The Ernie Awards for 2009 were awarded last nght, with the Gold Ernie being awarded to religious wingnut Danny Nalliah for his comments blaming the Black Saturday bushfires on the Victorian Parliament’s decriminalisation of abortion in that State.
Why are the Ernies called the Ernies? They are named in honour of former Australian Workers Union Secretary Ernie Ecob, who infamously stated that women were only interested in being employed as shearers in order to have sex, to which women in the labour movement responded in the manner recalled by Alison Peters:
It all goes back to the original night held to mark the resignation of the late Ernie Ecob from the position of President of the NSW Labor Council. Ernie, who at the time was the Secretary of the Australian Workers Union (AWU) was notorious amongst women unionists for his comments (amongst others) that women who wanted to become shearers were only interested in the sex.
A few left wing women unionists (including Meredith Burgmann who had been elected to the NSW Upper House) decided that Ernie’s resignation should be marked in some way and with the enthusiastic help of Meredith a dinner was arranged at Parliament House. This was the inaugural Ernies. It was small, intimate and raucous as we loudly competed for the honour of taking home the sheep trophy on behalf of our male comrades who had lived up to Ernie’s bad example. We had a great time as we used fun to make the point that we still had a long way to go in the union movement. In fact it was so much fun we decided to do it again!
Alison Peters went on to express her concern that the labour movement had, by 2001, fallen under the Ernies’ radar, despite the fact that its gender politics was far from beyond reproach, and to call for a renewal of labour movement feminist vigilance.
If we look at a list of Ernies winners since 1993, it’s clear that Alison Peters had a valid point – but, it would seem, one which has not been taken on board by the Ernies judges. Insofar as the partisan political allegiances of Ernie recipients can be identified, none appear to be from the Labo(u)r side; the collective Doc Martens are only stomping on toes on the right foot.
Is it really the case that the labour movement, Labor Party and Labor governments have attained a state of gender-political grace?
Tegan Leach and Sergie Brennan might ask whether Anna Bligh is a more worthy recipient of the Elaine Award than Miranda Devine – or, to be fair, whether the Queensland Parliamentary Labor Party might, collectively, be a more worthy recipient of the Gold Ernie than a religious wingnut with no real power like Nalliah.
Likewise, women and queers in Victoria might be wondering whether Rob Hulls should be allowed to keep his Good Ernie from 2001 when he is presiding over legislation which will allow religious organisations to continue to discriminate on the grounds of gender, sexuality and marital status.
And whilst Bill Heffernan undoubtedly deserved his Silver Logie for his comments about Julia Gillard’s “barrenness”, where is the gong for erstwhile Federal ALP candidate John Williams who made similar comments about his Liberal opponent Sophie Mirabella (nee Panopolous) at a time before she had borne her first child?
Alison Peters was right in 2001 and she is even more right today. The Ernies began as an occasion for exposing and condemning sexism wherever it existed, without fear or favour. If the Ernies fail to return to that tradition, rather than being the occasion for partisan shitpotting which they seem to have become, they run the risk of becoming a hindrance rather than a help to the great project of principled feminist critique and transformation of our economy, politics, society and culture.
P.S. A couple of pre-emptive comments. Andrew Norton and I are not the same person. And no, I don’t think the Greens should be off-limits for Ernies.
Opposing abortion is not sexist. Abortion is wrong. More women than men are pro life and many feminists think abortion is wrong. Groups such as Feminists for Life promote self respect for the woman and life for the child under the slogan Women deserve better. Abortion laws should be tighter to protect the unborn. A baby should not be aborted because of poverty, disablity, bad timing or because mum and dad decide they don’t want it. If you don’t want a child then take precautions. Don’t expect to be able to end the life of the child and have the state pay for it and think that this is just. It is wrong. Abortion, alongside capital punishment, torture and war is a form of violence that many women and men oppose.
“Opposing abortion is not sexist.”
Congratulations! You win today’s prize for comprehension!
Of course, it is sexist really, just not plainly or simply enough in this case to deserve the award.
Wikipedia seems to have missed that I shared the 2004 award with Paddy McGuinness.
While I enjoyed getting it the offending passage, in an argument that low birthrates among female graduates was due to low marriage rates and not HECS, suggests that the sisterhood is rather sensitive:
“Public policy should focus on things it can influence. The poor school performance of boys, a leading cause of the gender imbalance at universities, is an obvious place to start. The social returns on fixing that problem would be much higher than from making life a little easier for graduates with children.”
The explanation over the phone was that even though boys muck around at school and get lower marks than girls they end up earning more than girls, and therefore policymakers should not make the interests of boys a priority.
It’s a more or less inevitable outcome of the way the award is made by acclamation (or whatever the negative form of this term is). It often tends to go to the most disliked character rather than the one who might ‘deserve’ it on more considered criteria, a point which Burgmann at least cheerfully admits.
Anna Bligh and whoever in Queensland put the Cairns lass up on charges of procuring an abortion are worthy of an Ernie. From 2010 we are keeping children at school until age 17 so that 19 year olds in the prime of their reproductive life have only just left their legislated prolonged childhood and socially have not had the experience and have not developed their earning capacity thus are still to young to be functioning parents in our society. I support the right of the Cairns lass to choose when to start a family and to trust her ability to make a fair judgement of her situation.
Guy Rundles analysis of the way labor’s predominance has made it harder for the marginalised was very compelling. It seems to have played out in the willful blindness of the Ernies. I’ve always found labor/lefty discourse to be fundamentally blokey and sexist (fond memories of attending meetings to arrange protests in my teens, and it be suggested that me and the other females “arrange the childcare”). But then, I’m not sure I actually ever spoke to a real right wing person (other than my father and my brother – actually I never spoke to them either) until I started law at the age of 23. Perhaps the same scene was playing out at various Young Liberal meetings? Will we ever know?
What’s still wrong with the Kevvies? The qrats egg as usual…take Afstan, take any stan…
Operation Omelette II 2000 plus is on 24 hour standby…yep! & yeehah!
Could it be that adf fhog & bonus is just yet another beautiful set of #’s?
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/afghanistan-starting-to-look-like-obamas-vietnam-20090929-gb0b.html
Just asking.
Yes, forcing women to carry unwanted pregnancies to term is far less sexist than allowing women to make their own reproductive choices *rolls eyes at Spana*
When abortion is freely and legally available, there is no increase in abortions (in some cases they decrease) but what does decrease is women dying or being injured due to unsafe abortion practices. Abortion saves women’s lives, it is a feminist issue and yes it is sexist to restrict womens access to health services.
Forcing women to have abortions is wrong, but so is forcing women to continue an unwanted pregnancy. Women can make up their own mind and when given the freedom to do so studies have shown better health outcomes for women and children.
I think Bligh certainly deserves an Ernie for her sexism.
“Yes, forcing women to carry unwanted pregnancies to term is far less sexist than allowing women to make their own reproductive choices *rolls eyes at Spana*”
And Danny Nalliah and his mob have more!
Once those young women continue with unwanted pregnancies Catch the Fire have the god and government given right to discriminate against the single mothers for employment purposes. Nailed ‘em if they do and nailed if they don’t.
http://www.theage.com.au/national/government-bows-to-religious-right-20090926-g76u.html
So how do you explain the feminists who believe women deserve better than abortion? Do you deny they are feminists because they refuse to believe that killing an uborn child should be a choice. The vast majority of abortions are the result of consensual sex with parents who have made a choice. Abortion is a product of a materialistic society where people want to evade responsibilty for their actions. If you can’t handle the consequences of your actions don’t do them but it is wrong to end the life of an unborn child because you find it inconvenient. I suppose you support the “right” of parents to kill unborn daughters in China and Indian just because thay are women? After all, its all about consumer choice to the abortion lobby isn’t it.
Spana’s comments richly deserve being submitted for mockery to “spEak You’re bRanes”, but he spells just a little bit too well to get the full treatment. Shame, really.
I enjoyed Nalliah’s response.
Yes Spana, women have different opinions. It’s almost like women aren’t a homogenous group or something and therefore feminism might have some sort of diversity! But that would be crazy talk, clearly all women are the same and should be controlled as such by the state.
I am guessing you don’t care if women die as a result of restricting abortion, so many “pro-lifers” don’t seem to want to notice that fact.
It is a sexism issue. If men could get pregnant, there would be no abortion issue whatsoever – it would be free, easily available and god help any poor muppet who tried to change that and force men to be baby incubators.
Historically of course controlling women’s bodies has been a safer and easier gig for Spana and his crew.
I completely missed any reportage of the Ernies, on radio or newspaper. Fran Kelly usually has fun with them the day afterward but perhaps I was out feeding the dog or something? She previewed them but not even Google can give me a run-down. Where can i find a list?
Yes Iain, keep on ignoring the fact that being pro life is about protecting unborn babies from horrendous human rights abuses. Read up on late term abortion and tell me it is not killing. A baby is viable at 23 weeks. The abortion lobby wants open slather on the unborn until birth. This is truly immoral and violent. Abortion has no place in a just and non violent society and opposing it is NOT about controlling women. Stop chagning focus and address the issue.
Yawn. You’ve made your point, give it a rest now Spana.
I’d like to nominate John Brumby for an Earnie award next year.
After his recent visit to Queen Liz he complimented her as “a role model, particularly for women”. Go John, bucket please!
Spana, keep on ignoring that limiting access to abortion results in horrendous human rights abuses, specifically the 68,000 women who die annually due to unsafe abortion.
Read up on late term abortion and you will find they are primarily due to a medical condition that was either the fetus being incompatible with life or the life of the mother was in danger. No one has late term abortions for lulz.
It’s not just the abortion lobby that wants safe and accessible abortion, women do too. Unless you think women are inherently evil baby killers or somesuch you’d realise that available abortion doesn’t mean an increase in abortions, just safe medical procedures for women.
The majority of abotions (about 80-90%) are performed before 12 weeks. ‘Abortion’ is not performed at 40 weeks, that would be called an ‘induction’.