Nothing like a better address if you’re in politics, right? Everyone wants the imprimatur of the prime minister, the premier or whoever is top honcho. Higher status, better contacts, greater clout; it’s a no-brainer. Yes, come in here with me my dears, said the premier to the women in sensible shoes. Forget that old low rent Department of Women. Come into my deluxe department. Join a higher loop. Some tiny adjustments naturally come with the big time. What’s 75 per cent of your staff between a better class of friends? And lopping 85 per cent of your grant money is dirt cheap to get into this neighbourhood. I’m also sure you chicks won’t mind if we appoint some bloke who’s hanging about as a surplus clerk to be the boss of you newly elevated lot. Would Sandra sell you out? Never. The blokes are hungry. Let’s do lunch my lovelies. Equality forever. Here, allow me to open the door. Do you prefer red or white? Good thing that sleaze Brogden fell over, doncha reckon? What a disgrace.
36 Responses to “Have I got a deal for you”
Comments are currently closed.
It’s sexist to have a Women’s Department when there is no Men’s department.
It’s also sexist for Eva Cox to discriminate against Mr Connelly just because of his gender.
Hypocrisy abounds.
OK, you get one comment Evil. Any repetition and you’re deleted, with relish, ol’ buddy.
Repetition will get Evil deleted? That’s dead wrong! I repeat: dead wrong! And I suppose you‚Äôll ban Evil if he makes the same hilarious spelling mistake four times in one paragraph. Nazi!
Special women’s depts, just like the ATSICs, need to be dumped altogether to focus resources on things like health and hospitals, as well as public transport, education and the like. I’m sure most women want reduced hospital waiting lists and their trains on time, rather than gabfests and a few sinecure jobs for the girls. I see Tas is adding itself to SA as having a ’stuffed’ health system.
The commenter above observa is also on notice.
Do you mean directly above or are you putting yourself on notice? Do us all a favour…
Yeah, I know, I’m on notice.
Ah, Mr Beck. You live under a rock, I believe? Welcome. Yes, on notice. I like the curve.
So, tell me Chris, what is it about me that so intimidates you?
‘Irritates’ is the right word, Mr Beck. I’m irritated that I don’t have a right-wing-nutter spray … you know, like mortein, so that all commenters like you would be sent somewhere else to type.
“I like the curve”? Isn’t that something you’d usually write to Gianna, Chris? Hold tightly to that treasure!
Can I be on notice too? I feel left out.
How bout you find a spray that send me to Crete? I could go for a nice vacation in the Mediterranean - under a rock, of course.
Yes, you irritate me too: it’s a nagging rectal itch thing.
Everyone’s on godamned notice. Talk to the topic, civily, un-vexatiously, non-abusively and you’re OK, with heaps of latitude; and if you’re amusing and/or stylish and/or sincere, you’re always excused. Otherwise you get deleted, more in alacrity than sorrow.
Talk to the topic, civily, un-vexatiously, non-abusively and you’re OK, with heaps of latitude
Unless your name is Evil Pundit.
awwwww, Evil, poor baby. You’re OK pal, except you have to realise the sperm scam has happened, and it’s time to move on. We all know the story. Some even sympathise. But does your event have to dominate all time and space? Man, other stuff is happening. Join in, but do you have another song to sing?
My post was on topic, civil, and non-vexatious.
Do you have any argument with which to counter my points?
“But does your event have to dominate all time and space? Man, other stuff is happening. Join in, but do you have another song to sing?”
Heh heh………nope..
I hope
You don’t need an argument when you’re a lefty with your finger on the delete button.
Man, other stuff is happening. Join in, but do you have another song to sing?
Yes, I do, and I sing it on other threads that deal with other topics.
But this thread is about the NSW Government’s Women’s Department, and consequently my reply was specifically addressed to that topic.
You seem to be suggesting that it’s okay for me to post here, as long as I remain on-topic, but that I shouldn’t address the topic of the thread.
Why hasn’t Chris resigned his university post so that a wooman might take over? Offer a female academic a better address, Chris!
A bloke types a post, and he’s met by a conga line of RWDBs.
Can we leave the opportunity for folks to comment on the topic, and I’ll have the rest of yews out the back?
The only meaningful opportunity for dissenters to interact with Tim Blair seems to be on those occasions when he ventures outside the censorship-secured safety of his own blogspace.
I suspect those occasions will become increasingly rare.
So anyhow.
I heard Nori on the radio yesterday saying that it was purely a bureaucratic thing, given the dept had been absorbed into Premiers but the head of the Office was still a woman, Elizabeth Coombes. Look, a diagram. I’m not really up on the nuances of the upper echelons of the public service, is this not a reasonable dodge? Just a structure thing on paper? Or not?
You brought this on yourself, cs. You over-reacted to EP’s predictable reaction, and now you’re fending off minoan mental midgets with a cricket bat. Don’t bite, you drongo; it only excites the flying monkeys.
On the original point of the discussion, I don’t see why we need a Women’s Department. Whether at municipal, state or federal level they seem to be completely ineffectual at doing whatever it is they’re meant to be doing.
Good one, Amanda. Love a good structure chart.
Hmm .. I find myself agreeing with EP on this one and I ain’t no RWDB.
I agree with Fyodor and I am funny!
not as funny as timbo commenting on whether people should be banned on blogs or not.
Next thing he will be criticising Mark Latham for his language!
The Government seems to think it can adequately address men’s issues without a Men’s Department.
If men don’t need a special department, then neither do women.
Claiming that politicians can’t address women’s needs because they’re men is sexist. It’s the policies and attitudes of the representatives that matters, not their gender.
Fyodor agrees with Evil Pundit, but tries to hide it under a puny insult. Tell me Fyodor, does the fact that EP’s response was predictable make it less correct? Did EP present the argument in a less intellectual manner than your good self? Why do fools fall in love?
You’re punny, Homerkles, not funny. The lurkers have spoken.
This whole thread is on notice. If it’s going to turn into meaningless exchange of insults, then it gets put out of its misery.
What do you call females that vote for men,Naomi. un-womanly?
Actusly he said I was very funny sometimes but you are more consistently funny.
That is what this thread needs some fun.
One needs to dress up a womens department!
Sorry getting too hard for me.
Toryhere,
1) Not at all. He’s always predictable, and usually wrong.
2) Of course.
3) Why does the rain fall from up above?
Now, answer me this: does it hurt to be EP’s sock-puppet? I’ve heard he’s an easy lover. He’ll take your heart but you won’t feel it. He’s like no other. Before you know it you’ll be on your knees. Better forget it - you’ll regret it.
So, people are banned ‘with relish’ here? I wanna be banned with mustard C.S! [abuse deleted by MB]
Well all that went well.
Ok, two points.
First, I agree with Fyodor that cs’ first comment seems to have had the unintended effect of provoking all this. It’s not a stoush in the fine tradition but a pointless exchange of insults - and not something I’d like to see here.
No doubt Chris was conscious of the fact that comments made by EP on these matters do tend to have a certain sameness about them. However, I don’t think that comments should be deleted unless they breach the comments policy and the reasons why should really be explained to the person posting the comment.
The second is that the comment by N. Bechtel is meaningless abuse. Such comments have no place on this blog and for that reason this thread, as I signalled before, ends here.