Flexing my mussel

15 Oct

WARNING: this post contains images of shellfish and flowers that some readers may find confronting

I’m not at all disturbed by the disgraced Peter Slipper likening my lady bits to a shellfish, in one of many private text messages sent to his then new friend James Ashby.

For a start, as I have often said, one overlooks the insult (if indeed we confer on this text message the status of insult) on considering the source, and chooses not to waste one’s time and energy getting exercised about it.

Secondly, the comment is hardly original. Women’s genitals have been likened to fish of one kind or another many times before. Does anyone recall that scene in Bliss, the Peter Carey novel turned film, in which sardines cascade from Bettina Joy’s vagina? Yes. Well. Is it a boy thing?

For myself, I’m more inclined towards the Georgia O’Keeffe visual analogies such as this one:

But hey, whatever floats your fishing boat.

On the other hand, I find Opposition leader Tony Abbott’s comments on women profoundly disturbing. For example:

It would be folly to expect that women would ever approach equal representation in a large number of areas simply because their aptitudes, their abilities and interests are different for physiological reasons. 

Or:

The problem with the Australian practice of abortion is that an objectively grave matter has been reduced to a question of the mother’s convenience… Even those who think that abortion is a woman’s right should be troubled by the fact that 100,000 Australian women choose to destroy their unborn babies every year… When it comes to lobbying local politicians, there seems to be far more interest in the treatment of boat people, which is not morally black and white, than in the question of abortion, which is.

Why anyone would spend five minutes of their time worrying about how immature men describe female genitalia when we have an aspiring Prime Minister who thinks like this about women, is a mystery to me.

Then there is the semantic quarrel about the difference between sexism and misogyny. You don’t have to hate women to be sexist, apparently, but you do have to hate us to be a misogynist. Why do I not feel consoled by this distinction?

And let’s not forget hatred can take many forms. It does not have to be overt. It adapts itself readily to many guises. If I am treated as inferior because of my sex, as Mr Abbott suggests, am I to feel better about this if it is described to me as sexism rather than misogyny? Surely sexism is an expression of misogyny?

Tony Abbott has three daughters. He feels their virginity is their most  precious gift. He reduces his daughters to a hymen, a reduction I would argue denies them their full  humanity, as so many of Abbott’s statements about women deny us our full humanity.

What we need to ask is do we want a Prime Minister whose default position is to deny women our full humanity?

And why would he want to do this if he doesn’t hate us, however well that hatred may be disguised?

About these ads

68 Responses to “Flexing my mussel”

  1. annodyne October 15, 2012 at 9:17 am #

    I can ignore Slipper’s mussel thing – his arse must be a vile sight.
    I agree with you that sexism is merely one of the ways in which misogyny manifests.
    As for Abbott’s view that all terminations are for the mother’s convenience, I could debate with him that the absolute majority are for the father’s convenience; and would remind him that it suited him well to have a girlfriend relinquish the infant he/they thought was his.
    I know more about this than he does, having endured both for the same father.

    The pressure on his daughters must be awful, and on Margie to keep them corralled when he is in Canberra so much. What a hypocrite he is to deny them sex-before-nuptuals, when he did not deny himself the same, or that poor girlfriend still suffering the trauma of relinquishing an infant. I wish a pox on him.

    Like

  2. paul walter October 15, 2012 at 9:49 am #

    That’s the the neatest thing you’ve done for weeks.
    Am still trying to get past Slipper getting the boot for the shellfish remark, a private chat not public till that weasel Ashby dragged him down and this inadvertently turned up on the subsequent dumpster trawl that culminated in Abbotts call for the removal someone who Gillard pointed out, had been an old friend.
    As for it being a symbol of a deeper malaise, I wonder. Woman have told me what goes on and gets said at hen’s parties, after a few, for example. Coarse comments and belly-laughter about the opposite sex may just be human behaviour as much as evidence of a cultural basis for misogyny or misandry.
    I’m not saying this is definitively so, but has the final, conclusive evidence, one way or another, arrived yet?
    But Abbott and Jones are different and their stuff is similar to the murky stuff I’ve seen put up by US FB friends as to the “war on women”, reminiscent in sentiment to the sort of stuff annodyne is describing, conducted particularly by the right over there.
    This is not just a joke at the barbecue everyone laughs at in common, but is stuff laden with thuggery. I was watching Abbott’s body language during Gillard’s speech and I thought, “this fella really does try to impose himself”, sort of “role over or I’ll belt you” stuff. I wondered if Gillard doesn’t feel suffocated by the presence some times.
    The sort of stuff that comes from hard right types seems similar when it applies to race, “Mississippi Burning” stuff.
    It’s a nasty outlook not just racist, not just misogynistic but bespeaking an underlying attitude involving a jackboot power trip that repels many men as well as women.
    I believe Abbott is misogynist and several other things reactive, to boot.

    Like

    • Hypocritophobe October 15, 2012 at 10:23 am #

      The Grech and Slipper affairs are twins, as are the coalition players involved, in both incidents.
      Ashby will be cast aside, like a used condom soon enough.

      Like

    • helvityni October 15, 2012 at 2:01 pm #

      Well said, Paul Walter.

      Like

  3. Hypocritophobe October 15, 2012 at 10:19 am #

    If Abbott has ever used the C word in a fit of rage he stands condemned on his own standards song sheet.
    Abbotts misogyny is the least of his flaws we, as Australians, should be worried about.
    The wall punch ‘allegation’ is a tad too indicative of things to come AFAICT.
    Being their leader, it shows just how low the coalition standards are.

    I have noticed his head has begun shaking more and more during his interviews lately, and his face has become more contorted.I think we have another Mohammed Ali, Parkinsons candidate coming up.Boxing has a habit of doing that.

    Like

  4. Sam Jandwich October 15, 2012 at 10:34 am #

    Hello,

    I’ve been enjoying Fiona Apple’s new album recently. But what’s the name of that phenomenon where you mishear song lyrics and imagine you’ve heard something else? Perhaps it’s my hyper-sexed mind, but “just tolerate my little fish rubbing on your forest chest” is actually not how the song goes!! Sounds quite scratchy and unpleasant anyways.

    And it’s interesting that Master Abbott would use the word “folly”, which as we know is supposed to describe a particularly feminine kind of madness…

    Like

    • Hypocritophobe October 15, 2012 at 10:48 am #

      Mondegreen or something like that????????????

      Like

      • annodyne October 15, 2012 at 11:52 am #

        yes. The Archive of Misheard Lyrics = http://www.kissthisguy.com/
        This Week #1 suits boxer Abbott:
        Robert Palmer. Addicted To Love. Might as well face it, you’re a dick with a glove …

        Like

        • paul walter October 16, 2012 at 2:44 am #

          I rather liked the REM one.

          Like

  5. Hypocritophobe October 15, 2012 at 1:48 pm #

    “WARNING: this post contains images of shellfish and flowers that some readers may find confronting”

    ..and then I scrolled down…
    So is Abbott flower or fish?

    Like

    • helvityni October 15, 2012 at 1:59 pm #

      …neither, he is by now a very experienced filleter of fish.

      Like

    • Jennifer Wilson October 16, 2012 at 7:08 am #

      unidentified life form

      Like

      • hudsongodfrey October 16, 2012 at 9:15 am #

        “Life captain, but not as we know it”, as they say in the classics :)

        Like

      • ann odyne October 16, 2012 at 10:52 am #

        ‘unidentified life form’ For The Win JW.
        If Only I had known when 16 to not go off with a boy who had no respect for his mother.
        (of course a mother has to be worthy of respect, and that’s another theme) BUT – what do we know about his Abbott’s mother – that’s where it all starts. My view is that nurtured mothers produce decent people.

        Like

  6. gerard oosterman October 15, 2012 at 3:27 pm #

    I’ll stick to raw herrings with onions for now.

    Like

  7. Marilyn October 15, 2012 at 3:55 pm #

    Anyone ever listen to Marianne Faithfull? Here are the lyrics to a secret delight song of betrayal.

    http://www.lyricsfreak.com/m/marianne+faithfull/whyd+ya+do+it+_20088583.html

    It’s a ripper of a song, brilliantly executed by a WOMAN.

    What about Martha Wainwright’s ode to dear old dad Loudon – that gem is called Bloody Motherfucking arsehole.

    Chrissy Amphlett – I touch myself.

    The imprisoned Pussy Riot?

    Toni Childs wrote an entire album called The Woman’s boat which is about sex, genitals, rapists and so on. And Mike Tyson thought Gillard was Bad ass, ‘nough said.

    Are we really still whinging about so called sexism in this day and age?

    Jennifer we are old and tired now, we had that war surely.

    I suspect the petals are being a wee bit precious while they are doing this to women.

    Papua New Guinea
    “The Government of Papua New Guinea in accordance with article 42 paragraph 1 of the Convention makes a reservation with respect to the provisions contained in articles 17 (1), 21, 22 (1), 26, 31, 32 and 34 of the Convention and does not accept the obligations stipulated in these articles.”

    Article 17 1 – the right to work.

    Artilce 21 – no housing

    Article 22 – no right to education
    Article 26 – no freedom of movement
    Article 31 – they are allowed to punish refugees
    32 – they can expel refugees
    34 – no naturalization

    This debate is seriously juvenile because really sticks and stones willl break my bones but names will never hurt me.

    Although dear old Rupert calling the people who have been hacked by newslitd. scumbags is a bit rich it is nothing compared to what his staff did to them.

    Like

    • doug quixote October 16, 2012 at 12:41 am #

      Hmm. I think I have reprinted the lyrics to “Why’d ya do it’ in full at least twice in my posts.

      Women are fine by me, especially the feisty variety. Don’t know why, but I’m attracted to strong women. Freud might have had a guess.

      Like

      • Marilyn October 16, 2012 at 6:13 am #

        It’s a geat song and I am as feisty as all hell.

        Like

    • Jennifer Wilson October 16, 2012 at 7:07 am #

      Yes, we’ve fought in the war all our adult lives, Marilyn, it’s probably time the younger ones take over if they care to…

      I agree with you – it’s easy to make a noise about ribald descriptions of genitals (and women have many such ribald descriptions of male tackle) while letting the real dangers go unaddressed and unremarked.

      Like

      • Sam Jandwich October 16, 2012 at 10:12 am #

        That’s where Lucy Jordan comes in :-)

        There are microcosms of societies out there which would warm the tiredest of hearts. So many young women these days are so sure of themselves and of what they want, and so convinced that there is no justification for anything to get in the way of that, that I really think that amongst the ranks of the well-educated and socially-minded there is a place where sexism and misogyny are seen for what they are – unnecessary, backward, and deleterious viewpoints held only by infantile and thoughtless people.

        But society is so fragmented these days, and we are learning more and more about gender divides that exist in places we might once not have known about, or conveniently denied, or which are re-emerging under our very nose.

        From my perspective the feminist viewpoint is well established. The work that your generation has put into the endeavour has resulted in feminism having become mainstream.

        but I’m starting to wonder whether it’s enough. It seems to me that it creates a situation where people are able to look after themselves, but the challenge now is not to bat off dinosaurs like Abbott, but to get people to care about people with whom they have nothing in common, to the extent that we become willing to share our wealth, time, and expertise more equitably. ,

        Like

        • Marilyn October 16, 2012 at 6:35 pm #

          The five most powerful people in Australia are women because of the work we old broads did for decades.

          We don’t need a new generation of whiney girls without a clue to bitch and moan when they have it so damn good.

          Like

  8. Marilyn October 15, 2012 at 3:57 pm #

    And the vagina is a muscle. Has to be so it can expand and shrink and push out babies.

    Like

  9. hudsongodfrey October 15, 2012 at 7:57 pm #

    Abbott doesn’t say that he hates women, even if he does seem to take this faith’s position on their role on society. That position is sexist because it doesn’t believe in equality in the sense that women have agency to aspire to a role of their own determination whatever that may be. It is in effect an argument that suffers from the broader critique of religion that we question in terms of how this ideology lays claims that it knowing what is best for others. I think that view is wrong and I’m hardly in a minority in so doing, but wrong in a way that is not necessarily misogynist.

    I don’t know that proponents of Christian or Catholic beliefs necessarily express a level of antipathy towards women that deserves to be labelled misogynistic. Gillard used the term because there has been a level of that in attacks upon her, and she was quite justified in so doing in the individual cases of some of the vitriol aimed in her general direction.

    So if we can rightly argue that Abbott can’t take advantage of “the enemy of my enemy is my friend”, without himself being guilty of misogyny by association, then nor can we claim he’s misogynist if he distances himself from that as he has occasionally done. I think that as a person he’s sexist, but that if he’s also a misogynist then it isn’t something I see him overtly expressing. The reason why I think he gets accused of misogyny is because he is perhaps willing to overlook it in others if they take his side in politics. And therein lies the rub if that’s also what Gillard is seen to have done with Peter Slipper.

    I’ll grant that Slipper’s immature ramblings about genitalia, if that’s what they were, are relatively inconsequential. But the bigger picture is of a professed atheist from the left of Australian politics entering into a political deal with Anglican Catholic priest from the National Party in an attempt to make political capital out of a situation that in retrospect always stretched the bounds of credulity. So while I think that ultimately the matter of Slipper’s alleged misogyny is trifling, other things Gillard has overlooked over the course of the journey with him as speaker have been somewhat less so. Her willingness to compromise for political convenience has been as obvious as Abbott’s in this regard.

    There could perhaps be few burdens more onerous than being a female politician bearing the brunt of feminist expectations. The fact remains that what I agree with Jennifer most strongly about is that the Gillard government when it comes to women’s rights have a record that while less than perfect, is nevertheless miles ahead of what we know to expect under an Abbott led coalition.

    Abbott’s recent use of his wife’s endorsement to try and whitewash over his appallingly sexist attitudes is by way of an admission as to how bad they really are. The picture his stance on those issues paints of the man who might lead this country is an unflattering one. It is of an individual driven by ideas that are regarded by most as regressive. Ideas that of all the subjects we could touch upon have been discredited and rejected by more feminists more vociferously and more clearly than any other views he holds about any other aspect of his party’s policies. And less heeded! And that in a nutshell is the problem that I see, Abbott is the kind of man who fails to listen, and fails to listen particularly to women.

    Like

  10. paul walter October 15, 2012 at 8:51 pm #

    So much to like in this thread. If you offer Australians an example of something in the world, as it is, unencumbered of “mediatisation”, they quickly enough work out what it’s actually about, what’s actually happening and what’s driving it.
    Jennifer and Marilyn were right to point out that woman’s pink bits are actually quite remarkable, as are their owners. Why should they not have pride in themselves and resolutely repudiate attempts to devalue them. Annodyne and others mentioned the lack of patience men show and its fair enough to expect that women will show a bit of caution before allowing themselves into a compromising or harmful situation.
    So the battle of the sexes emerges and can be contestive, sometimes even spiteful. That it is human nature to behave in certain ways of course in no way precludes the need for correction, as we saw with the PM and Abbott and in some cases retribution, involving those who can’t govern their tempers or keep their fists to themselves or those that take what is not theirs through rape.
    Hormones of course drive it all; without them we’d be just flatworms in the primeval mud, never really conscious or alive. So we have consciousness and a measure of free will, but our lives are difficult mechanisms to drive sometimes.
    So Hudsongodfrey sees well enough and concludes, I think on behalf of other contributors, that the situation is about a blockhead who cannot or will not learn; is somehow convinced that life is about power and control and hence needs to be warned of, to others. I agree with the conclusion that he needs to listen, to include, to “let go”, other wise he is forced to continue his life as brownshirted flatworm, never fulfilled and a risk to others.

    Like

  11. doug quixote October 16, 2012 at 12:36 am #

    “. . . crying cockles and mussels alive, alive o”

    Never thought Molly was such a rude girl . . .

    Like

  12. Hypocritophobe October 16, 2012 at 12:51 am #

    “The Love Shuck” ?

    Like

    • Ron Savage October 16, 2012 at 10:46 am #

      Hi

      Here’s an example of the, err, shoe on the other foot, although the limb in question isn’t a leg:

      http://savage.net.au/Flowers/Alocasia.colocasia.html

      Try googling for this flower, and the internet suddenly seems to be censored re images like this (yes, I know it never happens), but that’s why I’ve had so much trouble identifying this flower…

      And yes, it really is a flower which really does bloom in my front garden.

      So, here’s cheers to flower lovers everywhere.

      Like

      • Hypocritophobe October 16, 2012 at 11:07 am #

        Isn’t that plant an elephants ear?

        Like

        • Ron Savage October 16, 2012 at 11:37 am #

          Hi

          Now that’s I’ve (** cough cough **) fixed the faulty links to Wikipedia’s entries on Alocasia and Colocasia at the bottom of the page, you can see that there are a large range of flowers in the 2 categories, and yes, some are, perhaps unfortunately, called Elephant’s Ear.

          But my flower dictionary, The Royal Horticultural Society Encyclopedia of Plants and Flowers says:
          o Giant Elephant Ear is Alocasia macrorrhiza, but
          o Elephant Ear is Philodendron domesticum.

          Such Is Life.

          BTW – You may be wondering why I did not prefix my original link with a warning along the coy/blunt lines of:
          Warning: If you have religious sensibilities or any other type of perversion, DO NOT CLICK ON THIS LINK!

          Well, the real answer is of course I only thought of that after I posted (such is life), and the most provocative answer is that I wanted such people to click on it…

          Like

          • samjandwich October 16, 2012 at 12:19 pm #

            Seems you’ve been deflowered…

            Like

            • Hypocritophobe October 16, 2012 at 2:15 pm #

              Pluck me dead.

              Like

        • paul walter October 16, 2012 at 3:20 pm #

          It is more likely the mouses ear.

          Like

  13. 730reportland October 16, 2012 at 1:34 pm #

    Slipper and Ashby are a pair of dills, and they were texting to each other, thanks to the embedded media this nonsense has been megaphoned, as was the screeching between the leaders of the duopoly in parliament. Did you folks catch Oakshott on LatelineLand? While the duopoly leaders were screeching, Windsor and Oakshott convinced Slipper to resign. Have you noticed they have received Little credit from the embedded media?

    Like

    • Marilyn October 16, 2012 at 4:18 pm #

      But there was no reason for Slipper to do anything at all.

      Like

    • doug quixote October 16, 2012 at 7:20 pm #

      Windsor seems to me to be a very sensible man, a wise elder. Imagine my dismay when I bruited this view to a good friend with whom I see eye to eye most often : “Arrogant prat!” he said of Windsor. But I think they have history . . . I suppose it just goes to show how individual we all are in our view of things.

      Like

      • Hypocritophobe October 16, 2012 at 7:34 pm #

        Common sense and statesmanship are neutered from the two big parties who are loyal to factions,party lines and platforms.
        It never used to be so.
        Windsor and Oakeshott use their cerebral cortex’s,synapses and ears.
        Both of the right wingers(Labor/Coalition) have pre-written scripts from masters above.
        Sadly the MSM will fuel the demise of these 2 indies.
        They have been walking upright since the formation of government,unlike their friends and foes.

        Like

      • 730reportland October 17, 2012 at 1:50 pm #

        Yes DQ, Windsor does seem to be sensible, actually I find all the independents/green reasonably more sensible than the duopoly. Unfortunately, I too suspect what Hypo suggests, that the embedded media will campaign for their demise. The minority `water-melon` government doesn`t fit with the embedded media`s pre-welded narratives.

        Like

      • Marilyn October 17, 2012 at 4:30 pm #

        I did too until he and Oakeshott supported the shoving away of refugees to birdshit islands in breach of the law.

        Like

  14. paul walter October 16, 2012 at 9:15 pm #

    Agrees with Marilyn.
    What a storm in a tea cup.
    On such as this, are the precious resources and time of the nation’s peak legislative body profligately squandered.

    Like

    • doug quixote October 16, 2012 at 10:57 pm #

      Storms in teacups is what the opposition are good at. Miserable opportune and pathetic, but enough storms in teacups act like the dripping tap. Some psyches are weaker than others, and Slipper has had everything but the kitchen sink thrown at him by the Murdoch Press and its running dogs.

      I have no love for Slipper, and he has revealed a rather miserable character as well – hardly surprising, he was a Liberal member for 20 years or so – but he was a quite effective Speaker when he presided.

      This opposition is so transparent as to be laughable, a Pirates of Penzance opposition, seeking to drive certain members of parliament out of parliament in any way it can manage.

      Both major parties are the same? Bullshit.

      Like

      • paul walter October 16, 2012 at 11:04 pm #

        What has stunk even more has been the naked misinforming by the Press Gallery. Just answering elsewhere,said I finally conceived of a species of life I detest more than politicians.

        Like

  15. paul walter October 17, 2012 at 12:00 am #

    Emma Alberici and Latteline were too quick on their feet. Morrison and Bowen have egg on their faces for different reasons and it’s as it should be.

    Like

  16. Marilyn October 17, 2012 at 4:32 pm #

    And today real news over takes, news that under Gillard there has been a conspiracy with the US over Assange and the case used against Hicks fell right over in a heap.

    Imagine how wealthy he will be once all the compos are paid by state and federal government.

    Another poke in the eyes to the egregiously dreadful Brandis and co. who branded, tarred and feathered Hicks and one in the eye for Neil James as well.

    Like

    • Hypocritophobe October 17, 2012 at 4:57 pm #

      Julia Gillard-Howard, a man’s feminist.
      Cricket anyone?

      Like

      • Forrest Gumpp (@ForrestGumpp) October 17, 2012 at 5:08 pm #

        Odd you should mention cricket, Hypocritophobe.

        Like

        • Forrest Gumpp (@ForrestGumpp) October 19, 2012 at 10:56 am #

          Just flexing my mussel again.

          Like

        • Forrest Gumpp (@ForrestGumpp) October 19, 2012 at 11:40 am #

          Flexing my mussels more properly this time. I knew just two tweets wasn’t the whole conversation.

          Like

          • Forrest Gumpp (@ForrestGumpp) October 19, 2012 at 12:24 pm #

            Grrrr! That didn’t work the way I thought it would, had been led to believe it would. Perhaps it is the WordPress link spam protection cutting in? Anyway, I post a couple of links to Twitpics that DO show the missing part of the conversation:

            http://twitpic.com/b5dacc

            http://twitpic.com/b5dbl6

            It is important, because it reveals a non-sequitur response from the AEC within 33 minutes ON A SUNDAY!

            I hate non-sequiturs, and you should, too.

            Like

          • Forrest Gumpp (@ForrestGumpp) October 20, 2012 at 8:48 am #

            I know this post is going to appear a bit off-topic here, but the opportunity to place something that may in coming days be seen to be important on record seems too good to pass up. I didn’t know that posting a link to a tweet on ‘Sheep’ would result in the tweet and/or conversation being reproduced with ‘live’ links and mouse-over features as if one was on Twitter itself, and this has got me ever-so-slightly excited.

            Perhaps it only appears like that if, while viewing a thread on ‘Sheep’, one also has a Twitter account. For all I know, those having no Twitter account may only see a few non-self-explanatory conventional links. If such be so, my apologies, but I think many who post here are on Twitter. Viewers who are not will just have to make do with the Twitpics linked to in my post of October 19, 2012 at 12:24 pm, above.

            I’m pretty sure that I first saw Senator Ursula Stephens’ tweet when I looked at my Twitter timeline around 8:00 AM on Sunday 9 September. The reason I am so sure is because I do not ‘follow’ @ursulastephens on Twitter, did not see her tweet as having been retweeted by someone I do follow, and wondered as to how her tweet had appeared in my timeline accordingly. (Perhaps there is some way a user can get to tweet more ‘globally’ to Twitter users in a given geographical area, and Senator Stephens was able to do that.)

            The thing also was that I happened to know a little bit about the level of provisional electoral enrollment (ie. of 17-year-olds) apparently being achieved as at around roll close time for the 2010 Federal elections, and had posted upon this in several places on OnLineOpinion. As can be seen, I attempted to give Senator Stephens a heads-up to the fact that there might be something anomalous about the number of 17-year-olds that seemingly moved onto the rolls as fully qualified electors in the 22 days between 30 June 2010 and the 22 July 2010 roll close date.

            What happened next I found most surprising, given that I had tweeted my response at 8:10 AM on a Sunday. I received a tweeted response to my tweet from the (Twitter-authenticated) Australian Electoral Commission in just 33 minutes! On a Sunday morning before 9:00 AM!

            Sadly, that impressively quick response would have been recognised as a non-seqitur, with respect to the anomaly I had implied existed in my reply to Senator Stephens, by anyone knowing anything at all about the size and birth dates distribution of the 17-year-old cohort of the Australian population. That cohort would have constituted around 220,000 persons, the bulk of them also qualified by way of citizenship, that would, in a normal course of events as each turned 18, be placed upon the rolls as electors, if all were to have been provisionally enrolled.

            Birth date information is collected from applicants for provisional enrollment and stored in the AEC digital database, such that as any provisional elector turns 18, their change in status automatically results in their name appearing upon any certified list of electors produced for any given electoral event. Even those who turn 18 between a close of rolls and an election day are automatically placed upon the list, enabling them to vote if they turn up.

            Now the problem is that, according to the AEC’s own official records of enrollments, the 47,579 names that moved out of the 17-year-old enrollment cohort and seemingly into the combined 18 and 19-year-old enrollment cohort grouping should no way have shown such apparent concentration of birthdates in that 22-day period! If every single one of Australia’s 17-year-old cohort had been provisionally enrolled as at 30 June 2010, the maximum number that could have been expected to have turned 18 in those 22 days would have been around 14,000. The AEC, however, tells us that only around one quarter of those eligible actually exercise their right to provisionally enroll. That should have meant that we should have seen only around 3,500 enrollments move from the 17-year-olds column into the combined 18 and 19-year-olds column during these 22 days, not the 47,579 that seemingly left it according to the AEC’s published figures.

            If, after subtracting the believably to be expected 3,500 turning 18 in those 22 days, we divide the remaining 44,000 evenly between the around 150 Australian electoral Divisions, it amounts to nearly 300 enrollments per division over which, of statistical necessity, there hangs a degree of questionability as to their legitimacy. More than enough to have ‘hung’ a Parliament, was there to have been some centralised contrivance that emplaced those enrollments in the first place, and then used them in like fashion to claim votes. Of course, in reality, the distribution of these new entries upon the rolls would not have been expected to have been even, thereby concommitantly intensifying any distorting effect such may have potentially had upon electoral outcomes in those Divisions wherein more enrollments were concentrated.

            So can you see why I thought that AEC tweet was a non-seqitur as a response, and why I think that you, too, should dislike such non-seqiturs?

            Like

            • doug quixote October 23, 2012 at 7:06 pm #

              I would have thought that the announcement of a poll would focus the minds of those who became eligible to vote. There would be a “why bother to enroll now, there is no poll for ages ” effect.

              I registered a few days after turning 18 (something else I can thank Gough for, by the way) but very few would bother unless a poll is imminent.

              Like

              • Forrest Gumpp (@ForrestGumpp) October 23, 2012 at 8:03 pm #

                Doug Quixote,

                That explanation doesn’t stand up. There were shown to be 59,831 provisional electors ALREADY on the rolls as at 30 June 2010. The 2010 Federal elections were not called until 17 July 2010. By the time of the roll close on 22 July 2010, there were shown to be only 12,252 provisional electors on the rolls. The logical conclusion is that the 47,579 names that in that 22-day interval had disappeared from the 17-year-old column had moved, by reason of advancing age, into the 18 and 19-year-old column of the official record of electors enrolled published by the AEC.

                It may well be that a number of 17-year-olds were stimulated by the announcement of the Federal elections to provisionally enroll during the period 17 July to 22 July 2010, but they would not have contributed to the 30 June 2010 total of provisional electors shown as being enrolled. Indeed, to the extent that any 17-year-olds were so stimulated as you suggest, their enrollments would only serve to emphasise this apparently anomalous concentration of birth dates, not ameliorate it.

                Like

      • Marilyn October 18, 2012 at 3:44 pm #

        Yeah and let’s sell deadly shit to a country that has their own watchdog on nuclear power saying they are a second from disaster and have naval exercises to stop more pesky Sri Lankans from leaving to seek protection.

        Like

    • paul walter October 19, 2012 at 5:26 am #

      Richard Ackland follows it up in a great op-ed in the SMH, just out.

      Like

  17. paul walter October 23, 2012 at 11:12 am #

    The idiot has done it AGAIN.
    This time Captain Catholic reckons that mentally enfeebled Julia Gillard (a woman of course!) cannot work out a family budget because she doesn’t have children (despite being brought up in a working class home?).
    How does not having kids preclude understanding mundane budgeting, I don’t see the necessary connection between working out a budget and not having offspring.
    Even single people have to work out how to use their money over a week or fortnight.
    (Fumes).

    Like

    • doug quixote October 23, 2012 at 7:08 pm #

      Can’t help himself.

      BTW, be very careful with humour over at Ellis’ blog!

      Like

      • helvityni October 23, 2012 at 9:04 pm #

        Who are you scared of, DQ. I wish there was more friendliness and humour over there, as I said before if they are not more careful ,they’ll have only two people left with their numerous pseudos battling with each other.Frangipani was chased away, now they are swearing at Paul…

        Like

        • doug quixote October 23, 2012 at 9:39 pm #

          I am frightened of no-one behind the mask of anonymity. I would have thought it might be a problem for you, as your identity is an open secret.

          No, my difficulty is that I seek to persuade others to my eminently sensible view of the world, and to do that one must first establish some sort of rapport with even some of the more silly of the reprobates. Telling the worst of them to fuck off is the least cruel treatment in the long term; rather like with South Africans, when it is best to take an instant dislike to them – it saves time.

          Those who show some signs of intelligent life are to be cultivated, and brought to the light. :)

          Like

  18. paul walter October 23, 2012 at 9:38 pm #

    As I said over there Doug, it is one thing to question or probe or converse or disagree or agree; quite another to abuse and threaten.
    Some of them need to brighten up their attitudes.

    Like

  19. paul walter October 23, 2012 at 9:40 pm #

    Now, back to Hildegard of Abingen- quite fascinating to listen to both the ancient and modern reworked versions.
    Helvi, your sanity is a breath of fresh air.

    Like

  20. Forrest Gumpp (@ForrestGumpp) December 11, 2012 at 5:28 pm #

    Just flexing my mussel here by way of rescuing myself from the spam bin on account of too many links in my post. Can anybody see what I have linked to?

    http://noplaceforsheep.com/2012/12/03/hey-mr-tamborine-man/#comment-59129

    Like

    • Hypocritophobe December 11, 2012 at 8:18 pm #

      Yep

      Like

      • Forrest Gumpp (@ForrestGumpp) December 11, 2012 at 8:45 pm #

        Thanks Hypo, but your test will have been inconclusive as JW freed that post from the spam bin at 5:52PM. What I think is happening is that if I copy the link location (the little red #) from a post that I may have just made that is ‘awaiting moderation’ and post it elsewhere on ‘Sheep’ as a link, that anybody clicking the link will be able to bring up the post that is ‘awaiting moderation’.

        Thereby effectively defeating ‘awaiting moderation’.

        A WordPus bug, feature, or vulnerability? I don’t know.

        Whilst I can see my own ‘awaiting moderation’ posts, I’m still not sure whether anyone else but JW can do so when I post such a link.

        Like

        • Hypocritophobe December 11, 2012 at 9:39 pm #

          I doubt anyone but the originator and the blog admin would see such ‘pending’ posts.It would defeat the purpose.

          Like

          • Jennifer Wilson December 12, 2012 at 6:01 am #

            I don’t think anyone sees the trapped posts but me

            Like

            • Forrest Gumpp (@ForrestGumpp) December 12, 2012 at 6:36 am #

              That is only as it should be. However I was disconcerted by the appearance of my avatar in the ‘Recent comments’ list for my post with link to ‘Flexing ..’ at a time when one for my binned post to ‘Tamborine Man’ was not.

              Like

  21. Forrest Gumpp (@ForrestGumpp) October 27, 2013 at 9:01 am #

    Just for the titular record:

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 3,746 other followers

%d bloggers like this: