Why Abbott’s sex life is my business

6 Mar
Mr & Mrs Abbott

Mr & Mrs Abbott


There’s only one circumstance in which I consider the sexual lives of politicians to be my business, and that’s when they legislate about what goes on in other citizens’ sexual lives.

Failed Prime Minister Tony Abbott operates from a platform that is largely based on his personal morality, drawn from Catholic dogma. This morality advocates traditional heterosexual monogamous marriage, and argues fiercely that this is the only circumstance in which children ought to be raised.

Abbott supports the current Marriage Act with the amendment added by John Howard specifically to deny same-sex couples the right to marry.

Same-sex marriage will, in Abbott’s view, destroy what he perceives as the “sanctity” of monogamous heterosexual marriage.

Abbott foisted the notion of a plebiscite on same-sex marriage on his party, a completely unnecessary, extremely expensive and likely barbaric exercise in which citizens vote on whether or not other citizens are permitted to legally commit themselves to each other in marriage.

As health minister in the Howard government, Abbott refused Australian women access to the non surgical abortion pill known as RU 486 because his personal morality is offended by abortion. RU 486 had been declared perfectly safe, and was widely used in many parts of the world. Abbott directly interfered in the sexual lives and futures of women who did not wish to have a child, by denying us access to this drug should we need to use it, thus restricting our options in the event of unplanned pregnancy.

Abbott has paraded his wife and his daughters as evidence of his personal morality: he is a traditional, heterosexual married male, and therefore we assume him to be upholding monogamy as a significant value in our society and in his personal life.

Tony Abbott has made it his business to comment on, criticise and exercise legislative control over the sexual practices and commitments of Australians. If he is not living up to the ideals he demands are enforced, if Abbott is himself desecrating the perceived sanctity of monogamous marriage by infidelity with a married woman, I have a right to know about that hypocrisy.

If Tony Abbott would care to lose his interest in controlling the sexual practices of adult citizens, I will be more than happy to lose my interest in his. Until then, everything Tony Abbott does that can be seen to affect the sanctity of the ideals he espouses and imposes is my business, and yours, and everyone else’s.


85 Responses to “Why Abbott’s sex life is my business”

  1. John Samuel March 6, 2016 at 7:58 pm #

    A fair and reasonable attitude, if admittedly made easier to read by the StopTonyMeow extension I still have running in Chrome. 🙂

    Liked by 2 people

  2. Fiona March 6, 2016 at 8:30 pm #

    As a wise old bird suggested to me a few minutes ago, there is another circumstance that warrants interest in politicians’ sex lives:

    If politicians have been blackmailed (through sex or anything else) to do their work in a particular way then I want to know.


    A point well made, in my opinion.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Jennifer Wilson March 6, 2016 at 8:31 pm #

      Ah, yes, I hadn’t thought of that, Fiona


      • Fiona March 6, 2016 at 8:37 pm #

        I’m probably naive, Jennifer, but I think there’s always been more of a “publish and damn your eyes” attitude among Australian politicians than those in the UK or America.

        However, it’s not beyond the bounds of possibility. Just imagine certain senators indulging in certain unusual activities – a little blackmail could go a long way there.

        Liked by 1 person

        • Jennifer Wilson March 7, 2016 at 7:04 am #

          No, I don’t think it’s naive, Fiona, blackmail doesn’t seem to be a big thing in this country and it’s likely only a matter of time till that changes. Especially given there’s no moral leadership to be found in the parliament.


  3. Florence nee Fedup March 6, 2016 at 8:53 pm #

    I consider Abbott’s sex life my business, as he interferes in everyone else’s. #auspol

    Liked by 3 people

    • helvityni March 7, 2016 at 9:49 am #

      Abbott does not look very comfortable in that photo, I wonder why not…?

      Liked by 1 person

  4. 8 Degrees of Latitude March 6, 2016 at 9:12 pm #

    Your usual very cogent argument. With one point at which I might cavil. “If”. We don’t know whether Abbott has abused his self-proclaimed views about the supposed sanctity of marriage by consorting sexually with a woman married to someone else. It is a rumour; gossip; quite possibly scurrilous; and more than likely political in the intra-party sense. That said – I devoutly wish he and every other bedroom policeman would bugger off, mind their own business, and refrain from expensive duck-and-weave ‘plebiscites’ that are wholly unnecessary.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Jennifer Wilson March 7, 2016 at 7:00 am #

      Yes, 8 degrees, both parties have denied an affair. Whether they actually joined genitals isn’t the point for me. Bit like Bill Clinton saying he didn’t have sex with that woman because there wasn’t penetration.

      Their intimacy was alarming given their professional roles and power. Given as well the strict rules for monogamous heterosexual marriage, (which are not mine!) they were publicly emotionally unfaithful to their spouses.


      • paul walter March 7, 2016 at 9:02 pm #

        You and I are never going to see eye to eye on Clinton, are we?

        Cheese and chalk.

        However, Clinton did make one unforgiveable mistake and that was in discussing his wife with Lewinsky and for that I’m glad he copped some sort of comeuppance for that.

        But I’d just once like read something from a feminist that factors in the context of a monumental smear campaign against the Clintons to hog tie the government and considers the role of Linda Tripp, an individual more despicable than the Clintons and hapless Lewinsky combined.

        Liked by 1 person

        • Jennifer Wilson March 7, 2016 at 9:33 pm #

          No, we aren’t PW! I’m no Clinton fan, husband or wife.


          • paul walter March 8, 2016 at 12:30 am #

            Linda Tripp?

            Liked by 1 person

          • doug quixote March 8, 2016 at 9:27 am #

            You are hard to please. Bill Clinton was one of their better Presidents, and Hillary rated one of the better Secretaries of State.

            Bill misbehaved sexually, and Hillary probably knew more about it than they let on; but it isn’t OK in the strange moral codes of America for a partner to turn a blind eye to sexual misbehaviours.

            Hillary is strong and her strength includes knowing just what Bill is like, and not being bothered all that much about it. It sends the conservatives even more batshit crazy than they are. They can’t lay a glove on her.

            Liked by 1 person

            • Jennifer Wilson March 8, 2016 at 9:55 am #

              Well, I don’t live in the US, so I can be picky 🙂


            • Jennifer Wilson March 8, 2016 at 2:41 pm #

              DQ you’ll notice some of your replies to Tess Tierney are gone: I’ve trashed all her posts and all our replies.


              • doug quixote March 8, 2016 at 2:57 pm #

                Perfect, Guinevere.

                Liked by 1 person

                • paul walter March 8, 2016 at 6:58 pm #

                  Don’t agree. TessTierney is likely a sock puppet for some one else and “her” ideas seem odd to better educated people, but I hate the idea of someone, most of all someone maybe with issues, perhaps, winkled out.

                  You have always allowed people to comment freely in the past and let their arguments stand or fall on their merits, because there are enough people here capable of dismembering illogical posts.

                  From what I remember of TessTierneys’ posts, they were odd manifestation of a troubled soul, rather than deliberately trouble causing.

                  Liked by 1 person

                  • Jennifer Wilson March 8, 2016 at 7:44 pm #

                    Oh, PW, I haven’t got the energy just now. It was the religious assault I didn’t want. There’s no arguing, debating, reasoning with the religious, really there isn’t. I don’t need to look at my blog and be assaulted by religious claptrap just now. Nobody was engaging anyway, only DQ getting sweary. I don’t have a problem with different points of view and contrary opinions but the religious fanaticism is beyond me.


                    • paul walter March 8, 2016 at 8:41 pm #

                      You are an angel. I am so deeply fond of you I will conclude, earnestly, that you may be hasty in describing brotherly guidance as “mansplaining” .

                      It is a duty of care we feel we owe our sister’n yet so often our good intentions are rejected with contempt prior to investigation as native feminine impetuosity takes over, creating “errour”.

                      Liked by 1 person

                    • Jennifer Wilson March 9, 2016 at 7:07 am #



                    • paul walter March 8, 2016 at 8:49 pm #

                      You have to recognise though, if you don’t say you prayers before bed each night, God will know and will punish you later.. you will not get that birthday pressie you kept close to your heart, for not being nice to God.

                      Liked by 1 person

                    • Jennifer Wilson March 9, 2016 at 7:08 am #

                      *snort snort*
                      My birthday is the Ides of March. So….


                    • doug quixote March 9, 2016 at 7:13 pm #

                      “Getting sweary”!

                      I reserve the right to tell any religious nutter to fuck off. 🙂

                      It was pretty obvious that our Tessie was a sock puppet for some deranged Pell supporter, who’d wandered in because of the re-blogs.

                      Never darken our door again. If you want religious “debate” go to ABC religion; or better still, go to buggery.


                      Liked by 1 person

    • helvityni March 7, 2016 at 9:59 am #

      Something good might come out of Savva’s book, people who have forgotten what a book looks like, might start reading again…

      Booksellers are smiling again, this one will sell like hot cakes, better that sweet Annabel’s book on cakes..

      Liked by 3 people

      • Jennifer Wilson March 7, 2016 at 2:57 pm #

        Good point, Helvi 🙂


        • samjandwich March 8, 2016 at 1:34 pm #

          Indeedie! What always fascinates me is that, regardless of your efforts to portray yourself in a certain way, it is ultimately the public who will decide what role you fill in their lives.

          Abbott has become “that guy”, you know, the one we’re all told that we shouldn’t be.

          Liked by 1 person

          • Jennifer Wilson March 8, 2016 at 2:59 pm #

            Quite rightly, imo. Why on earth would anyone want to be like Abbott?


  5. Brendan March 6, 2016 at 11:27 pm #

    Based on that photo I would be more worried about Mrs Abbott playing hooky. I mean surely Tony’s head has been Photoshopped into that photo! It is the only explanation for why his head is just that little too big and placed too low on his neck.*

    *I don’t really think this but that is a terrible photo.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Jennifer Wilson March 7, 2016 at 7:01 am #

      I know it is, but I didn’t have time to search plus I don’t care much if its terrible, lol. 🙂


    • pamela March 7, 2016 at 11:55 am #

      Well he really does have a “BIG” head!

      Liked by 1 person

  6. paul walter March 7, 2016 at 3:18 am #

    Fiona’s reason is as compelling as Jennifer’s and I doubt whether it is a naive proposition, it goes to the realist heart of darkness that is the underbelly of our world. The two reasons combine in the example of Tony Abbott, vanity and over confidence masking a vulnerability that makes him one of the led rather than a leader and a target for manipulation.

    Abbott’s soul mate in all of this has become the black eminence of Nikki Savva, a desolate soul-free sort of place. We’ve seen vicious hit pieces in the past but this effort rivals any for cynicism.

    Burt it is true that if Turnbull can’t get the Abbott dog’s teeth out off his leg very soon, the Coalition lose the election.

    The trick will be to welcome some more home truths about Abbott without assuming Turnbull and his string-pullers are any better, any sort of substantial improvement, after the last few months.

    Put it this way, without Abbott for contrast, how good does Turnbull REALLY look?

    An interesting thing will be to see if Bill Shorten can use his repreive to make the ALP competitive again.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Jennifer Wilson March 7, 2016 at 7:02 am #

      PW Shorten blotted his copybook at Mardi Gras by asking that the refugee float be excluded. A compromise was reached, the float ordered to sail far away from Rainbow Labor.


      • Rob B March 7, 2016 at 10:02 am #

        … Is that true … how pathetic …

        Liked by 2 people

      • paul walter March 7, 2016 at 5:19 pm #

        You are kidding me??

        I can’t beleive they would be that stupid. What in the name of god do these hillbilly corstalks think they are playing at?

        Liked by 1 person

    • Fiona March 7, 2016 at 11:45 am #

      Thank you, Paul (and Jennifer) and okay, I was being a bit tongue in cheek about being naive.

      I’m very much in four or five minds about Ms Savva’s role in this galère, however.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Jennifer Wilson March 7, 2016 at 2:58 pm #

        Yes, well, me too, Fiona, she has her own agenda I think


        • paul walter March 7, 2016 at 5:21 pm #

          Heavens above, four or five minds about her?
          She is a pure ball of destructive opportunism.
          I rate her lower than Mad Miranda Devine.


  7. doug quixote March 7, 2016 at 8:10 am #

    Abbott’s hypocrisy knows no bounds, but it is fully consistent with his mentor George Pell and with his cronies on the right of the Looters Party.

    As you point out, Jennifer, Abbott made his own family an issue, a part of his political platform and an exemplar of moral rectitude. He now deserves all he gets.

    Liked by 1 person

  8. townsvilleblog March 7, 2016 at 9:06 am #

    Catholic dogma says have an affair Mon-Sat and come to confession on Sunday and after 3 our fathers and 5 hail Mary’s all is forgiven til next Sunday when the process repeats itself lol.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Fiona March 7, 2016 at 11:43 am #


      I am not, and never have been, a Catholic. My many Catholic friends, however, have told me that they only get absolution/forgiveness if they are truly sorry, repent, and do their best to amend their wicked ways. So, just turning up for confession, telling whoever what you did or didn’t do, and saying sorry doesn’t cut the mustard.

      Liked by 2 people

      • paul walter March 7, 2016 at 8:52 pm #

        Nailed it!!


      • Florence nee Fedup March 8, 2016 at 6:21 pm #

        You are correct.


      • townsvilleblog March 9, 2016 at 4:57 pm #

        ….and maybe tell a little story that you will never do it again, until next week lol…. religion = delusion.


    • Eamon March 7, 2016 at 5:10 pm #

      3 our fathers and 3 hail Mary’s. That is the norm lol


  9. alphatacticus101 March 7, 2016 at 10:04 am #

    Reblogged this on alphatacticus101 and commented:
    Serious food for thought !

    Liked by 1 person

  10. alphatacticus101 March 7, 2016 at 10:05 am #

    Thank you for your insightful article. I always enjoy reading your opinions .

    Liked by 1 person

  11. reg gilbert March 7, 2016 at 1:10 pm #

    Seems all these bible bashers are tared with the same brush. preach one thing do another.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Fiona March 7, 2016 at 3:00 pm #

      The bashers, certainly. However, I do know many people of faith, and without faith, who are truly good and caring individuals.

      Liked by 1 person

  12. Dave March 7, 2016 at 3:26 pm #

    Whatever you think about Tony Abbott, you either think his views and policies are irrelevant, or you don’t. The logical extension of this article is that if he is a faithful husband, his values and morals are consistent and his views valid? If he has been unfaithful his values are morals are questionable and therefore his views are invalid? This is high school school stuff. I don’t care who he is sleeping with, my disagreement with his views on gay marriage and women’s access to RU48 etc are absolute. Is the author of this article then insinuating her position on Abbott and his policies is flexible based on his extracurricular activities?

    Liked by 1 person

    • Jennifer Wilson March 7, 2016 at 3:53 pm #

      That isn’t my logical extension. I think you missed the point of the post. I would oppose Abbott’s policies no matter what his personal activities. The post is about hypocrisy.


      • doug quixote March 7, 2016 at 5:17 pm #

        I agree. There is no such extension of logic. An absence of hypocrisy would however show Abbott to be delusional.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Dave March 7, 2016 at 9:37 pm #

        No, the article is kind of about stooping to his level “you got no right to preach to me preachy preacherman when you’re shagging your secretary”. I’m saying he had no right to preach irrespective. If the man can’t separate church and state that’s a bigger problem for me than hypocrisy, or us poring over his dirty laundry. It distracts from the main game here – he was a terrible prime minister, who ran his party like a dictatorship (after we caned Krudd for doing the same), and imposed his religous beliefs on the populace. If it is not the logical extension of you article to weight Abbotts policy against his integrity, why would you spend 4 paragraphs making that association?


        • Jennifer Wilson March 7, 2016 at 10:51 pm #

          I really am not fond of having myself mansplained to myself.

          I don’t care about anyone’s sexual life unless they are in a position where they have power over the sex lives of others. If they poke their noses into others bedrooms, others are entitled to return the disfavour.

          I have on this blog an entire category dedicated to Tony Abbott, with thousands of words about his policies and no reference to his sexual activities.

          Liked by 1 person

        • doug quixote March 8, 2016 at 12:02 am #

          It’s a current issue. Abbott’s incompetence has been dealt with ad nauseam, here and elsewhere.

          This issue potentially blackens him with his core constituency – and they aren’t the forgiving type.


          Liked by 1 person

      • paul walter March 9, 2016 at 10:44 pm #

        Circumstantial evidence would back Dr.Wilson’s statement up.

        Previous thread starters here have demonstrated that Dr Wilson is consistent in her opposition to ALL politicians of Abbott’s type and has its origins in a rational appreciation of how many policies derived of an ungoverned subjectivity, hence bias, conscious or unconscious, will impact adversely on the subjects of misguided policy, such that a 10 yo aboriginal girl suicides because life has been made intolerable for her by the system.

        It appears a fault in perceptions derived of an incorrectly weighted and conditioned personal make up, a theory also backed up by the sort of statements about lying (not sex) Abbott offered up to Leigh Sales and others over sometime, but perversely ignored by the public.

        It’s quite simple. If Abbott can’t rein in his impulse to lie on some issues, how can we ever know he won’t lie on future ones?


  13. LSWCHP March 7, 2016 at 8:27 pm #

    In Abbott’s bizarre worldview, a man fucking another man is a crime against nature that will result in them both being burning in fire for ETERNITY after they die. An incomprehensibly monstrous concept.

    On the other hand, a man (of the catholic priest variety) fucking regiments of little boys is something that should be swept under the carpet in case it damages the reputation of the catholic church and those who work for it such as his good mate george pell. An equally incomprehensible and monstrous concept.

    He’s an incomprehensible and monstrous life form.

    Liked by 1 person

  14. Michael March 7, 2016 at 9:06 pm #

    He’s worse then the”desiccated coconut”
    Thank goodness he’s now in histories garbage bin.

    Liked by 1 person

  15. Michael McKew March 7, 2016 at 10:59 pm #

    Abbott epitomises hypocrisy.He’s’hoisted on his own petard’ (the penultimate loser)

    Liked by 1 person

  16. samjandwich March 8, 2016 at 1:49 pm #

    One thing that’s always fascinated me about Abbott: you always hear anecdotally from people close to him that he is apparently an excellent listener. He’s reputed to engage thoughtfully with people one-on-one, ask sensitive questions and to seek to properly understand their perspective…

    … and then he proceeds to throw it right back in their faces and imposes his ideas of what he thinks is good for them. It’s like he sees himself as a lightning rod for all that ails us, dissipating all our energy into the ground. I’m not sure where I’m going with this…

    Liked by 1 person

    • Jennifer Wilson March 8, 2016 at 3:01 pm #

      He’s acting out the priestly role he abandoned after the seminary but never entirely relinquished. He did that in his moralising, and his lectures. Where you are going is obviously to a crucifixion as Abbott sacrifices himself for our sins.
      I must be channelling a bad spirit today….

      Liked by 1 person

      • samjandwich March 8, 2016 at 5:40 pm #

        Gosh you’re right : he’s martyred himself, and now he’s risen from the dead… and stigmatised to boot!

        Liked by 1 person

      • paul walter March 8, 2016 at 7:14 pm #

        He is Christ incarnate, suffering for our sins..how dare we not be chastised, bowing before Tony, utterly awe struck at his performance of suffering on his metaphorical cross.

        What a klutz.

        He always reminds me of Snoopy on his kennel again engaging in death defying combat with a mythical Red Baron.

        Liked by 2 people

  17. katgallow March 8, 2016 at 1:50 pm #

    As usual, a great analysis Jennifer. I don’t disagree with you, but I’ve been thinking of this in different terms. Aside from the hypocrisy, affair/not is irrelevant. The frisson to me smacks of (1) blaming women for men’s downfall; and (2) an attempt to emasculate Mr Abbott through the way in which Ms Credlin is presented as so ‘formidable’. In other words, Mr Abbott wasn’t man enough to control his woman. I wonder also if we will ever get over assuming man + woman = sex. No one presumed that the pre-budget cigars shared by Messrs Hockey and Corman were post-coital…

    Liked by 1 person

    • Jennifer Wilson March 8, 2016 at 2:58 pm #

      Aha, that last sentence, Kat!
      Yes, agree, with 1 & 2, I hadn’t thought about the second but of course it’s part of the thing.
      It appears not only Credlin is being blamed for the situation: Savva is also being blamed for writing her book. She was daft not to ask for the protagonists’ comments, imo, but aside from that, and not having read it, I hear from reliable sources that her information is also well-sourced.

      In my experience situations such as described by Savva don’t occur and continue without a great deal of compliance and enabling by everyone else in the particular workplace. It reminds me of Rudd in that he apparently terrorised all around him as apparently has Credlin, and I’m interested in the psychology that seems to have turned everyone into direct and indirect victims of these two.

      I don’t think whether Abbott and Credlin actually had sexual congress is the central issue: it sounds as if their relationship was of an intimacy that was obsessive & consuming, whether actually sexual or not.
      I wonder if we attach too much significance to man + woman = sex, rather than looking at other forms of bonding between people that can be far more destructive and long-term than a sexual affair.

      In many ways a sexual affair is the most simple form of infidelity and betrayal: what Abbott & Credlin have sounds far more complex and insidious than just bonking.

      Liked by 3 people

    • doug quixote March 8, 2016 at 3:00 pm #

      “No one presumed that the pre-budget cigars shared by Messrs Hockey and Corman were post-coital…”

      Speak for yourself! What they gave birth to deserved whipping. 🙂

      Liked by 4 people

  18. doug quixote March 12, 2016 at 7:06 pm #

    Jennifer, please put up a new article with a photo/drawing/painting NOT of Tony Abbott!


    My stomach is strong, but . . . .

    Liked by 2 people

    • paul walter March 12, 2016 at 11:58 pm #

      Still, is there a more fascinating subject for study than Abbott’s decision making processes and what drives them?

      It is a really big question for society if our supposed best and brightest can get things so wrong on basic issues.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Jennifer Wilson March 14, 2016 at 2:28 pm #

        The big question is how did such a twerp ever become regarded as *best and brightest.* We have weird criteria


    • helvityni March 13, 2016 at 9:19 am #

      …I can’t say I’m happy with Niki re- awakening this interest in Abbott. He’s one of our great mistakes.

      He was already a yesterday’s man yesterday.

      Liked by 1 person

      • paul walter March 13, 2016 at 10:23 am #

        Trouble is, he makes Turnbull look better than he is.


        • helvityni March 13, 2016 at 11:23 am #

          …precisely, that’s why I am not happy with Niki; we all, even the Libs, know that Abbott is bad, some still see Mal as our saviour.


          • havanaliedown June 28, 2017 at 7:54 am #



    • Jennifer Wilson March 14, 2016 at 2:27 pm #

      Ah, DQ I have been very busy with other life matters, but I will do my utmost to get something else up soon. 🙂


  19. Melly Smuff March 13, 2016 at 4:09 pm #

    Boring, boring, Tony is boring. So there is evidence that Tony may have fucked the mother of his children three times. This only makes him a mother fucker. Nothing to see here move right along.


    • paul walter March 13, 2016 at 9:45 pm #

      But doesn’t that mean that on at least three occasions Tony allowed Margie her fulfilment through childbirth?

      How fair do some of you want it?


  20. Michael McKew March 14, 2016 at 2:41 pm #

    Dyson Haydon nominated him for a Rhodes scholarship,guess that helps.

    Liked by 2 people

  21. wondering June 27, 2017 at 7:17 pm #

    Never with the wife. Is he a closet gay and no one game enough to tell. Always with men


  22. Peter Shanley June 7, 2018 at 1:12 pm #

    This is the former self appointed Minister for Women. Couldn’t/wouldn’t appoint
    any woman from his own government’s front bench to the role. What a disgrace!


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 )

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: