyone is asking
266Who murdered the Arts degree?
231South Australia. It's the middle bottom bit.
231Craig Thomson speaks. Meanwhile, in Australia...
223The world puzzles over Australia's Prime Minister

106 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • Erick says:

      04:58am | 01/03/11

      Oh, poor you. Women hold a privileged position in our society - they can criticise men from the biggest platforms in the mass media, while they are themselves immune to retaliation from men.

      Just to take one example, here at The Punch we are treated to feminist articles like this every second day. Feminist complaining about objectification, feminists complaining about an imaginary pay gap, and of course, feminists complaining loudly about being silenced.

      But where are the voices in opposition? During two years of reading this blog, I have seen just one article that mildly criticises feminism. All the rest of the dissenting views are from the comments sections. Most journalists are feminists, and feminist voices dominate the media. And education. And the government.

      Yet still you complain about being silenced, or being criticised for speaking out. Try putting forward a men’s rights position - then you’ll know what it’s really like to be personally abused and told to shut up.

      Reply

    • BJ says:

      07:05am | 01/03/11

      People don’t abuse you and tell you to shut up because you’re a bloke Erick. They do it because your comments fall into the troll category. Maybe when you have something genuine to add to a debate, that isn’t venomous bile, people will listen & not tell you to keep quiet

    • Jugg says:

      08:05am | 01/03/11

      Here, here Erick.  I wonder how the male journo’s feel when they look in the mirror?

    • eva cos says:

      08:08am | 01/03/11

      Erick illustrates the problem very clearly. women are not a single group, nor are men, and both cover behaviors that range from virtuous to evil. I do not see many articles by men on the problems of masculinity, or criticisms of other men being claimed as dogfights. I agree with Lauren, there is the assumption women should be always nice to each other? Why? we need to disagree as men do and have that accepted as normal.

    • Jugg says:

      08:11am | 01/03/11

      Adding to your point Erick:

      Have you noticed how many articles have come out criticising the football club, the football players, the football manager and how many have come out questioning this girls motives, character and morals?

      Automatically slanted against, surprise, surprise, the ‘men’, yet no one mentions this calculating and manipulative female (for want of a better word).

    • AliceC says:

      08:13am | 01/03/11

      Oh poor you Erick. Please provide one example where you personally (and I’m talking in your life, not in blogs or comments) have been negatively affected by femanism. An actual example.

    • Tom says:

      09:00am | 01/03/11

      @BJ and AliceC, thanks for proving Eric’s last sentence.

    • Jack says:

      09:08am | 01/03/11

      Careful Jugg, you are suggesting indirectly that women should be held accountable for their actions and the blindingly obvious situations that they put themselves into.

    • Zoe says:

      09:42am | 01/03/11

      @Jugg. .. This example of the St Kilda photos shouldnt be about male vs female. Every case is different. I have raised my daughter with the advise that although there is no excuse for rape assault etc There are certain things she should do to avoid putting herself in danger in the first place,  eg dont dress like a slut, get drunk and grind all over strangers. It might go against womens rights to do anything they want without repercussion but I dont really care.
      In the footy case its more an issue of age. I’m just as discusted when I hear of a female teacher etc sleeping with a teenage male 20 years her junior. Older people should not take advantage of teenagers who, lets face it, arent always the smartest beings on earth. Does that make me ageist?

    • Hislop says:

      09:48am | 01/03/11

      Erick surely you’ve figured it out by now

      Everything a woman say, does or thinks must be automatically praised -sorry, be supportive of - and she must be validated.

      To do otherwise means you are a misogynist. This is because women were oppressed and forced to make babies and clean houses paid for by their husbands.

    • Aasq says:

      09:49am | 01/03/11

      Oh, poor you, Eric.

      Here at The Punch, not every second, but every single day, we are treated to comments like this from you. No wonder you feel so sorry for yourself.

    • Helen says:

      10:32am | 01/03/11

      [ I have raised my daughter with the advise that although there is no excuse for rape assault etc There are certain things she should do to avoid putting herself in danger in the first place,  eg dont dress like a slut, get drunk and grind all over strangers. It might go against womens rights to do anything they want without repercussion but I dont really care. ]

      “Zoe”, truly disgusting. If your daughter should ever suffer rape or sexual assault not in the “approved manner” (in a dark alleyway and preferably with a weapon, but presumably you’d then be asking her why she was walking past the alleyway in the first place), you’ll be adding an inestimable amount to her trauma.
      Get some education please. 90% of rapes occur with someone known to the victim. That might be a start. Disgusting.

    • Brian says:

      11:03am | 01/03/11

      “Helen”, truly despicable. You have taken the words of someone and totally twisted them. Zoe has given some examples of unfortunately necessary precautions, and you’ve somehow turned that into the concept that she would not support her daughter if she were raped. If I tell my son that he should lock his car and make sure he has a quick look around when he leaves it to ensure it’s safe, does that mean that I wouldn’t commiserate with him when it was stolen?

      Somehow you’ve managed to make the jump from reasonable advice which ANY parent should give their child (It’s sad that we need the advice, but we do) to assumed actions after that advice has proven insufficient. There is precious little we can do to protect our adult children, but advice like Zoe apparently gives is certainly one of those things.

      And I still don’t get how Zoe’s advice has anything to do with ~who~ performs the rape - much like any precaution, it will only protect against a limited set of circumstances, but that doesn’t mean I don’t get the measles vaccine just because it doesn’t prevent AIDS.

    • so much to ponder says:

      11:18am | 01/03/11

      Is Helen critiquing when she is being catty in reply to Zoe? Is it being catty just because it doesn’t sound supportive of the instructions Zoe has given her daughter so far. Is Helen a woman or a man or a lemur in disguise?

    • Sad Sad Reality says:

      11:23am | 01/03/11

      @Aasq, maybe Eric is trying to even the ledger a little.

    • Erin says:

      11:38am | 01/03/11

      Brian,
      Comparing being raped to having your car stolen is probably quite offensive to everyone who has ever been raped.

    • Squeeze the Middle says:

      01:02pm | 01/03/11

      @ Eva. You ask ‘Why?’ It’s simply really IMO. Because men are.  I.e. men ARE generally nicer to other men than women are to each other. (And in no way am I suggested that this is a conscious decision)

      And a group working in unison will almost always end up better off than a goup that doesn’t. And, in general, men, through necessity, seem to be better at working in unison than women.  (Whether for the right reasons or the wrong reasons.  Consciously or subconsciously.)

      Men relate to men differently from the way women relate to women IMO.  Not much different.  But enough to make a big cumulative difference to society. Why?  I don’t know.  I could take a guess based on my life experience and all those wildlife doccos I’ve watched.  Men are more likely to get quickly (probably physically) sorted if we aren’t nice to that guy at the pub, beach, game, shops, etc. So we are more careful about picking fights. (Is this such a bad thing in the end when men can work together to take down the thugs?)  I.e. men’s weakness (e.g. violence) has become our strength? While their altercations are more violent, there’s less of them.

      Am happy to be proven wrong. My reading of Wikipedia’s entries on feminism and feminist theory haven’t changed my opinion. Maybe I need to reread my copy of The Female Eunuch.

      Maybe more brawling (figurative) between women will be a good thing. Because the feminising of men hasn’t worked.  All that’s happened is that the more aggressive men have had an easier time of pushing the less aggressive men aside.  Like Gresham’s law. I.e. if men are currency then bad men push out the good.

    • Pop says:

      01:03pm | 01/03/11

      Erin - love your work, that was funny. Now to grab popcorn and was satire-humour deprived people flame you.

    • Direct says:

      01:04pm | 01/03/11

      @Erin, you displaying your inability to comprehend a logical argument and misconstruing Brian’s argument is offensive to all rational people.

    • Aasq says:

      01:37pm | 01/03/11

      Oh, poor you, Sad Sad Sack.

      So, if Eric posts comments like this every single day, blubbing about articles like this, (on his own assessment), every second day, then how would that be trying to “even the ledger a little” ?

      You’re obviously just feeling a bit sorry for yourself too. HTFU.

    • Erick says:

      02:51pm | 01/03/11

      @Aasq - Since you asked:

      (1) I don’t post comments like this every single day. The second Thursday in the month is my day off.

      (2) Comments have only a tiny proportion of the impact of articles. Or even headlines. Most people don’t even bother to read the comments.

      So my efforts, despite how much they may enrage you, are hardly on a par with the endless feminist drone in the mainstream media.

    • Tim says:

      02:57pm | 01/03/11

      Aasq,
      you do know the difference between comments and articles right?
      Which do you think have more prominence?
      Evening out the ledger would be to stop posting ridiculously illogical feminist rants or at least post one article about men’s issues every once in a while.
      Maybe you should be telling the author to HTFU?

    • J.R says:

      03:40pm | 01/03/11

      Oh god, not you again. Would you shut that sexist trap of yours already? It’s getting old. I know it’s hard to have your masculinity threatened by a woman that wont let you beat and harrass her, but this is getting seriously pathetic. Grow up and get out.

    • Jugg says:

      04:07pm | 01/03/11

      Zoe,

      No problem at all with your position.  Have you heard anyone discussing the virtues of the female involved?  Why haven’t they?

    • Aasq says:

      06:17pm | 01/03/11

      Your comments don’t enrage me in the slightest, Eric. They might make me feel sorry for you, if you weren’t already doing that so demonstrably for yourself. Having said that, I can see why you do; there’s nothing weaker than a man who blames all of his inadequacies on women.

    • Erin says:

      09:20am | 04/03/11

      @Direct
      I comprehended the argument fine. In fact I didn’t disagree with it at all. All I said was the comparison was quite insensitive. Comparing sexual assault to property theft instead of sexual assault offends people. It is equating the damage done to the victims of property theft to the damage done to the victims of sexual assault.

      Also, I didn’t misconstrue Brian’s argument. Pointing out the above does not in any way change his argument. All I said was he was insensitive in the way he communicated it.

    • TChong says:

      07:07am | 01/03/11

      Thats a rather bemusing legacy of feminism- censorship.
      Women ( like Lauren) feel presured not to say anything, no matter how big the indescetion , or fail, if commited by women.
      Feminism allows no dissent.
      Now, who woulda thunk it?

      Reply

    • Nullarbor Nymph says:

      07:25am | 01/03/11

      What irks me is the media’s insistence on referring to this young woman as a schoolgirl, if she is not attending school then she is no longer a schoolgirl! Please use another appellation if it is necessary to continue to write about this person!

      Reply

    • Zoe says:

      09:23am | 01/03/11

      It’s because the players met her at a school footy clinic. When this all started she was a schoolgirl. They knew how old she is.
      If she had snuck into a club and lied about her age, I wouldnt blame the players involved at all.
      Dont get me wrong. I love footy, and I know there are women in clubs who persue players and later, when dumped,  cry victim. But every case is different. These players and even worse Ricky Nixon is getting the whole code a bad name. Plenty of footy players do a lot of good work which doesnt make headlines the way this has.
      The fact that shes one messed up, scheming nutter doesnt change the fact that she is only 17.

    • BK says:

      02:12pm | 01/03/11

      @Zoe

      Yes, every case is different. I reserve my sympathy for the next young woman who claims to be sexually assaulted by a footballer. Maybe the next case will be quite different, but after these incidents, public opinion will be quite sceptical from the very start.

    • Tedd says:

      07:32am | 01/03/11

      I have no doubt women can critique each other without a cat fight. The thing that annoys me is simply illustrated with Juliar. Ever since she took power by betrayal we here critiques about her fashion sense, hair cut, etc, etc. Then we have women complaining that it is unfair how she is judged on her outward clothing, etc and that this would not happen with a male PM (sexist anti male BS). News flash women, YOU are the ones critiquing her and YOU are the ones complaining about it. Guys on the whole don’t care about her fashion sense, all we care about is how she got there (whether se earned it on merit) and how well (or otherwise) she performs her job.

      Reply

    • Blind Freddy says:

      07:47am | 01/03/11

      Boo Hoo! It’s all mens fault- trying to silence the sisters! Bwaa waaa . . . snuffle . . . sniff . . . sniff . . .?

      Reply

    • iansand says:

      07:57am | 01/03/11

      Message to Lauren:  They are not women.  They are human beings.  That will get rid of your angst.

      Reply

    • Your Uncle Bob says:

      08:15am | 01/03/11

      Erick is absolutely right. This article is seriously unbalanced. The whole militant women’s solidarity thing is so boringly 1970s. Time to move on for heaven’s sake. Gender Shmender. Female this, women that. Enough of that rot. It’s positively dripping in a deranged, militant ideology.

      Reply

    • Huey says:

      08:25am | 01/03/11

      Come on Lauren, stop self-censoring. Let ‘er rip. Strip away the titillating aspects of this ongoing reality soap and tell us what you REALLY think. Please?

      Reply

    • Likes Joining Dots says:

      04:04pm | 01/03/11

      Huey

      Good point.  This is like the Punch/Counter Punch articles, except we only have one side.

      Lauren, ‘let ‘er rip’ with a counter punch in the next few days.

    • Markus says:

      08:27am | 01/03/11

      Women can’t criticise other women? What the hell world are you living in?

      Women do nothing BUT criticise other women. When they aren’t blaming men for everything, of course.

      Reply

    • KH says:

      10:34am | 01/03/11

      Its not the criticism that is the problem - it is the labelling of it as a ‘catfight’ thus implying that the criticism is not valid, and there is some personal motivation for it that involved jealousy or some other emotion.  Criticism and commentary doesn’t always have these kinds of motivations.

      If someone wants to bed thousands of people, its no ones business but theirs - however some of the girl referred to in the articles’ behaviour borders on the bizarre and should not be beyond criticism - blackmailing people using the internet as a weapon is not the kind of behaviour one would expect from a mature adult in possession of their faculties - men tend to not to criticise her for fear of being labelled ‘sexist’, and women are not doing it because the label is ‘bitch fight’ or something of that nature, instead of merely being accepted as a comment about behaviour that is, really, unacceptable, no matter who is doing it. 

      The whole saga is amongst birds of a feather, as far as I am concerned - reading about it has been like opening a window into a murky world that most of us have no interest in visiting.  All of the protaganists have displayed various degrees of appalling behaviour, including the football players, the managers, the AFL and the girl herself.  None of them have much to be proud of really..

    • MK says:

      12:58pm | 05/03/11

      There is a huge difference btween ebign Catty/Bitchy and a catfight
      they are practially completely different things, it has nothing to do with wrestling in Jello, Low blow there Lauren in a feeble strawman attempt
      I dont know anyone but Lauren the only one pushing the catfight angle,

    • red corner says:

      08:27am | 01/03/11

      “Not every comment is motivated by an innate need to jump into a vat of jelly and wrestle until we’re spent.”

      sigh, that’s a shame, Grandma likes taking on new comers.

      Reply

    • AdamC says:

      08:40am | 01/03/11

      Lauren, are you serious?

      I haven’t noticed any shortage of women criticising this “St Kilda Schoolgirl”, nor do I recall female commentators holding back on questioning the authenticity of the ‘Real’ Julia’s really convenient bout of emotion. Aside from a few internet comments (which, as well as talk radio callers, is what people cite when they got nothin’) do you have any sort of evidence that actual, non-online people think in the way you imagine they do?

      I suspect that you are projecting your own personal issues onto society at large.

      Reply

    • Phil says:

      08:55am | 01/03/11

      Yes because its always a mans fault isnt it, you poor thing.
      The catty looks you give each other after looking another woman up and down anywhere from random strangers on the street, train, shopping centres or anywhere else.
      The need to gossip about one another (even your closest friends), the even stronger need to start problems over nothing, back-stab and then recruit half the office or social group to your side as that slag doesnt deserve people to talk to her etc.. maybe its the drama you are all so addicted to?
      Your lack of ability to get your problems (even the petty small ones) off your chest and dealt with, with the person your problem is with (another woman) in a civilised manner if at all.

      Cant remember the last time I encountered the same kind of childish behaviour from a straight male.

      This is nothing new and wont change in a hurry, look at all those tacky woman’s mags just full of gossip and judgement for each other.
      You are your own worst enemy but apparently its our fault?

      Go figure.

      Reply

    • Sid says:

      10:34am | 01/03/11

      But don’t you love sitting in front of the tv listening to the wife and 20 year old daughter verbally shredding the women in reality shows with deep intellectual comments like “she’s fat”, “she has no fashion sense”, “she’s ugly”, you get the drift. Then if you are foolish enough to make a comment like, “that girl made a stupid choice” you get call opinionated, black and white, etc. Some women have no idea!!!

    • Zoe says:

      09:09am | 01/03/11

      Are you joking? All the comments i’ve read have been totally blaming the teen. From men and very loudly from women too.
      I have used the term “teen” rather than “girl” or “woman” because that seems to be such an issue with people. I once read somewhere that the most savage animal on the planet is the teenage girl. I had a laugh at this because in many cases its true. I know. I was a teenage girl. I’ve witnessed some very nasty ones. I’ve raised one as well (not a particularly nasty one although not perfect either). And comforted her at times when she was victim as most mums do at that age. (My son is a totally different experience. He’s more likely to get in a fight and be over it soon after. He asked me the other day why two girls in his high school class had picked mercilessly on another girl. The next day the victim was mates with one of the girls and the other one was being hounded. His comment..“Why cant all three be friends? I just dont get girls”)
      Problem is they have the body of a woman, young and attractive. But still the brain of a child!  If stupid, mature (allegedly) men go there, and get outsmarted by a hormonal nutjob, they get what they deserve.
      Just say what you think. There are very obvious differences between men and women. Some good, some bad. Its obvious from when they are very small.
      It works both ways. If you critisize Lara Bingle, it must be because you are jealous.
      If a man says Julia Gillard is doing a bad job, they are being sexist. You cant win.

      Reply

    • Sad Sad Reality says:

      09:55am | 01/03/11

      Zoe, watch Media Watch. They showed without a shadow of a doubt, that this “girl” deliberately set Ricky Nixon up. She was in negotiations with several papers before she even had the footage. She was in regular contact, recording several videos until she finally captured a clear shot of his face. Victim? Ah ha ha ha ha! She’s a cold calculating cow. She admitted as much. Cheering and celebrating that she had her revenge.

      “Problem is they have the body of a woman, young and attractive.”

      There’s your problem. It’s not the brain of a child that is the concern. It is the brain of a woman attached to an attractive body that is the true path to cruelty. Women wield good looks like a machine gun, no matter their age. Morality is a male invention, and for women, a fiction.

    • AdamC says:

      10:08am | 01/03/11

      “She’s a cold calculating cow.”

      What a strange image.

      Of course, being scheming, nasty and vengeful does not reukle out also being immature, due to young age. There is no doubt that teenagers often fail to properly assess the consequences of their actions.  That’s not to make excuses for the girl, it is just to acknowldge that she is just a girl.

    • Sad Sad Reality says:

      10:40am | 01/03/11

      “Of course, being scheming, nasty and vengeful does not reukle out also being immature, due to young age.”

      Ah yes, accountability avoidance. Old enough to seduce a man and record him with the sole aim of ruining his career, old enough to wear the consequences for mine.

    • Warren says:

      12:07pm | 01/03/11

      @Sad Sad Reality I suppose you think the media forced the 47 year old Nixon to take alcohol to a 17 year old’s hotel room & drop his pants.

    • Markus says:

      12:32pm | 01/03/11

      @Warren, I don’t see anything SSR has written that has defended the stupid actions of a man who is old enough to know better.

      He was just pointing out the hypocricy that while Nixon is now paying for his poor decision, St Kilda girl is yet to suffer any real recourse for hers (short of some online comments about how much of a bitch she is).

    • Sad Sad Reality says:

      12:38pm | 01/03/11

      Warren, not at all. The guy is a scumbag. He’s a low life. But so is she. Why do we only feel the need to pedestalise women. If it was a 17 year old guy with a 40+ powerful woman, no one would bat an eye. He’d be seen as a legend, and she an empowered cougar going after what she wants. You can’t have it both ways.

    • Mahhrat says:

      12:53pm | 01/03/11

      @Warren: It is perhaps unfortunate, but apart from the drugs and the appalling bad decision making, nothing Mr Nixon is alleged to have done appears to be against any law.

      Is it wrong?  Of course, but he doesn’t deal in right and wrong, he deals in money and law.  The two are not the same thing.  He’ll be back in 5 years and sell his story for more than it’ll cost him in salaries.

    • Warren says:

      02:25pm | 01/03/11

      I think its a joke to attack a young woman however mixed up she might be, when a multi million dollar industry, with access to the media and their own PR machine manges to stuff up their own image so badly.

      Peter Costello is right, I wouldn’t let my daughter near these numpties, nor for that matter, anywhere near SSR with his school yard values.

    • Sad Sad Reality says:

      02:57pm | 01/03/11

      Warren, you’re right to not let her anywhere near me. That’s just good parenting.

    • Tim says:

      03:03pm | 01/03/11

      Warren,
      I don’t think you can “Let” your daughter do anything.
      What a disgusting, outdated attitude you have.
      Get back to the 1950’s.

    • Warren says:

      03:42pm | 01/03/11

      It’s called parenting Tim.

    • bobw says:

      09:09am | 01/03/11

      So a few anonymous morons jumped to the silly conclusion that your Drum piece was motivated by pure cattiness.  Big deal.  It hardly justifies the totally overblown claim that “evidently, there’s only one possible reading of one woman criticising another and that’s the catfight angle”.

      If I were you, I’d be more concerned about the many comments to the effect that the Drum piece was:  (a) pointless, in the sense that it dealt with a non-issue; or (b) unrigorous, in the sense that your allegation of fakery was radically under-explained.  Both of these criticisms are perfectly arguable, and neither is linked to your gender - unless, of course, you’re suggesting that they wouldn’t have been made at all had the article been posted under the name “Bob Ellis”?

      For anyone interested, the piece referred to is here:

      http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/43782.html

      Reply

    • BK says:

      01:58pm | 01/03/11

      This isn’t just about one article on the drum. There is a broader pattern of social pressure that acts to discourage any critique of any woman’s behaviour. Either it is seen as controlling or undermining her right to make choices, or it is seen as bitchiness. Comments about our behaviour are a part of life.

    • bobw says:

      02:37pm | 01/03/11

      Perhaps, BK.  But I find it problematic that Lauren uses the responses to the Drum piece as a rhetorical platform for her claim that the “catfight” narrative is ubiquitous when it’s clear that a preponderance of the comments critical of the piece do not, in fact, mesh with that narrative.  Sure, a couple do, but outliers don’t make a trend (not to mention that unhinged comments are a fact of life on the internet, and should in general be ignored).  If there’s a “broader pattern” here, then the Drum example is a poor illustration of it, and reliance on it makes the whole argument look slipshod.

    • Tim says:

      09:10am | 01/03/11

      The author suggests that women can’t critique other women without being accused of bitchiness?
      Well try being a man critiquing the illogical arguments put forward ad nauseum by some feminists. Shaming and personal abuse are the most common tactics.
      Here on the Punch even - write a well though out response that disagrees with a feminist article and watch it get censored while personal abuse is apparently legitimate debate.

      Reply

    • LauraBoBaura says:

      03:33pm | 01/03/11

      Just admit it Tim, you hate women don’t you!
      smile

    • Tom says:

      04:22pm | 01/03/11

      Laurawhatever, ... “Shaming and personal abuse are the most common tactics.”

    • LauraBoBaura says:

      04:55pm | 01/03/11

      Tom - I was taking the piss man.
      Lighten up.. mkaaay?

    • fred says:

      09:24am | 01/03/11

      And somehow, while stridently claiming that you “won’t criticise” the 17 year old, you manage to leave us all with very little doubt about your perspectives on the situation.

      Well played.

      Reply

    • Sam says:

      12:44pm | 01/03/11

      Well played indeed.

    • Sad Sad Reality says:

      09:35am | 01/03/11

      No one should criticise women. They are beyond reproach. Where us men are violent savages, women are paragons of virtue and nurturing. That’s why they wear the ripped stockings and war paint and regularly hook up with thugs. What’s that? A child is more likely to be murdered by its mother than its father? There are a staggering amount of false rape claims made every year that forever tarnish the reputations of the men involved even though they are innocent? Often the women making false rape allegations get off with a slap on the wrist after destroying a man’s future? Spousal abuse in lesbian relationships is higher than it is in the rest of the community? Women instigate 70% of divorces (See Eat. Pray. Love. for the non-selfish-cow justifications)? The Family Court grants custody of children to women by an overwhelming majority? Women that molest underage boys regularly evade custodial sentences? That can’t be. Misprint. Arrest whoever wrote this. Filthy man.

      Most women are like Martin Bryant’s mum, completely incapable of holding themselves accountable for their moronic choices. This is why footballers will always have hot wives and why most single mothers will never admit they probably shouldn’t have gambled on a locally renowned player hanging around after the bun hit the oven.

      Like IMAX, a woman’s mind is all about one thing - projection. Most of what feminism does is take a desire by women (control, rape, objectification, selfishness) and transfer it to men, so they can pretend to be upset about it while simultaneously being titillated. 

      Thus when some leathery old femo screams, “All heterosexual sex is an act of rape!” She’s really saying, “God I’d love to be tag teamed by a gang of sweaty bikers!”

      And when a woman can’t look at anything in the world without presupposing some evil patriarchal bent, she’s really just telling you what she’d do if she was in power. Hint: Hitler was a choirboy by comparison.

      Reply

    • Hanging Judge says:

      09:55am | 01/03/11

      Bzzzt Godwin’s law - you lose.

    • Sarah says:

      12:31pm | 01/03/11

      I’d like to assume that this is a sarcastic rant, but I have a strong feeling you actually believe this. This is where feminism came from to start with and some people are so scared of women being able to stand up and have an opinion, that they blindly attack and twist their words around to the point where they’ve managed to discredit the person without even bothering to hear what they have to say.

      It’s still a man’s world whether you pretend to believe it’s not is your call. Attractive, powerful women are constantly having to deal with a barrage of criticism. “she slept her way to the top…” Even if it’s true, which it usually isn’t, powerful men have to be manipulative too to make their way up the ladder. But the attacks on women always seem to be personal. “why doesn’t she have children?” “she works too much to look after her children” I’ve even heard “women wanting to have a career is a joke, realistically they will last five years and then run off to have kids…”

      “Most women are like Martin Bryant’s mum, completely incapable of holding themselves accountable for their moronic choices.” Do you actually believe this? Are you married to a woman like this? If so, I’d say that was your moronic choice.

      “most single mothers will never admit they probably shouldn’t have gambled on a locally renowned player hanging around after the bun hit the oven” - Yes, luckily for “the player” it all comes down to how the woman was irresponsible. It takes two people. That’s TWO people, both people have responsibilities once a baby comes along, why is it more often then not single mother, not single father?

    • Mahhrat says:

      12:59pm | 01/03/11

      @Sarah, I’m not going to tell you you’re always wrong, because the things you describe certainly do happen.

      I’d like to offer up a thought though - where do you suppose most of such “personal criticism” of women comes from?

      I’ll offer you this thought - when guys get into dispute, they tend to settle it directly.  Once settled, they generally get along pretty well with each other.  Most of the time, it’s over perceived territory, as men are generally territorial in nature.

      These are all sweeping generalisations, but in my humble experience it’s very rare for personal attacks to be made by a male - we tend to play the ball, not the “man”.  Women I’ve known far more target the personality, probably because they understand such personality traits better.

    • Markus says:

      01:05pm | 01/03/11

      @Sarah, attractive, and not so attractive, powerful men are constantly having to deal with the exact same barrage of criticism.
      Guys like Kyle Sandilands regularly receive death threats (I don’t care how unbearable he is, that kind of behaviour is ridiculous).
      The difference is that they acknowledge it is part and parcel of being a public figure and actually deal with it, rather than complain that someone disagreed with them because they are a man.

      ‘I’ve even heard “women wanting to have a career is a joke, realistically they will last five years and then run off to have kids…” ‘
      The statistics of female university graduates indicate that this is the most likely outcome, with the majority permanently withdrawing from fulltime or all work within 5 years of graduating. Since when is commenting on a real labour market trend a personal attack?

    • LauraBoBaura says:

      01:16pm | 01/03/11

      Obvious troll is obvious.
      SSR: Did you just admit to reading ‘Eat Pay Love’?

    • Sad Sad Reality says:

      01:30pm | 01/03/11

      Sarah, so good to see your rationalisation hamster is healthy and happy.

      “It’s still a man’s world whether you pretend to believe it’s not is your call.”

      Yeah, I agree. Because we designed and built it. Women weren’t capable. And still aren’t. Hence affirmative action. Without a helping hand, we’d have even fewer women in positions of power than we do today. Men aren’t trying to oppress women, their natural inclinations and biology however… I can’t explain the shockingly low numbers of female rocket scientists, must be the male-centric way science is taught in school. Change it now!

      ‘“why doesn’t she have children?” “she works too much to look after her children”’

      Personally, I don’t care if a woman has children. I do care if she raises those children to become criminal drains on my tax dollars. And, Sarah, parental neglect is right at the top of that list. So make your choice, and stick by it. Most women do. And they don’t choose a career. They took a recent poll and up to 70% of working women said they’d rather stay at home with their children than work. Fluke? Probably.

      “realistically they will last five years and then run off to have kids…”

      Do you know how many people are born each year? Each one of those babies emerges from a woman. So yes the odds are pretty good that she’ll want to have kids at some point. The majority of women do. Those that don’t are seen as outliers, with good reason, they are.

      “Do you actually believe this?”

      Why yes. But you are mistaken. I am not married, and I wasn’t inferring that married women are like this, I was stating, clearly, that all women are like this - AKA completely unable to hold themselves responsible for their messed up choices. Thus when a woman falls head over heels for a guy that looks like he stepped out of an exhibit on the Paleolithic era we are all supposed to feign surprise when he beats her up. Is this guy a low life? Yep. Is the girl a princess? No, she’s a moron.

      “Yes, luckily for “the player” it all comes down to how the woman was irresponsible.”

      Thanks for proving my point.

      Everyone knows the player is a scumbag. His mum, his dad, the bus driver that takes him to work. The seven girls he has on rotation in the office. The only one who doesn’t realise, until an unwanted child is born into a loveless home, is his alpha-idolising girlfriend. I tell every man I know to pour hot sauce into their used condoms to prevent just this situation. Most women are too deceitful to gamble your future on their concept of “birth control.” There are many reasons to have a child. Trying to keep your boyfriend from leaving, or trying to get revenge on a one night stand that didn’t turn into the whirlwind romance you expected are not two of them.

      “why is it more often then not single mother, not single father?”

      Because courts rarely grant men custody. And because the real way to a woman’s heart is through a man’s wallet.

    • Sarah says:

      01:40pm | 01/03/11

      @Mahhrat I’m not saying that all the criticism comes from men, by any means, but I’m just trying to point out that is is often hard for women when they do get into those positions because it feels like they are being attacked from every angle. While it’s accepted that men rise smoothly through the ranks, when women do, they are viewed with suspicion. Often times it comes down to jealousy too, on both men and women’s parts, but for men it seems it can be emasculating to be overtaken professionally by a woman. This brings in a gender argument that doesn’t need to be there because the promotion was given on merit.

      @Markus It’s a personal attack because the person delivering it wasn’t intending it to to be a simple observation of a common market trend. If that was the case, I wouldn’t have taken issue with it, the point was pretty much that women shouldn’t even bother with an education since they will only end up chained to the oven anyway. Obviously this guy was narrow minded to say the least, but it’s disappointing that people can view a woman’s education as essentially useless. You can still have a career after and with children.

    • Sad Sad Reality says:

      01:52pm | 01/03/11

      LBB, yes I loved it. There’s something so amazing about the way she leaves her loving husband after a fickle change of heart, you know the husband she took a vow to love and cherish until death and all that crap, only to throw her downstairs Wet ‘n’ Wild at a selection of idealised third world studs. What a woman. Wait. You know what would be awesome? If heaps of women read the book and like Oprah gave it her seal of approval, then lots of women could like rationalise completely irresponsible selfish behaviour as like finding themselves. That would be cool.

      Successful mole is successful.

    • LauraBoBaura says:

      02:24pm | 01/03/11

      SSR: I actually lol’d at downstairs Wet ‘n Wild. Damn. I was really aiming for outrage today.
      Meh - as much as I hate to say it, I actually find myself kind of sorta maybe agreeing with you. On the book part, nothing else.. all your other opinions, as usual are very much wrong. wink
      I am curious as to whether Oprah would have put her ‘stamp of approval’ on Eat Pray Love if it was about a man doing the same thing..

      I’m just going to ignore your mole comment, hey! It’s what us women folk do best right? Ignore issues? Oh and breed.

      Sad Reality is Sad?

    • Sarah says:

      02:27pm | 01/03/11

      @SSR “Thus when a woman falls head over heels for a guy that looks like he stepped out of an exhibit on the Paleolithic era…”

      Haha, I like that

    • Content says:

      02:39pm | 01/03/11

      Sarah - “hard for women when they do get into those positions because it feels like they are being attacked from every angle. “

      It is hard for men too. The higher the role the more some people want it and the harder they will fight to get and keep it. Look at the level of politics at exec and the next teir down in any large corp and you will see a constant dogfight with smiles permantently fixed to each of the players face. Pickaxes would be a more humane way to go.

      “While it’s accepted that men rise smoothly through the ranks” - in my experience, it is not like that at all. People interested in power want to climb quicker and will undermine anyone they perceive as a threat regardless of gender. Most of us (the plebs) are just happy getting a decent salary in a decent job so we can be doing the stuff we really want to be doing for as long as possible.

      It is this attitude that I personally think is behind people wanting to be stay-at-home parents or to ‘settle’ for the life they have. Money and power is not the great inspring force for the majority, we will take it, but we don’t care for the crap that comes with getting it.

    • Sad Sad Reality says:

      03:02pm | 01/03/11

      Sad Sad Reality owns.

    • Sarah says:

      03:29pm | 01/03/11

      Content I feel like I may have made it sound like I think all women are victimised and that really wasn’t my intention at all. Realistically majority of women will leave the workforce (voluntarily) in order to have children and I think that’s great. You can’t argue with biology. What I disagree with is when women make the choice to stay in the workforce or even sacrifice having children to do so, that the criticism they receive goes beyond underhanded corporate tactics and becomes too personal. As has been pointed out, women are our own worst enemy and we stoop to bitching about petty things like how the PM has her hair done today, instead of the fact that she just did a major turnaround on an issue she went into the election swearing would never happen in her government… off topic…

      But we’re still so programmed to believe we only have so much choice, as soon as someone tries to step outside what’s expected of them,  they are shot to pieces. I know this happens to an extent with both men and women, but it just feels like societies expectations of women are still so rigid and archaic.

    • Thompson says:

      10:29am | 01/03/11

      We were all young girls with dreams once, maybe the 17 year old aspires to be a footballer’s ‘first lady’, to wear the infamous red dress, donned by Miss Twigley who is now the enviable Mrs Judd. She was just a girl with a dream and by giving it all to a ‘half wit’ footballer, maybe she thought it would happen. For that, we can thank the media. You journos can use all the adjectives, and fancy lines you want to make the girls look bad, improper, conniving or whatever. You have done it to the girls, you created the scenario - take away the magazine articles, the sultry pictures, those famous lifestyles you report on and most of these girls wouldn’t dare to dream. Just maybe for once, it’s not the girl who’s to blame, but a more powerful source - the media.

      Reply

    • Markus says:

      10:57am | 01/03/11

      Yes. All those pesky advertisements telling young girls to steal pictures from people’s computers and release them to the public, and stage illegally obtained video footage of prominent sport’s managers to sell to newspapers.

      Just maybe, for once, it is not somebody else’s fault, and the girl should be responsible for her own actions.

    • Phil says:

      12:35pm | 01/03/11

      If not the girl, but the girl before her that she is trying to be like as well it worked for her so obviously being much more attractive, smarter (cunning) and younger she must be able to do the same in a much shorter span of time.
      Odd how guys never are in this position to look up at supermodels and go hmm how can I trap them in to a relationship of profit from some kind of situation I can get in with her.

      All these trashy TV shows, Kardashians, Essex, jersey shore, Kendra etc dont do anyone any favours either! You blame the media but lap this crap up!

    • Markus says:

      10:48am | 01/03/11

      I’ve found the piece Lauren is referring to:

      http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/43782.html

      Of the 230 comments received, the term catfight is not to be found.

      Only one refers to her article being catty.

      One. And it was replied to with another comment insulting that commentor for being equally catty.

      Apparently less than 0.5% of responses criticising her for being catty is indicative of some social norm where women are not allowed to criticise each other.

      I wouldn’t be surprised if this gets moderated because it unveils this article as the load of rubbish that it is.

      Reply

    • LauraBoBaura says:

      01:18pm | 01/03/11

      You read all the comments scanning for the word catfight?

      Why?

    • Erick says:

      01:52pm | 01/03/11

      LauraBoBaura, I’d like to introduce you to the “Find” command, available in all good web browsers.

      Markus, that’s priceless. So Lauren cooked up this whole scandal in response to one word in one comment? Ahahahaha!

      What was I saying about overprivileged women?

    • Markus says:

      01:55pm | 01/03/11

      Because this entire article is based on the premise that the writer was repeatedly accused of starting a catfight, and that the only logical conclusion is that everyone must think any female criticism is seen as a catfight. She even uses the word in this article twice.

      That the article in question does not have a single comment with the word catfight (ctrl+f is your friend), and only a single comment with any variable of the word, proves the entire premise to be false.

    • Kerryn says:

      10:51am | 01/03/11

      Humans discriminate.  Stupidity doesn’t, and can be found everywhere.  Males, females, straights, gays, whenever, where ever.

      Instead of turning on the opposite gender (90% of which are probably good people anyway), let’s turn on stupidity.  It’s a disease that needs to be wiped out!

      Reply

    • Helen says:

      10:53am | 01/03/11

      Wow, there is some pretty heavy duty misogyny on the Punch. (Not you Thompson, people upthread.) It’s good in a way to know what’s out there even though I have to pause to bleach the brain every so often. And some people say we ought to be post-feminist? I don’t think so.

      Reply

    • Markus says:

      11:07am | 01/03/11

      Articles that are blatant lies about women still being oppressed by (patriarchal) social norms and expectations tend to bring out massive frustration in usually logical men (and women).

      Stop publishing these lies and you will stop receiving angry comments calling you out on your lies. Simple.

    • Sad Sad Reality says:

      11:08am | 01/03/11

      Any conversation about female accountability = misogyny. That’s it, Helen, copy book. Now use that ridiculous claim as the reason for extending feminism’s devastating effects on society. Excellent work. You could have put in a reference to men being bitter, having small penises, needing to ‘man-up’, but it’s a solid start. 5/10.

    • Ray says:

      11:25am | 01/03/11

      Helen, it’s because of the air play women get. Men have had enough.

    • Nerf Target says:

      01:21pm | 01/03/11

      SSR, I think you should deduct a point from your score, there didn’t seem to be much effort in the way of claiming victimhood. If she put in a “I get sad when I think that my boyfriend / brother may also think this way”, then it is a solid 5, maybe even a 6.

    • Dave says:

      04:15pm | 01/03/11

      There is also some very heavy duty misandry on the Punch.

    • Placebo says:

      11:26am | 01/03/11

      I agree partially with the article that if a female criticises another female, she is jealous of her. It happens ‘ALL’ the time. On the other hand, if a man criticises a woman, he hates women. This too happens ‘ALL’ the time.
      If a bloke disagrees with a bloke, they talk about it and sort it out if possible and the forget about it. However, if two females disagree with each other, they will bitch about each other to others but will ‘seldom’ talk about it with each other. Thats how they are wired.
      I try not to be sexist and judge people on merits rather on the basis of their sex (and I am a female). I would rather judge Julia or Chritina or Anna on the basis of the job they do rather than their dresses or haircut or makeup or the timing of AWW cover spreads. Similarly, I would much rather call Tony Abbot out as a MCP than judge him by his budgies etc. To each his own. It is a fine line to tow. IMHO, calling a SPADE a SPADE is always better than hiding behind sexist tirade.

      Reply

    • david says:

      11:28am | 01/03/11

      It’s ironic that a feminist journalist feels so suppressed by her own gender that she can’t express her true feelings on a subject.

      Amazingly, women are now officially oppressing themselves.

      Reply

    • Cate P says:

      11:33am | 01/03/11

      Now I realise the St Kilda scandal was actually all about Lauren Rosewarne’s feelings being hurt by a few comments on the internet.  Thanks Lauren for this important insight. Though 750 words is a broad definition of ‘silence’, I am sure you know best dear.

      Reply

    • Your Uncle Bob says:

      11:36am | 01/03/11

      I feel compelled to write a response to this article in more detail but I I find myself deleting everything I write due to self-censorship and not wishing to invoke the thought police. We really do live in Orewellian times. This is one of the legacies of left-wing feminism.

      Reply

    • Sad Sad Reality says:

      02:16pm | 01/03/11

      Don’t drink the Soma, Bob. Write what you see.

    • mmr 1 march 2011 says:

      01:17pm | 01/03/11

      Men think women are all shy sweet kind beautiful friends with each other
      Women are more competitive with each other than men.

      Reply

    • NEFFA says:

      03:16pm | 01/03/11

      which men think that?

    • Squeeze the Middle says:

      05:09pm | 01/03/11

      @ NEFFA
      Me. Maybe not ‘more competitive’.  But differently competitive. See my response to EVA below.

    • LauraBoBaura says:

      01:22pm | 01/03/11

      As a woman, I don’t criticise other women without being catty. It’s true… if a woman has done something, say at work, to piss me off, it’s ‘You know, she’s really unproffessional to do that, she should have spoken to me first. Oh yeah.. and she was wearing this horrible dress today that made her look fat’

      Sad, but true.

      Lauren, just say what you really think.

      Reply

    • BK says:

      01:42pm | 01/03/11

      The “feminism is about choice” cliche was largely developed to resolve the mummy wars. It has evolved to the point where some women claim licence to do whatever they like, without any negative comment from anyone. They pretend that any negative comment on their choices undermines their basic right to autonomy. The misuse of the concept of choice has a number of problems.

      1)Women are socialised to be more sensitive to criticism than men. It doesn’t make them any happier and it certainly makes life difficult for the rest of us.

      2) Choices have consequences for the individual. How can women make informed choices, if discussion of negative consequences is discouraged, for fear of undermining freedom of choice?

      3) Choices have consequences for others. This gives the rest of us a right to comment.

      4) Choices have contexts and these should sometimes be scrutinised. Few choices are completely free from external influences.

      I would have alot more respect for feminism if it was seen as a civic duty, not an excuse for selfishness. A principle isn’t a principle until it costs people something.

      Reply

    • Ray says:

      04:08pm | 01/03/11

      Can someone please advise me how such an issue can command the comment of so many people.  In perspective of where matters fit in the world where does this rank.

      FFS women are a basket case perse. How can a well paid feminist journo have such debilitating inhibitions that it needs soul cleansing exposure followed by the usual suspects trying to dignify matters which demonstrate terminal failings.

      If you wish to know why women fail look at the analysis they put into a featherweight topic and get all bitter and twisted by it.

      It succinctly demonstrates my workplace observations that women cannot prioritise a critical path to project conclusion. They repeatedly get derailed or stuck on irrelevencies that are emotionally driven without appropriate prioritisation.

      Continue the hand wringing, tear jerking path to nowhere. It’s how women are designed. With an appropriate leg up to enable them to partake in life with some false elevation beyond their capacity.

      Feminism is the pinnacle of example with nil constructive framework and a predominance in denigrating men while silencing men’s response. And men frankly don’t give a ‘flying F—k. Mainly because women are hard wired to such mentality (I mean ‘womantality’ for the thought police) while men do the business and get on with the next. All done while contemptually dismissing the feminist delusion presently put before us, BECAUSE IT DOESN"T GET THE JOB DONE (but provides a source of humour for those needing side issue relief)

      Reply

    • BK says:

      08:31pm | 01/03/11

      A great example of a male being constructive here, Ray.

    • Ray says:

      04:55pm | 01/03/11

      Just to add an analogy.

      It’s a bit like organising a schedule on who’s going to get the water instead of putting the fire out. Note I did not say who is getting the lunches. Nor who will carry the water. And I did not go anywhere near saying we need a female Deputy Fire Commissioner as well as a real Fire Commissioner.

      Reply

    • Ian says:

      11:32pm | 03/03/11

      Women have a stronger position in society today that what men do…positions have changed…males are at lost with themselves and many are looking as to where and what their status in society or the community really is…

      Reply
 
Comment

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Anthony Sharwood

antsharwood 28 May 12 12:01AM

#markwebber just wasted petrol faster than everyone else in monaco #f1

Anthony Sharwood

antsharwood 27 May 12 10:49PM

In my sports column on The Punch tomorrow: why Eurovision was easily the best game on the weekend. Mummy bloggers, you'll like this one!

Daniel Piotrowski

drpiotrowski 27 May 12 10:12PM

The Logies could learn a lot from Eurovision #lamethings#sbseurovision

Daniel Piotrowski

drpiotrowski 27 May 12 10:03PM

RT @ellehardytweets: Already despondent about the next fifty one weeks. #sbseurovision

See all tweets

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

Punch on: Open thread 28/05/2012

by The Punch Team

0

Punch on: Open thread 28/05/2012

There were two skydiving incidents reported over the weekend. VIDEO: Granny’s shocking skydive…

Abbott’s crass logic: trash the Parliament in order save it

by David Penberthy

180

Abbott’s crass logic: trash the Parliament in order save it

An email was sent to almost every politician in Australia this week saying that someone should cut off…

Our special forces don’t always need special treatment

by Paul Toohey

27

Our special forces don’t always need special treatment

We admire them, but we’re not entirely sure why. We allow them to operate in the shadows; we rarely…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

Michael S says:

"A teacher at Geelong Grammar had criticised her for using words that were too long, which had left her confused and had made her doubt her ability to write essays. She became ''quite distressed'' when her English marks began to fall." I can sympathise. My scholastic mentors conveyed to me a causal relationship… [read more]

From: Welfare for breeders is a bonus for everyone

Change Up! says:

I have no problem paying my taxes. As a single, childless person on a very decent income, I can afford it and not have my life severely altered. Plus I understand that my taxes paying for things like schools, childcare and infrastructure is ultimately a good thing. A better community is better for me… [read more]

Light weight

Gentle jabs to the ribs

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

A private school girl’s family is sueing her elite, extremely expensive private school for not… Read more

243 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free daily Punch newsletter

Subscribe to The Punch RSS feed