Sunday, November 19, 2023

Men’s welfare at the mercy of feminist ideology

One should be wary of stereotypes in matters of divorce and child custody. When my wife walked out with our 5 year-old son, I might well have had grave concerns for his welfare. I did not. I thought his loving and capable mother would look after him well and was happy to leave him in her care

And my positivity was rewarded. She thought the boy needed his father and made a point of sending him to me for a day each weekend. No custody dispute whatever. With goodwill many custody disputes could be avoided and the lack of goodwill is the real problem. Not all fathers may be able to act as I did but those who try it may be surprised at how trust engenders trust


For two days this week the lawns of Parliament House have been strewn with 2500 empty shoes, one for each of the men and boys who die in Australia each year through suicide. According to the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare our male suicide rate is overall three to four times higher than the female rate, and mainly involves men in mid-life. These are the major predictive facts about suicide: being male; being divorced, widowed or separated; living alone; being unemployed. The suicide rate in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people is twice that of the non-Indigenous population.

Meanwhile, the government is concentrating all preventive efforts on domestic violence against women, always seen as “gendered” violence; in other words, men being violent towards women. According to organisations such as White Ribbon, domestic violence is just a male problem. It is their fault. What’s more, according to its media releases this week for White Ribbon Day, most men just can’t see it or know what to do about it. White Ribbon demands they “educate” themselves because “violence against women is at epidemic proportions, and (our research) contrasts that with the reasons men have given us for not getting involved. We think men will see that there’s no good reason to not step up this year and either make a donation or educate themselves. Because with one in three Australian women being a victim of violence, it’s not just a women’s issue, it’s everyone’s issue”.

But guess what? According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics there are 47 male deaths from suicide per week. Meanwhile, there are 71 females who die from fatal domestic violence per year, that equals 1.36 per week. So male suicides, which are 35 times as numerous as deaths from DV, should also be everyone’s issue. But where is the advertising campaign? Where is the support? The ads that are all about “gendered violence” just blame men, and boys, and the support for men at risk of suicide, except for veterans of the armed forces, is almost nil.

You might say these two issues, DV and male suicide, are not comparable. But think about them in the psychosocial terms of the health and social wellbeing of the community. Most importantly, how well do we value the health and welfare of each section of the population, male and female?

Domestic violence is, as I know, real and has all sorts of serious intergenerational effects. My paternal grandfather was a violent man, who terrorised his family. But, and this is the big but, where is the nuance in the “domestic violence is gendered” statements like the ones White Ribbon uses? It is all the fault of men and apparently the men have to educate themselves. This is simplistic. It is ideology, plain and simple.

What of the pathologies that plague all of us, and our whole society? Why is something that involves two people presented as one-dimensional: man bad perpetrator, woman good victim? The DV lobby does not allow presentation of this problem in any other way, because allowing any nuance might question the simplistic assumptions that underlie the narrow, prismatic feminist ideology that governs all current social legislation, especially in family law.

One fact of male trauma the feminist trope will not admit is that men’s mental and psychological welfare is often eroded by the constant blame and fear of being blamed. No wonder, as even White Ribbon admits, men are confused. None of the DV advocates who speak in terms of “gendered violence” and male “toxic” behaviour look at the root causes of violence.

Importantly, these overlap with the causes of male suicide: substance abuse, unemployment, isolation, intergenerational dysfunction (especially in Aboriginal men and young boys), and family breakdown, which affects all classes and groups of men, but particularly men in the highest age bracket for suicide.

Since 2008, the highest suicide rates have been observed in middle-aged males (aged 40-49). But groups such as White Ribbon are not really interested in the male’s welfare within a marriage or domestic partnership; furthermore, its view of female welfare is so one-dimensionally seen as victimhood that it never admits the couple dynamic.

However, male suicide, though complex, is often triggered, in the words of the AIHW research, by “a recent stressful life event”, especially divorce or final separation from a long-term partner. That has been cited by all research into Australian male suicide as the overwhelming reason behind the rise in middle-life suicide, especially where children are involved.

Divorce is not just a single event; it causes a cascading series of problems, and men in contested divorce cases often find themselves in a maze of legal and financial dead ends, with a mounting psychological toll of usually concealed trauma.

An inquiry into the operation of family law earlier this century was one of the longest in Australian history and found suicide among Australian men was disproportionately associated with family law disputes, especially over custody of children. What is more, the level of false accusations was outrageous. Consequently, in 2006 family law was redrafted to give fathers more say in parenting their children after divorce, with a presumption of shared parenting.

Now, due to the untoward influence of the feminist lobby, for whom all marriages are potential minefields of domestic violence, that sensible and humane principle has been abandoned. This is not “reform”. It is a regression to the past. It is a disastrous change, which will cause more false accusations of violence and more harm to fathers of children and, consequently, more male suicides.


Top doctor Nick Coatsworth delivers a brutal reality check for Aussies who still wear face masks

One of Australia's top doctors has issued a brutal message to those still wearing face masks - and hit out calls from the Australian Medical Association to bring back Covid masks.

Australia reported 6,550 new Covid cases last week. This surge has led health officials, including AMA Queensland president Maria Boulton, to advocate for the reinstatement of mask mandates in high-risk settings, such as on airplanes, in large crowds, and within medical facilities.

However, former Australian deputy chief health officer Dr Nick Coatsworth said Aussies shouldn't be overly concerned about the recent spike during an interview with 2GB'S Ben Fordham.

'The Australian Medical Association has quoted 245 hospitalisations of COVID-19 with this (current) wave in Queensland, but there are over a million admissions to Queensland hospitals every year,' he said. 'The suggestion that this is a wave is probably incorrect.'

He also believes reinstating mask mandates would have little impact. 'That's not going to make any difference at the moment,' Dr Coatsworth explained.

'If you say 'Look, wear masks in some situations but not others, don't socially distance and go about your business', then all the masks are doing is polluting the environment.' 'We need to be smarter about how we manage this.

He also slammed advice from scientists recommending 100,000 concertgoers to mask up when Coldplay performs in Perth this weekend. 'That's just a crazy thing to do,' he said.

'We got to remember just how infectious Omicron is. Just sticking a mask on at a Coldplay concert is unlikely to be protective.

'And number two, the vast majority of people have had Covid, even the people who claim they've never had it. The vast majority of people are also vaccinated.

'COVID-19 is now a milder disease because of what we call herd immunity, we have all been exposed to it. 'Our need to take a chill pill with Covid is getting even greater.'

Dr Coastworth isn't overly concerned about the latest spike but conceded it puts a strain on hospitals. 'The reason why health departments have put this out is because when we do get an increase in Covid or any respiratory virus, it does puts a strain on hospitals,' he said.

'I work in an hospital and you do see the strain but not because people are getting sick from Covid. 'Very few people are actually getting sick from Covid but it creates an infection control problem where you have to isolate the patients and it created bed pressure.

'But that's going to happen for the next 5-10 years with Covid and respiratory viruses and we have to find ways to cope with that.

'Frankly I was on shift yesterday and we had not a single patient with COVID-19 in our acute medical unit.

Dr Coatsworth emphasised that despite a minor increase in hospitalisations, there has been a decline in intensive care admissions from Covid.

'There's creative, innovative ways that will allow the community to get on with its business without constant talk of bringing back things that realistically, public health officials aren't going to bring back.'

Dr Coatsworth echoed the health advice to catch up outdoors where the risk of getting Covid is 'extraordinary difficult, if not impossible.' 'It's always been the right advice, I'm not sure why we didn't give it at the start of the pandemic,' he said. 'You would really have to be on top of someone to catch Covid outdoors.'

Meanwhile, infectious diseases specialist Professor Peter Collignon has made it clear he opposes people being forced by law to wear masks. 'If at increased risk, or concerned, yes wear a mask. But no mandates.'

Professor Collignon, who is a microbiologist at Canberra Hospital, said there was 'little or likely no point' wearing a mask outside.

He added that masks will give 'some short term protection' to those who are concerned about short term exposure indoors, but eye protection is also needed. 'What lands in your eyes goes into your nose,' the professor said.


The truth that may not be spoken

First, they came for our spaces, then our sports, our language, our opportunities and our children. Now, they’re coming for our thoughts and our voices.

I’m a Councillor with the Hobart City Council, arguably one of the Wokest councils in Australia. I’m also a wife, mother, and firm believer in freedom of belief and expression. I know how critically important tolerance and inclusion is to our democracy. Inclusion goes far beyond race, age, sexual orientation, and other variables. True inclusion is also diversity in belief and opinion.

The fundamental rights that underpin our democratic way of Australian life are under the type of attack we never would have thought possible only a handful of years ago. For me, this attack is hitting very close to home and my hip pocket.

I’ll soon be fronting the Tasmanian Civil and Administrative Tribunal facing an allegation that I have ‘incited hatred on the basis of gender identity’. My supposed crime? I spoke the truth.

The pathway here began when I spoke at a Let Women Speak women’s rights event outside Parliament House in Hobart in March this year. As part of my speech, I stated that ‘transwomen are transwomen and remain biological men’ and that someone ‘cannot be raped with a penis, if there is no penis present’, in reference to the valid need for some female-only spaces. Clear-thinking people know these to be undeniable truths, yet I’m absurdly being taken to court for saying them.

What we’re seeing is the pinnacle of gender ideology madness. The lunacy has gone beyond the loss of once female-only vulnerable spaces, like changerooms, toilets and shelters. It’s well advanced in women’s sport where men are celebrating from the top of the women’s podium. We have male rapists being housed in women’s prisons.

Women have lost their language, as ‘she’, ‘her’ and ‘woman’, is now under the ownership of, and ‘inclusive’ of, men. It’s no surprise when a man is the keynote speaker for an International Women’s Day event. And now the final frontiers – controlling and compelling the beliefs, thoughts and speech of others.

To complete the domination, activists and their well-funded ideology-driven organisations are weaponising legislation to silence people who don’t subscribe to the religion of gender ideology. The concept of gender ideology is just a set of beliefs, but more like a cult given questions are not permitted. Thankfully, in Australia at least, we would never see people being taken to Court for not believing in someone else’s religion, which is essentially what is happening here.

Taxpayer money is being shamefully chewed up on punishing people for speaking the truth, and making an example of them so that other non-believers dare not even try. Defending such absurdity – especially when there are Constitutional questions at hand – doesn’t come cheap. I’ve already invested thousands personally in our fight to speak the truth and our fair and valid opinion, but backup is needed to defend this right as far and high as we need to.

Laws around stamping out real incitement of hatred and violence are undoubtedly needed, but setting the threshold so ridiculously low is a full-blown assault on our implied right to freedom of belief, freedom of expression and political communication.

Yes, I could have grovelled when the complaint that ignited this firestorm first reared its head. I could have begged for forgiveness and made promises to ‘do better’ – ‘I’m so sorry for hurting your feelings’ and, ‘of course you’re a woman’, – but that is lying, and I won’t do that. Truth, reality, science and safety and fairness for women and girls are more important than the feelings of some men.

‘I’m offended’ cannot dictate where the bar on allowable public discourse is set. We all have the capacity to be offended by something, and being offended is part of being in a society. This is even more clear-cut when the ‘offence’ stems from fact. We all have facts we wish were not true, but they are, and no amount of outrage can change that. The possibility of being offended goes hand-in-hand with the right to speak – it’s a two-way exchange. In exchange for your right to speak, you accept the prospect of offence when others do. Being offended is part and parcel of diversity, debate and democracy.

The vast majority of Australians are on the same page as me. We don’t wish transwomen any harm and we want to ‘be kind’ but we won’t lie, and we won’t compromise the fair and valid needs of women. This complaint even being accepted for investigation shows that the Anti-Discrimination Commissioner is on a different wavelength to the general population.

All sane people know that this situation is ludicrous. We know that humans cannot change sex and that males, as a collective, are bigger, stronger, and present an inherent risk to women. Statistics show that 97 per cent of sex offenders are men.

There is nothing ‘progressive’ about prioritising the demands and feelings of some men over women’s safety, fairness, dignity and rights. There is nothing righteous about declaring that facts are hate and only one view is allowed. There is too much at stake to not fight back on this obscene level of censorship.


Aussie’s major private school claim sparks fierce debate

Note the last paragraph below. It is the major reason I sent my son to a private school

A young business owner has caused a stir after claiming there is a “huge difference” between private school and public school educated Aussies.

Zane Marshall, founder of marketing agency Lux Social, recently took to TikTok to claim that a whopping 70 per cent of CEOs in Australia all attended private schools.

He claimed that, “despite what people say”, private school students have a big advantage when it comes to finding success after school.

While Mr Marshall noted the level of education also plays a “huge part”, he believes the networking opportunities provided to privately schooled students are what really sets them apart and gives them “the biggest advantage” those who go through the public system.

“When I compare my friends that went to private schools, they all went off into really high paying job or got these amazing opportunities early on through their network from the private school,” he said.

“Whether it was sporting team, whether it was a friend of a friend that they went to school with, someone’s uncle, someone’s dad – they all got really great opportunities through the network in the school.”

But Mr Marshall believes the most important advantage of private education is the “high level of confidence and self-worth” instilled in them by their teachers. “I didn’t get that at public school,” he claimed.

The young Aussie’s claims sparked a major debate among viewers, with the video racking up over 1500 comments.

There were many who completely disagreed with Mr Marshall’s assessment, with some pointing out a lot of the families who send their kids to private school already have the connections he spoke about, along with the money to support their career aspirations.

“Yeah it’s not the education.. it’s the fact that most people going to private school are ahead economically already and easy to climb the ladder,” one commenter said.

“Unfair advantage. Taxpayers shouldn’t pay a cent to private education,” another wrote.

One commenter claimed her brother went to private school and, while he is financially successful, he is suffering trauma from his school years.

“I went to a public school – absolutely killing it with zero connections,” another said.

One person also claimed: “I think it’s only fair that you mention the highest university drop our rate are those from private school.”

However, there were still plenty of people who agreed with Mr Marshall, with many former private school kids chiming in on the debate. “All my corporate jobs have come about from my private school connections so I agree,” one wrote.

“Spot on! I went to a private school and I walked into jobs because of the school I attended,” another said.

One person believed private education was worth the money because it drills into students the importance of being “well dressed and having high public standards”.

“Private schools hold kids to a much higher standard than public schools. Kids will naturally aim higher after school with more confidence,” another said.

Others went was far as to claim that private schools don’t tolerate the same behaviours as public schools, therefore students “actually get the chance to learn”.




No comments: