Dysfunctional Feminism Strikes Again..

This is part of my effort to personalise and expose feminists in the area of Australian academia and demonstrate to you once and for all what type of people they really are and also how well they are living high off the public purse doing very little, spreading hate or as in this example, demonstrating clearly how dysfunctional they really are..

Read on..You are paying for this rubbish..

Redefining gender

Andrew Bolt – Tuesday, March 30, 10 (09:45 am)

Associate Professor Barbara Baird, head of Flinders University’s Women’s Studies Department, appears from her profile page to have taken her studies to heart:

From 2005 - 2007 Barbara held an Australian Research Council Discovery grant titled ‘Reconfiguring intimate life: Gender and sexuality as sites of national redefinition in Australian since 1996’.

(No personally abusive comments. She herself has made an issue of her appearance, but only in the context of a discussion on constructs of gender and femininity. You may discuss, seriously for preference, but not abuse.)

UPDATE

Baird is the very model of modern academic:

Barbara Baird lives and works on the land of the Kaurna people, the Indigenous owners of much of the country occupied by the city of Adelaide. She heads the Dept of Women’s Studies at Flinders University. Her research has considered the history and cultural politics of reproduction and sexuality. Her concern is to place the categories of race and nation at the centre of such research via the use of theories of critical race and whiteness studies alongside feminist and queer theories.

UPDATE 2

I’m happy to be confronted as part of some ‘left’ ...

UPDATE 3

Reader Arden notes that Baird has shared a conference stage with Dr Alison Moore of the University of Queensland, author of:

Kakao and Kaka: Chocolate and the excretory imagination in nineteenth-century Europe.

No, not kidding. (UPDATE: Her essay here.) Her other academic works include:

Relocating Marie Bonaparte’s Clitoris. Australian Feminist Studies (forthcoming 2009)

Rethinking Gendered Perversion in Visions of Sadism and Masochism, 1886-1930.

Recovering Difference in the Deleuzian Dichotomy of Masochism-without-Sadism.

Colonial Visions of ‘Third World’ Toilets: A nineteenth-century discourse that haunts contemporary tourism

Fin de Siècle Sexuality and Excretion.

Cultures of the Abdomen: Dietetics, Digestion and Obesity in the Modern World.

Just when you think you can satirise modern academia, along comes an academic, laughing…

UPDATE

From Moore’s Kakao and Kaka: Chocolate and the excretory imagination in nineteenth-century Europe:

This article will show that throughout the late modern era chocolate has been repeatedly associated, both explicitly and symbolically, with excrement…

Chocolate then was the symbolic byproduct of the process by which the European consumer classes domesticated the appropriation of wealth from colonial endeavors and controlled excretory processes in construction of the urban sanitary order… Through this analysis I argue that chocolate has consistently appeared as a symbol of the primitive within the civilized, as the child-like, the sexual, the fetishized, the excremental, which European societies have harnessed, channeled, and transmuted throughout the process of urban sanitization.

Oral contact with excrement represents one of the most charged taboos in modern societies… However, this article will argue that solid eating chocolate has throughout its history been fashioned and marketed in forms visually, sensually and symbolically alike to excrement and that it hence represents a simulacrum of the waste matter that Europeans of the nineteenth century saw as so essential to cast out in the name of a clean, odorless and ordered civilization.

More from delusional Feminists..

For me the low point was provided by Dr Sue Goodwin( Find this male-hater here)..who said: "We've just come through a very conservative, repressive
15 years in Australia."

Ah yes, wallowing in academia and very aware of the practised process of tapping the public trough to promote her male-hating messages. These feminists are referred to by their other term of endearment as "rent seeking scum", as they find irrelevant issues, blow them out of proportion utilising imaginary statistics and downright lies and "whallaaa", here is your money..
How else could they be relevant if they were not inventing ways to rob the public blind, inventing issues to justify their thievery ?..

The Sydney Morning Herald
20 March 2010

Feminism's failure to lend a hand
By Paul Sheehan
Link..
I received an item forwarded by a friend last week entitled, "Why men
shouldn't write advice columns". A woman, "Sheila", had written to an
advice columnist, "John":

"Dear John, the other day I set off for work, leaving my husband at home
watching TV. My car stalled, and then broke down about a mile down the
road. I had to walk back. When I got home, I found my husband in bed with
the neighbour's daughter!

"I am 32, my husband is 34, and the neighbour's daughter is 19. We have
been married for 10 years. When I confronted him he admitted they had been
having an affair for six months. I'm a wreck and need advice. Can you
please help?"

John replied: "Dear Sheila, a car stalling after being driven a short
distance can be caused by a variety of faults with the engine. Start by
checking for debris in the fuel line. If it is clear check the hoses on the
intake manifold and all grounding wires. If these checks do not solve the
problem, it could be the fuel pump itself is faulty. I hope this helps, John."

Don't we love gender stereotypes. The subject can fill an entire library
and is the subject of the latest splash book about feminism, Living Dolls:
The Return of Sexism, by the British journalist Natasha Walter. Her point
can be summed up in this passage: "I think it is time to challenge the
exaggerated femininity that is being encouraged among women in this
generation ... questioning the claustrophobic culture that teaches many
young women that it is only through exploiting their sexual allure that
they can become powerful."

Good point. It occupies the first half of the book. The second half is a
critique of gender stereotypes. Walter argues that the world is much more
complicated than the accepted stereotypes. We get that. In my house, I do
most of the housework. Stereotypes are merely indicative.

You could drive a truck through what's missing from Living Dolls as Walter
fixates on men's raunch magazines, like Nuts, or Zoo or FHM, and reality TV
shows, ascribing to them a great deal of blame for the obsession among so
many young women with glamour, modelling and highly sexualised self-packaging.

Walter largely skates over the damage done to the self-image of women by
other women, the ones who dominate the vastly bigger fashion industry, via
the air-brushing of bodies in fashion magazines, the selection of absurdly
unreal body types as the ideal, the use of extremely young women as models,
and the obsession with air-brushed female celebrities. All this is driven
by women, to exploit women.

You could also drive a truck through the gaps and silences at a symposium I
attended last week at the University of Sydney, "Feminism Matters". It
featured a panel of five feminist scholars from Australia and overseas. I
attended because feminism matters. More than ever.

By the end I wondered what I'd got for my $20. There are 3.5 billion women
in the world and half of them are living in societies where their rights
and freedoms are being rolled back or are at risk of going backwards. As a
global force, feminism is not triumphant. We live in a time of giant
questions concerning women.

Why is much of the most corrosive pressure on women coming from other
women? Why is the rise of militant Islam so intent on curbing the freedoms
of women? What has happened to nearly 100 million "missing" girls in Asia?

A report by the United Nations Development Program, published this month,
found: "The problem of 'missing girls', in which more boys are born than
girls, as girl foetuses are presumably aborted ... is actually growing.
Birth gender disparity is greatest in East Asia, where 119 boys are born
for every 100 girls."

This is an epic time for feminism; attending the "Feminism Matters" session
was like watching public servants discuss how to increase their budget
allocation. For me the low point was provided by Dr Sue Goodwin, a senior
lecturer in the faculty of education and social work at the University of
Sydney, who said: "We've just come through a very conservative, repressive
15 years in Australia."

The energy only picked up after young women from the audience began asking
questions. For the first time, the word "Muslim" was mentioned. One of the
American participants, Professor Karen Beckwith, rushed in with praise for
the way Muslim countries had elected women prime ministers in Bangladesh,
Pakistan and Turkey. No mention that one of these women was assassinated,
or that the freedoms of women are under attack in many parts of the Muslim
world. Not a word.

Another young woman complained that while 75 per cent of veterinary science
graduates were women, male graduates average $10,000 a year more than
women. "We are pissed off," she said. She then answered her own question:
in large animal practices strength is required and men are stronger than
women; country people respond better to male vets; women are perceived as
future maternity leave candidates.

Or, as one of the panelists offered, "Children are the glass ceiling." Yes
they are. It is one of the conundrums between the theory of equality and
the complexity of daily reality. I found the gaps in Living Dolls, like
those of "Feminism Matters", a metaphor for contemporary "feminism", which
is proving largely irrelevant to the great struggle being waged by women
beyond the bubble of Western progressive secularism.

Women Sailors Like Sex Too !

Andrew hits this right on the head. The blatant bias when it's a "man" doing anything must be condemned while the privileged princesses are always the "victim", continues unabated. Sadly this has been the ongoing aim of feminists, determined to ensure that women are more equal than the rest while at the same time ensuring the overall attitude towards ALL men remains or even elevated to excessive abusers and irrepairable in the process.
Fascinating how government departments are the main instigators and promoters determined to destroy male reputations at their whim and ofcourse their determination to follow feminist hypocrisy, enshrined in their daily proceedures as well as their operational proceedures ..

It reminds me of the "Spin Sisters" of the 90's in New York, where their sole aim was to "Find the Victim" and it did not stop there. Women are still deemed to be harmless and unaccountable as they continually demonstrate how easy it is for them to break any law and given the usual exemption..

 Shock: female sailors like sex, too

Andrew Bolt – Monday, March 29, 10 (09:10 am)

The Navy has spent a lot of money and time trying to prosecute - or persecute - male sailors for trying to have sex with female colleagues:

“MAFIA-STYLE" bullying of female sailors and predatory behaviour initially went unrecorded because of problems with the navy’s reporting system, an inquiry has heard.

The presumption is that women are the victims in a sexual encounter:

A FEMALE sailor on board HMAS Success said she was too drunk on one occasion to remember whether she had consented to sex or not, an inquiry has heard.
The sailor’s story was related by senior equity and diversity officer Dianne Markowski, who was called on to run workshops on board the Success....
Ms Markovski’s statement also told of a public sex act between two junior sailors in a bar, watched by a number of people who had been called over by senior sailors. The inquiry is investigating inappropriate behaviour on HMAS Success. It has previously been told predatory sexual behaviour including intimidation and threats of physical violence.

However:

At HMAS Creswell, home to the navy’s officer training college, commanders were told of a noticeable ”trend towards sexually aggressive females among the trainees”.

As you can see..

Well, it was due for an update..

JAIL (Juries Against Illegal Laws):Tasmanian Government Faces Anti-Male Group Action Lawsuit..

Another attempt by David to stone the feminised Goliath. We know for a fact that the excisting anti-male bias in so entrenched in the judicial system that it no longer even raises an eyebrow let alone stands a chance of becoming fair or reasonable. Continued bias would explain the reason why feminists are so keen to close women's prisons (as they do No wrong in their mind) as they continue to deny all men natural justice by any means available and that course of action has been their goal ever since they manipulated jurisprudence so many years ago (jurisprudence is the interpretation of the law on how Judges and juries are forced to interpret any law)

Finally, we have a group of guys determined to do something about it..

For those of you who can offer support do so and drop Ray some encouragement and support and for those against equality, don't bother because you are not going to have any affect as you have tried to destroy equality under the eyes of the law by pretending feminism introduces some euphoric ending just like fairy tales do..

Ray's email..

Violence law faces challenge
GILL VOWLES
The Mercury.
March 14, 2010 08:50am

A TASMANIAN group has filed a $200 million class action against Premier David Bartlett and the Director of Public Prosecutions.It is believed to be the first Australian class action against a law.
JAIL (Juries Against Illegal Laws) filed papers with the Federal Court of Australia on February 4 claiming that the Family Violence Act 2004 (Tasmania) was invalid.
The group is claiming $200 million in damages under Section 46 of the Australian Human Rights Commission Act.
JAIL is also seeking an additional $200,000 in damages for unlawful assault, trespass, negligence, conspiracy to cause economic loss, intimidation and defamation.
The writ further seeks an order that the Tasmanian Government and DPP Tim Ellis cease to engage in arresting people without proper evidence or procedures, giving police judicial powers, denying people the right to a fair and proper hearing and usurping the proper role of the courts.
JAIL president Ray Escobar said that if the class action was successful the money would be given to all the Tasmanians who had suffered under the Family Violence Act.
JAIL, formed in early 2008, now has more than 200 members around Tasmania who have been, or are related to, victims of false applications for violence orders.
Mr Escobar said JAIL was being represented by one of the finest legal minds in Australia, Sir John Walsh of Brannagh, who lives on Norfolk Island.
Sir John said he agreed to represent JAIL because the case raised important and fundamental questions of human rights, such as the presumption of innocence, right to a fair trial and the separation of powers.
"The legislation, and the way it is enforced, is contrary to human rights and to international law as accepted by Australia," Sir John said.
"The legislation conflicts with the Constitution of Australia and with the fundamental rights of all Australians."
Sir John said he was confident a federal judge would apply the law of the Commonwealth and the fundamental principles of Australia's legal system.
JAIL's application has been set down for hearing in the Tasmanian registry of the Federal Court of Australia at 10am on Monday, April 12.

Man Women and Myth..

A very good introductory video dealing with anti-male bias as well as feminists determination ensuring that both sexes are equally miserable..

Feminists are very good at spreading the pain and suffering while they collect the monetary benefits..

More on the demise of feminism with Greer in tow..

As more and more writers, journalists and commentators continue to downgrade and expose feminism for the hate-movement it is; we wonder why it has taken so long to comment on a doctrine that has damaged society so extensively..

Only taken 40 years to realise so one must assume that the previous gaggle of nah-sayers, namely former journalists were either ignorant or way to cowardly to raise such obvious and rational commentary..

But Marrin is apparently not alone. Check out the second article that finally exposes Germaine Greer for the monster it really is..

Unwanted men, we need you to curb the welfare Amazons

Minette Marrin

Are men surplus to requirements? The answer, after more than half a century of feminism and the welfare state, depends largely on class. Men from the employable and educated classes are still in strong demand among women. But much lower down the socioeconomic scale, among the least privileged, men have become — or have come to seem — entirely optional.
Already we have what the tabloid newspapers call an epidemic of single motherhood — young women who have chosen to have babies on welfare, without husbands or boyfriends. One in four mothers is single and more than half of these lone mothers have never lived with a man and survive on welfare.
As many of these women become grandmothers, a new pattern has emerged of three generations of mothers without a man in the house — lone granny, lone mum and fatherless children, all expecting the state to stand in for daddy, as of right. These women are not so much welfare queens as matriarchal dynasties of welfare Amazons.
In a study presented to the Centre for Policy Studies (CPS), the sociologist Geoff Dench argues from the evidence of British Social Attitudes surveys since 1983 that there is a growing number of such extended man-free families: “Three-generation lone-mother families — extended families without men — are developing a new family subculture which involves little paid work.”
The culture is passed on, as you might expect. Lone grannies are significantly more likely to have lone and workless daughters than grannies with husbands or employment, and the same is true of their daughters’ daughters. Baby daughters (and baby sons, too) are imbibing with their mother’s milk the idea that men, like jobs, are largely unnecessary in any serious sense.
The problem with this new type of extended family, Dench says, is that it is not self-sustaining but tends to be parasitic on conventional families in the rest of society. In fact, it appears to lead inexorably to the nightmare of an unproductive dependent underclass.
Clearly one of the worst problems with such a subculture is that although it’s not self-sustaining it has a powerful tendency to replicate itself. A boy in such an environment who grows up without a father figure is much less likely — for many well documented reasons — to turn into the sort of young man a girl could see as a desirable husband. A girl who grows up without a father never learns how important a man could be in her own child’s life. She will not see her mother negotiating an adult relationship with a male companion, so she won’t know how to do it herself or imagine what she is missing.
Before anyone starts to point the finger of blame at such girls, it’s worth remembering that many of them are simply making a rational choice. Badly educated at a rough sink school, facing a dead-end, low-paid job that won’t even cover the cost of childcare, such a girl will naturally decide to do what she wants to do anyway and have a baby to love. She knows she will be better off having welfare babies than stacking shelves and better off, too, if she avoids having a man living with her, even supposing she could find one from among the antisocial, lone-parented youths on her estate. That is because the state subsidises this rational choice, disastrous though it has proved, and has done so for decades.
Women quite understandably now talk of such lifestyle choices as their right. They’ve been encouraged to. And the state has actually made poor men redundant.
There are all kinds of protest one might make at this state of affairs. It is outrageous, for instance, that more than half a century of socialism and feminism has managed to marginalise and make wretched the least privileged of men. Evidence of the failure and the alienation of working-class boys, compared with girls, is incontrovertible. “From him that hath not, even that which he hath shall be taken away”, while to her that hath not shall be given just enough to get by on without him. So much for social justice and sexual equality.
There are further layers of injustice. The economist Professor Bob Rowthorn commented with some feeling last week that man-free women are very mistaken to imagine they don’t need men. The truth is they desperately need men in the form of all those male taxpayers (to say nothing of female taxpayers) who are forced to pay for a way of life that they don’t approve of and that they know to be socially disastrous.
It is hugely unfair to make responsible people who are struggling to support their own families struggle harder still to support women who won’t work. Family life is in a fine mess in this country. Looking after your own children has become a luxury that few women can afford, married or single, unless they abandon responsibility for themselves and go on benefits.
I doubt whether anything much can be done to untangle this mess. It is a knotty web of constant state interventions and their perverse consequences, and yet more interventions are likely to snarl things up even more. But if anything can be done, it must surely start with an emphasis on unwanted men at the bottom of the socioeconomic scale. Something must be done to help them become good prospects for girls wanting babies, so that they will be welcomed back into family life and become responsible family men, fathers to responsible sons. That means rescuing them from the failure, unemployment and general contempt to which many of them are now condemned. It means offering them consideration and respect — something they are routinely denied, to their deep resentment — and helping them earn it.
At a discussion of women and childcare at the CPS last week, a Conservative MP made the conventional suggestion that the workplace ought to be more feminised. Actually it is feminisation that is the problem; we have far too much of it already. Schools are feminised, run largely by women in ways that suit girls, not boys; exams have been feminised, and now girls do better in them; workplaces have been feminised; conversation and jokes have been feminised to sneer at testosterone-driven male aggression; and the entire welfare and benefits system has a bias against men. This is particularly hard on the poorest of men.
What we need now in society and in family life is not feminisation, but a new masculinisation. Otherwise yet more men will become institutionally redundant.
minette.marrin@sunday-times.co.uk

Fascinatingly, Greer's thesis is apparently diametrically opposed to her "Eunuch" book but one thesis that will never see the light of day. That would demonstrate the hollow, shallow and irrelevant being it really is..

Nowra's Greer and loathing for our own Female Eunuch

All that said, Nowra's essay is a great read, a brutal but thoughtful and sometimes fair critique of The Female Eunuch and of Greer: the daughter embittered by her narcissistic mother's emotional abuse; the powerful polemicist who inspired women to leave their husbands but who wrote off gays as ''faggots''; the fantasist who reckoned mothers could live in farmhouses in Italy where a revolving door of friends, relatives and local peasants would care for their children; the acid-tongued mauler of other prominent women; the woman who imagined herself as the wife of the Bard (''I'd f--- Shakespeare except that he especially asked that his bones not be disturbed''); the author of ''dull and graceless'' and ''increasingly daft'' prose; the attention seeker on Celebrity Big Brother; and, ultimately, the ''irrelevant noise of a shock jock few people listen to any more''.

Perhaps Nowra's cheapest shot is likening Greer, a ''befuddled and exhausted old woman'', to ''my demented grandmother''. If the dead could sue, his granny surely would.