tip off

Newspoll: 55-45 to Labor

After a slight improving trend for the Abbott government in recent weeks, the latest fortnightly Newspoll result has it back to its worst.

The fortnightly Newspoll in tomorrow’s Australian reverses the recent moderating trend in federal polling by showing Labor’s two-party preferred lead out to 55-45 from 53-47 last time. The only other numbers so far (courtesy of GhostWhoVotes) are personal ratings for Tony Abbott, which are little changed at 31% approval (up one) and 62% disapproval (up one). Stay tuned for primary votes and other leadership ratings. UPDATE: Newspoll also records a solid shift to Bill Shorten on preferred prime minister, his 40-37 lead from last time now out to 44-34, while his disapproval is down four points to 41% with approval steady at 34%. Full results courtesy of The Australian here.

Also out today was the regular fortnightly multi-mode (i.e. face-to-face plus SMS) poll from Roy Morgan, conducted over the last two weekends from a sample of 2797, which has both major parties down 1.5% on the primary vote – the Coalition to 35%, Labor to 36.5% – making way for Palmer United, recovering from a recent slump to 7% (up 1.5% on last fortnight), while the Greens stay steady on 12%. A big gap has opened on the two measures of two-party preferred, with Labor’s 54.5-45.5 lead on 2013 election preference flows blowing out to 57.5-42.5 on respondent-allocated. Interestingly, this has been echoed in recent respondent-allocated results from Nielsen, which is the only other pollster which publishes them. In its four monthly results since March, Labor’s lead has been between 1.5% and 2.5% higher on respondent-allocated than on the measure using 2013 election flows.

Stay tuned as usual for tomorrow’s Essential Research.

UPDATE: We indeed have Essential Research, and ReachTEL besides:

• Conducted for the Seven Network, the ReachTEL poll encompasses 3376 respondents and has Labor’s lead at 53-47, down from 54-46 at the last such poll on May 8. The primary votes are 39.6% for the Coalition (up 0.7%), 38.7% for Labor (down 0.9%), 10.3% for the Greens (down 0.9%) and 6.8% for Palmer United (up 0.8%).

• After a solid shift to the Coalition in last week’s fortnightly rolling average result, Essential Research is all but unchanged this week, with Labor leading 52-48 from primary votes of 40% for the Coalition (steady), 38% for Labor (steady), 9% for the Greens (steady) and 6% for Palmer United (up one). Among the remaining questions, of particular interest is one on approval of various government ministers, with Malcolm Turnbull easily leading a field of seven with a net score of plus 13%; Julie Bishop, George Brandis and Scott Morrison breaking roughly even; and Greg Hunt, Joe Hockey and especially Christopher Pyne trailing the field, on minus 11%, minus 12% and minus 18% respectively.

On climate change, 33% want the carbon tax dumped and replaced with nothing, while 16% want it kept, 22% want a shift to an emissions trading scheme, and only 9% favour the government’s “direct action” policy. A semi-regular question on trust in public institutions finds, for what reason I’m not sure, that the High Court, the ABC and the Reserve Bank are back where they were in June 2012 after big moves in their favour in March 2013, with each rating in the fifties for “a lot of trust” or “some trust”. The medical profession and law enforcement agencies score high on trust in use of personal information, with social media sites rating lowest.

The poll also inquires into Peter Greste and Julian Assange, with 39% thinking the government has not provided appropriate support for Greste, the view presumably being that it should have done more, while 20% say its support has been appropriate. A rather particular question on Assange has 69% opting for “it is a waste of money trying to arrest Julian Assange” against 13% for “Julian Assange should be arrested despite the costs”.

1274
  • 101
    BK
    Posted Tuesday, July 1, 2014 at 7:42 am | Permalink

    Section 2 . . .

    David Hayward says the Victorian government has lost any moral authority to sign off on any major project.
    http://www.theage.com.au/comment/napthine-government-has-lost-the-right-to-decide-victorias-future-20140630-zsqln.html
    This stinks! Maybe Andrews could direct them to work in Morriscum’s huge spin doctor department.
    http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jun/30/mentally-ill-people-could-lose-disability-support-pension-in-welfare-overhaul
    The New Matilda examines the proposed social security benefits changes.
    https://newmatilda.com/2014/06/30/welfare-fix-needs-boost-not-cuts-say-advocacy-groups
    Will we finish up with “door bitches” at hospital emergency departments?
    https://theconversation.com/on-spending-the-night-in-the-emergency-ward-and-myths-and-realities-of-the-ed-28633
    Coles reckons it’s as pure as the driven snow. But the ACCC thinks otherwise.
    http://www.theage.com.au/business/retail/coles-rejects-unconscionable-conduct-allegations-20140630-zsrfe.html
    Ross Gittins warns against rampant privatisations.
    http://www.theage.com.au/business/privatisation-debate-fails-public-good-20140629-3b21k.html
    And this is exemplified by this report on the dangerous state of privatised buses in Sydney.
    http://www.watoday.com.au/nsw/dangerous-faults-on-sydneys-buses-20140630-zsrbq.html
    George Williams says Brandis has tied himself up in legal knots over his refusal to accept the reality of the High Court ruling on school chaplains.
    http://www.watoday.com.au/comment/george-brandis-ignores-his-own-insights-into-chaplains-ruling-20140630-zsqnr.html
    Just have a look at his effort from David Pope. It’s a beauty!
    http://images.theage.com.au/2014/07/01/5558321/David-Pope-senate-defcon-620×0.jpg

  • 102
    BK
    Posted Tuesday, July 1, 2014 at 7:43 am | Permalink

    Section 3 . . .

    Alan Moir on managing democracy in Iraq.
    http://www.theage.com.au/photogallery/federal-politics/cartoons/alan-moir-20090907-fdxk.html
    Nice work from Ron Tandberg on Liberal branch stacking.
    http://www.theage.com.au/photogallery/federal-politics/cartoons/ron-tandberg-20090910-fixc.html
    Simon Letch on a reformed Luis Suarez.
    http://www.theage.com.au/photogallery/federal-politics/cartoons/simon-letch-20090908-ffni.html
    Brilliant stuff from David Rowe!
    http://www.afr.com/p/national/cartoon_gallery_david_rowe_1g8WHy9urgOIQrWQ0IrkdO

  • 103
    lizzie
    Posted Tuesday, July 1, 2014 at 7:48 am | Permalink

    The interim report of the Review of Australia’s Welfare System, led by former Mission Australia CEO Patrick McClure, is a vexed piece of work. There is much in it that is commendable and even far-sighted, but there is also much in it which is deeply problematic, reflecting the limitations of the context in which it is written.

    There are also some odd inconsistencies in the report. There is no mention of the dramatic reform to social welfare for people under the age of 30, which was announced in the federal budget in May.

    The report also does not sufficiently account for the nature of Australia’s contemporary labour market, which imposes a significant challenge to the type of universal labour force participation that the government aspires to.
    . . .
    Overall, the vision for the reform of Australian social welfare depends entirely on whether labour market opportunities will open up for those for whom it has previously been closed. It could also be viewed as part of the agenda for the end of the age of entitlement.

    Summary: there is far too much room for “subjective assessments” by welfare staff or ministers.

    http://theconversation.com/welfare-review-fails-to-understand-australias-labour-market-28587

  • 104
    roger bottomley
    Posted Tuesday, July 1, 2014 at 7:50 am | Permalink

    Brandis would be lucky to get a guernsey as the tea boy at Tony Morris’s chambers.

    He is a complete dud.

  • 105
    zoomster
    Posted Tuesday, July 1, 2014 at 7:54 am | Permalink

    Whatever else Clive Palmer has done, it appears he has royally wedged the Greens –

    Simmering tensions in the conservation community over the Greens' response to Abbott government environment policies are threatening to fracture the party's support base.

    At issue is the Greens' refusal to back a return to inflation-based indexation of federal fuel excise - regarded as "perverse" because the party supports price signals on fossil fuels - and Greens leader Christine Milne's claimed hostility to Clive Palmer.

    ...some renewable energy players are upset their party is undermining the Palmer compromise which they see as a lifeline through the retention of the Clean Energy Finance Corporation, the Climate Change Authority, and protection of the Renewable Energy Target of 20 per cent energy production from green sources by 2020.

    A senior figure in the sector said Senator Milne risked alienating supporters and putting jobs and investment in the renewable sector in further doubt by "running a noisy anti-Clive line and encouraging Greens to ring his office to attack him over repealing the carbon tax".

    http://www.bordermail.com.au/story/2387008/christine-milne-snub-to-clive-palmer-has-greens-on-edge/?cs=12

    Disclaimers (which seem to be necessary when posting anything to do with the Greens) –

    1. I did not write this article, am not responsible for its contents, and am posting it here because I think it’s interesting, not because I necessarily endorse any statement it makes.

    2. Posting an article which makes some attacks on the Greens’ position is not ipso facto, in and by itself, being ‘anti Green’.

  • 106
    Jolyon Wagg
    Posted Tuesday, July 1, 2014 at 7:56 am | Permalink

    Bemused

    It is not misandry to point out that wars are and always have been instigated, carried out and financed by men. Men plan the wars, make the armies, take the resources to fund armaments, and destroy people, animals, habitats and thousands of years of infrustructure in their wars. Women and kids are involved but that is all. In addition men use wars to steal goods, rape women and kids and torture non-combatants. Additionally or maybe purposely wars allow men to relate to each other in ways considered as a sign of homosexuality in civil life.

    Now if misandry is the abuse i have to cop every time I make a criticism of any male or males as a group, this sociologist is going to leave this site for somewhere else. I already cut back my visits here because I find every time I mention Julia Gillard I am targeted.

    If you want an nice little boy’s club where women don’t rock the boat you can have it. I notice a few of the ‘weaker sex’ not being here as often as before.

    There you go again Puff. Can’t help yourself.

    Bemused,

    I can’t see any misandry in the quote from PTMD. It looks like a set of statements that is a fair reflection of reality.

    PTMD,

    I hope you continue posting here. You are one of the people that I don’t feel the need to scroll past.

  • 107
    confessions
    Posted Tuesday, July 1, 2014 at 7:58 am | Permalink

    It’s obvious that most of the shit in the world is caused by men, as men basically run the joint. To argue otherwise is disingenous at best. I also have little doubt that the world would be a better place if the gender roles were reversed.

    A statement of the bleeding obvious that it shouldn’t need to be said, but sadly it does.

    And I’m still stunned by last night’s idiocy that all those evil men out there are only the way they are because their mothers made them that way. I mean FFS.

  • 108
    BK
    Posted Tuesday, July 1, 2014 at 8:05 am | Permalink

    And from the Land of the Free -

    Weekly upchucks.
    http://thepoliticalcarnival.net/2014/06/30/weekly-upchucks-shocking-religion-news-5/
    The US Supreme Court is ruining the US.
    http://thepoliticalcarnival.net/2014/06/30/supremely-wrong/
    http://crooksandliars.com/2014/06/usual-scotus-wingnuts-find-answers-they
    Judge Judith Bader Ginsberg’s scathing dissenting opinion.
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/06/30/ruth-bader-ginsburg-write_n_5544111.html
    Here’s the White House’s response to the ruling.
    http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/06/30/1310636/-White-House-responds-to-Hobby-Lobby-ruling-Today-s-decision-jeopardizes-the-health-of-women
    If ever you needed proof that Carl Rove is a dangerous idiot . . .
    http://crooksandliars.com/2014/06/karl-rove-continues-conflate-birth-control
    But it might just backfire, causing women to flock to the ballot box (er, machine).
    http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/06/30/1310677/-Democrats-need-women-to-vote-Hobby-Lobby-should-deliver
    An “unfortunate” gun show accident.
    http://crooksandliars.com/2014/06/gun-seller-second-amendments-customer-gun
    You have to admit it. Gun nuts have a wonderful ability to come up with excuses.
    http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/06/30/texas-gun-store-gun-show-shooting-death-is-no-different-than-not-wearing-seatbelt/

  • 109
    confessions
    Posted Tuesday, July 1, 2014 at 8:05 am | Permalink

    Looks like PvO is giving up twitter. Again.

    Peter van Onselen @vanOnselenP · 9h
    Please donate to http://www.dementiacareaustralia.com/ if I can last the month: no alcohol, no twitter. #dryjuly

  • 110
    Greensborough Growler
    Posted Tuesday, July 1, 2014 at 8:09 am | Permalink

    z,

    As always, the Greens are far too clever and greedy to take a win or at least a chance to progress their agenda, when it presents itself.

    Not agreeing to the excise increase means that taxes on carbon petrol will reduce as a proportion of the price of petrol and encourage more and not less road transport use over time.

    According to your source, this decision was not made on principle, but to somehow poke Clive in the eye. No wonder there are rumblings within the Party.

    Once again the Greens demonstrate they fight a good war of words on environment issues, but never actually deliver reform. No wonder, Clive in one fell swoop of publicity seems to have usurped the Greens as the champion of the CC movement.

  • 111
    BK
    Posted Tuesday, July 1, 2014 at 8:17 am | Permalink

    The problem with the budget is not that it hasn’t been sold well. Rather it’s that it has been understood!

  • 112
    lizzie
    Posted Tuesday, July 1, 2014 at 8:32 am | Permalink

    Clive in one fell swoop of publicity seems to have usurped the Greens as the champion of the CC movement

    ROFL

  • 113
    zoomster
    Posted Tuesday, July 1, 2014 at 8:34 am | Permalink

    GG

    my understanding is that the Greens are opposing the increase in exise because none of it goes to public transport.

    Seems when they ARE in a position to cattle trade, they refuse to do so on principle; when they’re NOT in a position to cattle trade, they decide it’s all the go.

    Blocking an exise they support in principle because the money raised doesn’t go where they want it to is simply silly.

  • 114
    Greensborough Growler
    Posted Tuesday, July 1, 2014 at 8:37 am | Permalink

    z,

    On form, the only thing Green about the Greens is their name.

  • 115
    lizzie
    Posted Tuesday, July 1, 2014 at 8:37 am | Permalink

    Victoria's water agency is suppressing documents detailing how managers have spent millions of taxpayer funds, saying disclosure could cause ''stress or anxiety''.

    More bloody ROFL.

    http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/water-body-censors-spending-figures-citing-stress-or-anxiety-20140630-3b4cv.html

  • 116
    Boerwar
    Posted Tuesday, July 1, 2014 at 8:43 am | Permalink

    55/45? It’s a truk, comrades.

    Meanwhile, and bearing in mind The Australian’s systemic war on Palmer, there is an article which reckons that Palmer (possibly illegally) used a shitload of chinese money to fund his political media strategy.

    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/china-has-to-know-did-we-fund-pup/story-e6frg6zo-1226972934518

    Let’s say that Palmer loses his seat because of conviction, what are the ongoing implications for Senate Management?

  • 117
    poroti
    Posted Tuesday, July 1, 2014 at 8:43 am | Permalink

    Just saw a deadwood GG. Goodness it seems like only yesterday that all Newspoll results scored a strip headline atop the front page :grin: Clive scored half of the front page.

  • 118
    Bushfire Bill
    Posted Tuesday, July 1, 2014 at 8:51 am | Permalink

    Not ONE SINGLE WORD on ANY ABC Radio news or current affairs show this morning about Newspoll.

    It never happened.

    Instead we got endless Rolf Harris – how he looked at his wife as he was led down from the dock, what the judge said, what the prosecutor said, etc. etc. – and a pap interview by Uhlmann with Abbott in triumphant mode: soft questions, bland answers, no follow up. There was even a question to him about Rolf Harris where Abbott said that it was a bad, bad thing.

    Ironic, as this was supposedly the first day of the rest of Abbott’s political life – July 1, 2014 – where the Carbon Tax is about to be repealed, yet his poll rating have sunk to their lowest. Ironic too that he should talk about how dreadful pedophilia is, while back pedalling on the pedophilia Royal Commission.

    Truly woeful radio.

  • 119
    Boerwar
    Posted Tuesday, July 1, 2014 at 8:52 am | Permalink

    How good was it to see an environment minister gleefully celebrating with his fellow ministers the victory in repealing the Carbon Tax on the floor of the House?

    Grattan got it right this morning… for the Coalition the Carbon Tax is a ‘talisman’.

    From:

    http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/talisman

    ‘An object, typically an inscribed ring or stone, that is thought to have magic powers and to bring good luck:’

    Grattan is right. IMHO we can extend the same sort of observation to ‘Stopping the Boats’ and ‘Fixing Labor’s Mess’. These are Coalition talismans as well.

    The problem for Abbott is that no-one much is taking a religious view of these talismans. The three word slogans worked like magic to give them power but they have lost their mojo.

  • 120
    guytaur
    Posted Tuesday, July 1, 2014 at 8:59 am | Permalink

    Puff

    The point I am making is the same as others. Its a myth that woman will not do unilateral starts of war.

    As for the men starting wars woman could slow them down considerably by denying access to themselves and their children before they become warmongers.

    Even in a society like Saudi Arabia it takes woman not standing up for those men to succeed. Why it is heartening to see woman and male allies standing up on the car driving issue.

    Remember the saying for evil to succeed it only takes the good doing nothing. This applies to men too of course.

    As for woman starting wars that is for a very good reason. Due to patriarchy woman have had fewer opportunities to start wars.

    Another example. Woman without male backed war machines forcing them into have been suicide bombers.

    The truth is the use of violence by woman has been prevented by the lack of access to power not because woman are genetically blocked from doing so.

    Ghandi was a man not a woman for the opposite side of the coin

  • 121
    lizzie
    Posted Tuesday, July 1, 2014 at 9:01 am | Permalink

    Bernard Keane ‏@BernardKeane 31m
    Tax dodger Glencore laments being asked to pay commercial prices for port access http://bit.ly/1mBZsYG

  • 122
    Posted Tuesday, July 1, 2014 at 9:01 am | Permalink

    I think the arrival of the new senate & Clive’s recent grandstanding has refocused voters’ minds on the stinker of a budget & consequently how much they dislike the government.

    The budget is set to take centre stage over the next few weeks. :)

  • 123
    confessions
    Posted Tuesday, July 1, 2014 at 9:02 am | Permalink

    The budget is set to take centre stage over the next few weeks.

    Esp since Hockey built himself a budget black hole.

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-07-01/budget-hole-as-savings-measures-delayed-by-senate/5561118

  • 124
    guytaur
    Posted Tuesday, July 1, 2014 at 9:04 am | Permalink

    I see zoomster (and GG) are attacking the Greens again.

    Greg Hunt will love that. As for wedging don’t believe the press a difference of opinion resolved is not wedging.

  • 125
    J341983
    Posted Tuesday, July 1, 2014 at 9:10 am | Permalink

    I’m increasingly of the view that we need to take the respondent-allocated numbers a little more seriously… especially in this environment.

  • 126
    bemused
    Posted Tuesday, July 1, 2014 at 9:10 am | Permalink

    Puff, the Magic Dragon.@90

    Bemused
    If you keep responding to posts of mine with which you do not agree by questioning my sanity, my emotional control and accusing me of having delusions, I am going to put you on my STFU list. I gave up putting up with that shit years ago and I am damned if I am going to put up with it here.

    Back off.

    I do none of that.

    I think the word you are looking for is ‘misandry’. Everything is the fault of men or otherwise gender based.

    Well guess what? I don’t give a toss about a persons gender. I judge them by their deeds and results. I have supported both male and female candidates over the years and at present think I have a great local candidate who just happens to be female.

  • 127
    Darn
    Posted Tuesday, July 1, 2014 at 9:11 am | Permalink

    No mention of the Newspoll on the 3aw 7.30 news this morning. Very disappointing.

  • 128
    zoomster
    Posted Tuesday, July 1, 2014 at 9:13 am | Permalink

    guytaur

    .. a difference of opinion resolved

    What difference of opinion was ‘resolved’?

  • 129
    zoomster
    Posted Tuesday, July 1, 2014 at 9:16 am | Permalink

    bemused

    you say – and sincerely believe, I’m sure – that you’re gender blind, but you’re not.

    Sorry, but there it is.

  • 130
    guytaur
    Posted Tuesday, July 1, 2014 at 9:20 am | Permalink

    zoomster

    The fact is the Greens have an official position and there is acceptance of that after the decision taken.

    Thats not wedging. No matter how much the media trys to make out otherwise. Same rule applies with Labor.

    The wedging on boats is a media and political attack term by the right. It boils down to divide and conquer.

  • 131
    bemused
    Posted Tuesday, July 1, 2014 at 9:22 am | Permalink

    zoomster@129

    bemused

    you say – and sincerely believe, I’m sure – that you’re gender blind, but you’re not.

    Sorry, but there it is.

    Ok, I admit it.

    I am biased in favour of my granddaughters. :P

  • 132
    Fran Barlow
    Posted Tuesday, July 1, 2014 at 9:26 am | Permalink

    From last thread …

    bemused defined ‘effective opposition’ as follows:

    One capable of forming a government and actually doing stuff. N.B. Not the Greens.

    I’d say that an effective opposition was one that could manage to prevent things getting done. The opposition to the 43rd parliament met your test, but failed mine.

    We Greens are obviously not yet an effective opposition but that’s not to say we won’t be one day. Sometime after that, we may even get to lead a government. Whatever we do though, we will do the most important thing — stand four-square alongside those fighting for social justice and fair dealing, for environmental sustainability and social inclusion. Neither of the current ruling parties can make that claim, and I doubt they’d even try.

  • 133
    guytaur
    Posted Tuesday, July 1, 2014 at 9:26 am | Permalink

    @JEChalmers: Tremendous insights into inequality and economic opportunity just now from Ken Henry at @ANUCrawford leadership conference #auspol #ausecon

  • 134
    guytaur
    Posted Tuesday, July 1, 2014 at 9:30 am | Permalink

    “@BernardKeane: Fantastic news for @greghuntmp coming in today’s Essential poll. (and yeah, I’m being seriously sarcastic)”

  • 135
    zoomster
    Posted Tuesday, July 1, 2014 at 9:31 am | Permalink

    bemused

    being biased in favour of your granddaughters is actually proving the point.

    I have neices and nephews. I love some of my neices more than some of my nephews, and some of my nephews more than some of my neices.

    That’s an example of not being gender biased.

  • 136
    zoomster
    Posted Tuesday, July 1, 2014 at 9:32 am | Permalink

    guytaur

    I didn’t say the Greens were wedged, I said there had been a wedge driven between the Greens and some of their supporters.

  • 137
    guytaur
    Posted Tuesday, July 1, 2014 at 9:34 am | Permalink

    bemused

    Bisexuals and Asexuals may have a claim to no gender bias.

  • 138
    zoomster
    Posted Tuesday, July 1, 2014 at 9:34 am | Permalink

    A quick correction – I did say the Greens were wedged!!

    However, what I meant is what I said above – that a wedge had been driven between the Greens and their supporters.

    So the Greens have been wedged.

  • 139
    guytaur
    Posted Tuesday, July 1, 2014 at 9:35 am | Permalink

    zoomster

    Nope. Thats media narrative.

  • 140
    zoomster
    Posted Tuesday, July 1, 2014 at 9:36 am | Permalink

    Oh, and guytaur, you still haven’t explained which difference of opinion was resolved.

  • 141
    zoomster
    Posted Tuesday, July 1, 2014 at 9:37 am | Permalink

    guytaur

    you will also note that I used the word ‘appears’.

    As for it being media narrative, it well may be. I did say I was posting the article out of interest, not because I necessarily agreed with anything is said.

  • 142
    bemused
    Posted Tuesday, July 1, 2014 at 9:39 am | Permalink

    Jolyon Wagg@106


    PTMD,

    I hope you continue posting here. You are one of the people that I don’t feel the need to scroll past.

    I share that sentiment.

    Puffy makes some very good posts which I enjoy.

  • 143
    guytaur
    Posted Tuesday, July 1, 2014 at 9:40 am | Permalink

    zoomster

    Why this obsession with the Greens? With the polls being like they are I would have thought Labor had a better chance in your electorate?

    I did tell you. You just don’t like the answer as it doesn’t let you continue your Green attack.

  • 144
    zoomster
    Posted Tuesday, July 1, 2014 at 9:42 am | Permalink

    guytaur

    if you hadn’t used my name, I wouldn’t have responded.

    It’s possible to criticise a party you agree with – I have frequently criticised Labor on this site, and on this very issue.

  • 145
    guytaur
    Posted Tuesday, July 1, 2014 at 9:44 am | Permalink

    zoomster

    I was replying to your post so of course I used your name.

  • 146
    bemused
    Posted Tuesday, July 1, 2014 at 9:45 am | Permalink

    zoomster@135

    bemused

    being biased in favour of your granddaughters is actually proving the point.

    I have neices and nephews. I love some of my neices more than some of my nephews, and some of my nephews more than some of my neices.

    That’s an example of not being gender biased.

    OK, you pinged me. I am biased in favour of my female grandchildren. :P

  • 147
    zoomster
    Posted Tuesday, July 1, 2014 at 10:01 am | Permalink

    bemused

    I’m sorry to tell you, but that’s actually a recognised patriachal trait.

  • 148
    guytaur
    Posted Tuesday, July 1, 2014 at 10:02 am | Permalink

    Abbott PEP speech on 24 now

  • 149
    Fran Barlow
    Posted Tuesday, July 1, 2014 at 10:03 am | Permalink

    Guytaur

    The truth is the use of violence by woman has been prevented by the lack of access to power not because woman are genetically blocked from doing so.

    This argument is so silly — a bit like saying that if my aunt were a man she’d be my uncle. ;-)

    To the best of my knowledge, there is no chromosome for being a psychopath or mass murderer, or being predisposed to start or carry on wars or systematic violence. I see no genetic reason why men ought to be especially inclined to misanthropy, relative to women. There are quite a few cultural reasons for it of course.

    It’s all pretty moot though because power and wealth is skewed radically in favour of the male portion of the planet, and is likely to remain that way for quite a bit longer. Matriarchy, if it ever came to dominate the Earth’s social arrangements, might well prove just as violent and nasty as patriarchy. Then again, it might not. After all, the circumstances in which a matriarchy arose might well be a consensus about the cultural failures of patriarchy, including an unhealthy pre-occupation with conquest and dominance. It is conceivable that the cultural context would preclude matriarchy simply putting old patriarchal wine into new matriarchal bottles. (Teats?)

    ;-)

    In any event, well before we could have a matriarchy there would be a period in which patriarchy had been overthrown which would probably be quite long and might well satisfy everyone well enough for the gender question to be regarded as settled, fore losing further change, so we could never know for sure what a matriarchy would have done with their power, or what power would have done to them. For mine, where humans need to go is away from power over others and towards authentic community with peers. Power of the kind one sees in human relations, is at best a mere proxy for the desires and aspirations of most people, arising in circumstances where there simply isn’t enough to guarantee everyone’s wants and where the satisfaction of the wants of a privileged few becomes the exemplar or cautionary tale, depending on your perspective, for the many.

    We are never going to find out for sure whether men as a group are more damaged by power and privilege than women nor get the chance to replace them all with women to find out. And while the rule of men has resulted in men as a class being more privileged on the whole than women, the reality remains that the vast majority of men are saddled with overheads for that privilege that deny them the possibility of achieving insight as surely as it is denied to women. In the poorest communities, the privileges men have at the expense of women come at a terrible cost to them too. In a very real sense, they must honour what oppresses them.

    The struggle for the inclusion of all the marginalised in social life serves, in the long run, even the vast majority of the relatively privileged, which is why all of us, male and female, regardless of ethnicity or class privilege or sexual orientation ought to see this winning struggle as a duty, rather than a struggle peculiar to the marginalised.

  • 150
    bemused
    Posted Tuesday, July 1, 2014 at 10:04 am | Permalink

    zoomster@147

    bemused

    I’m sorry to tell you, but that’s actually a recognised patriachal trait.

    :lol: :lol: :lol:

    Can’t win, can I?

Womens Agenda

loading...

Smart Company

loading...

StartupSmart

loading...

Property Observer

loading...