Here’s the bit from the 60 Minutes transcript:
LIZ HAYES: Homosexuality? How do you feel about that?
TONY ABBOTT: I’d probably I feel a bit threatened…
LIZ HAYES: I’m not asking if it’s a personal choice of yours.
TONY ABBOTT: ..as so many people.
LIZ HAYES: When you say ‘threatened’?
TONY ABBOTT: Again, Liz, look, it’s a fact of life and I try to treat people as people and not put them in pigeonholes.
Yes, don’t ask, don’t tell. Stay in the closet. It’s a private thing. Don’t ask for those pesky ‘rights’ or be too ‘queer’. And Tone won’t get scared.
I’m not surprised, given the way he lives his (ultra)masculinity, that Abbott literally is homo-phobic. Perhaps he could take up this offer?
Corey Irlam, spokesperson for Australian Coalition for Equality (ACE) will today write to Abbott, inviting him to meet with ordinary gays and lesbian people to help overcome his self-confessed sense of “threat” about homosexuality.
“We hope Mr Abbott will take up our invitation so he can overcome feeling threatened by homosexuality”, Mr Irlam said in a statement.
“Mr Abbott can pick any place he feels safe and we’ll invite ordinary members of the gay and lesbian community to come and talk with him to show him he has nothing to fear from us.”
Via Trevor Cook. I agree, as with the rest of Tony’s fascinating moral journey, it should be televised.
That would be *authentic*.
Update: Tone will probs say, as with some of his previous comments, that he was just answering the questions. Sorrow At Sills Bend has more on his ‘accidental’ oversharing, and some questions that could be posed to Abbott.
I’d love to have a beer with Duncan…
Update: Tone will probs say, as with some of his previous comments, that he was just answering the questions. Sorrow At Sills Bend has more on his ‘accidental’ oversharing, and some questions that could be posed to Abbott.
Urgh, I’m actually starting to get a bit sick of this rubbish. Yes the man is a little set in his ways, his views are old-fashioned, we get it it’s obvious to anyone with a grade 6 reading age or better. It says very little about how he runs the country, especially when Kevin is little better on women’s/gay rights himself (what is it with the maternity leave thing anyway, what women are allowed to have rights up until the point where it’s inconvenient for a corporation?)
And honestly, sexuality IS a private thing between partners; it’s not a government or general public concern, and the state legislating against or being unfavourable to that is rubbish. I honestly don’t want to know about the intimate details of any of my friends relationships, gay or not, but they certainly have the right to do it and recognise it accordingly. I really wish we would get over this childish lunacy.
PinkyOz
I suppose you tune out, or turn off, whenever you see heteronormativity celebrated on tv, etc, etc, then, PinkyOz?
Fortunately, he doesn’t. Nor will he get the chance to, precisely because he is so set in his ways and holds beliefs that are not merely old-fashioned but positively ante-diluvian.
I dunno, Gummo, I’m starting to get a bad, bad feeling about all this.
Works of fiction are a bit different, It’s not real life, and it’s completely up to the author on how he/she should handle gender issues (Well at least I hope so, bloody network execs). In some cases they may decide to choose an easy preset (say like stock heterosexuality) as a base as it is not important to the story or the characters.
That said, we can be pretty silly about gender issues. We choose to put sexuality (in particular non-heterosexual sexuality) as the central theme or we gloss over it and fallback to easy/safe gender choices; both approaches can be quite unappealing.
Of course we could just watch programs based on their merits instead of looking for problems, applaud shows that show genuine interest in portraying all social groups as more than their stereotypes, and enjoy less enlightened but still quality shows for their strong points. You know be entertained.
PinkyOz
La Bolta’s also on the case. A very, very strange and disturbing remark from Abbott, and one that goes, as you say, probably to his deepest fears. I wonder how he’s going to spin it. Not that he was ever chasing the gay and lesbian vote, of course.
So am I. That Abbott could even be considered seems beyond belief. But the figures, and more importantly the trend, suggest he’s in the race.
Abbott is very in the race. He hasn’t put a foot wrong so far. Of course this is the easiest part – getting the voter to know you. But, he’s aceing it so far.
Hopefully incumbency will still win the day, but we’ve not seen a “likeable larrikin” at the helm of a party since “Hawkie”. They’re hard to beat.
I don’t know about all that. I think it’s just the Libs coming into contention once they stopped tearing each other apart (the precondition for which was a right wing takeover of the party). The Ruddites were resting on their laurels, to be sure. But I’d be a lot more worried if the Libs were actually ahead in the polls. And that, in itself, wouldn’t be the end of it – not by a long shot.
PinkyOz: Kevin may be a little reactionary, but “being threatened” by homosexuality is just bloody unprofessional for a would-be PM. Whether leader of the opposition or PM, wouldn’t his job involve dealing with other parliamentarians – gay ones included? And it’s not just the ones in Australia like Penny Wong and Bob Brown. If he ever visits the States on official business, it would be best for him stay clear of Barney Frank. Accidental homophobic outbursts would be met with cutting, caustic, amusing, and extremely YouTubeable wit.
Kim,you’re trying to present Tony Abbott as being homophobic. Am I correct? You did hear all of the interview? If you did, you’ve only presented a very small portion of it. That’s rather poor form, don’t you think? There seems to be a fascination in the media and blogosphere about this man’s personal views on what are personal subjects – and a completely irrational fear that he wants to inflict them on the country. I wonder why.
PinkyOz is correct in stating, “And honestly, sexuality IS a private thing between partners; it’s not a government or general public concern”. You only make anything a public issue when you flaunt it – and if you do, be prepared for whatever comes your way. You know that Tony Abbott will not respond to Corey Irlam’s peurile challenge. Maybe he should challenge Ms Hayes… Nah! Weak target.
“heteronormativity”… is that a Kevvie word?
Mr Trotsky. You haven’t been paying attention. One’s ideas are what they are. Fashionable currency is irrelevant. The same applies to morals. You made a silly statement based on narrow, flawed perceptions. You’re too set in your ways.
Yes. But that is not what this was. This was a perfectly judged (even if – after a life-time of politcs – an instinctive) dog-whistle to a mainstream audience – who’d all (ie 58.5%) be nodding, as they nod off in the Jason recliner – yeah, you’re spot on there, Tonebags.
Jed @ 12:
Why do people suspect that Abbott would inflict his private views on the country? Because he has previous form, that’s why. Remember the ban on RU-486? The funding of anti-abortion groups to provide pregnancy counselling services? Or weren’t you paying attention to Abbott’s performance as Health Minister?
True, wbb – and here’s another fine bit of dog-whistling, in the classic Howard style:
Apropos nothing at all, here’s a link to John Quiggin’s blog (totally off topic, unless you’re into blue socks).
Jed. We are looking very closely at Abbott because we want to know what to expect from the next PM.
The media has decided it’s a goer, if Kevin would just pull the pin on an early election we could just get it all over with.
“I agree, as with the rest of Tony’s fascinating moral journey, it should be televised.”
For sure, Insiders interview room, all participants dressed in budgie smugglers and a big bottle of lube as a background prop. Go Tones!
“heternormativity?”
Is this the celebration of the hetero immaculate conception?
In the interest of balance we should also have a Joseph and Mario story and a Josephine and Mary story…we should all be able to believe that ‘God’ is the equal access impregnator.
That is a vicious bloody homophobic comment from Abbott. He would create an open season on gay bashings in which some hetero-lout has drives in to Oxford St all the way from Penrith in order to have the opportunity to feel “threatened” and then bash some poor bastard. That’s personal experience, BTW, and I’m not gay. Wrong place, wrong time, non-hegemonic masculinity (ie = gay).
I’m enjoying Bolt’s comment linked @8 about “some in the gay community only encourage this unfortunate perception of the predatory gay with foolish and irresponsible displays” that’s ahem…coupled with a pic of blokes in…budgie smugglers.
Down and Out @ 12 – Point taken, It’s a really stupid thing to say. The point I’m trying to make is that the socially progressive are desperatley looking for signs that Tony is a conservative, we already know that. Let’s judge a potential PM by his policies, not his personal insecurities (regardless of how stupid they are).
murph the surf @ 18 – Yeah, that one got me too. Heteronormativity refers roughly to the use of gender stereotypes in various media to reinforce normalised hetrosexual gender roles in society. I dare say that most people don’t think about that when there watching their favourite shows but I guess it’s supposed to be a subtile reinforcing effect.
PinkyOz
@nabs,
That remark about “the predatory gay” paired with a photo of happy blokes at Mardi Gras floored me. What on earth is “predatory” about dressing up for a parade and a party?
“Predatory” and “exhibitionist” would seem to be behaviours that would be virtually impossible to display simultaneously, no?
@21 – none too subtle, I’d say.
And we’ve just had two good examples of how Abbott’s remark gives implicit permission for all sorts of hateful speech and behaviour – viz Bolt and anthony’s correct perception that this sort of thing encourages gay bashing.
It’s exactly the same sort of phenomenon as racist dog-whistling, which, btw, isn’t just about hoovering up the votes of the prejudice, but about powerfully reinforcing the values which underpin those attitudes, and allowing people a free pass to act them out. Remember mosques being firebombed, kids being attacked, women being assaulted and insulted in public over “terrorism”?
And – because of all that – I’m somewhat flabbergasted that we shouldn’t be worried about the ‘private’ views of Tony Abbott when they’re so loudly and *publicly* expressed.
Who really wants a PM who is ‘threatened’ by people because of their sexual attributes?
I think it’s safe to say that Tony Abbott feels less threatened by homos than Kim feels threatened by straight guys in budgie smugglers.
‘Amused’ would be a better description than ‘threatened’, Yobbo.
Yes wbb, but what if in the “getting the voter to know you” part, he alienates several key slices of the electoral pie? Elections are won and lost on very small percentages indeed, and the 10-ish% “pink” vote is one of them. I know that it’s crude to talk about voting ‘blocks’ and that people in given demographic don’t vote all-to-a-(wo)man in the same way, but surely these kind of comments can prove expensive in electoral percentages where he needs to make gains?
I think Abbott’s Achilles heel is that his political instincts are rooted in a kind of secular-sectarian demographic politics (voting by demographic affiliation) that we haven’t seen in Australia since the Menzies period. The problem he’s got is that the Anglo-Catholic-hetero-male-biffo vote isn’t an election-winning demographic on its own.
Whereas Howard’s and Rudd’s electoral strength came from being, essentially, post-demographic politicians. They attracted electoral support from all parts of the Australian community. I doubt very much that either of them are or were enthusiastic celebrators of queer sexuality, but they were both smart enough to STFU about their personal feelings on personal subjects.
But Tony can’t help himself. The nationally televised media interview is his Confessional.
I agree that it looks obsessively odd for LP to keep jumping on individual utterances of the man, but take a step back and look at the big picture: there has been a steady drip-drip-drip of statements from this man who wants to lead the nation, the sum-total of which paint a very unsettling picture for anyone whose personal circumstances happen to fall outside the realm of his world-view of what is an “acceptable” way to live.
As for the juveniles on this thread who are frightened of big words like “heteronormativity”, let me give you a brief lesson: Name one great historical figure you learnt about at school who was gay. You can’t, because such biographic details are omitted from school-level historical enquiry. Heterosexuality is assumed, so much so that it’s not even mentioned, nor is it questioned – that’s ‘heteronormativity’. One result of this is that kids who grow up queer “learn” that gay people have built no cities, won no battles, composed no symphonies, invented no devices, painted no masterpieces, crossed no oceans, founded no empires, created no mathematical theorems, made no fortunes, discovered no science, indeed done nothing of any note or importance. Think about how that would play out for you psychologically as a teenager. And stop being so juvenile in rejecting big words you don’t understand.
@22 –
Not sure, tigtog! How about Tony doing his swagger thang?
Anthony @ 19. Good point. When I was a teen I was a victim of several bashings myself. Got worse once the perps at my school could give the reason that I was gay (I wasn’t) and that I had made a pass at them (I didn’t.)
Pretty much gave them a get out of jail free card every time. (Until a teacher who got sick and tired of it took the perpetrators aside one by one and threatened them with…something. Still don’t know what.)
@21: agree with Kim – There is nothing subtle about heteronormativity!
Thanks for the link Kim. I didn’t know anyone still read my blog. In all seriousness I do sincerely hope some journo thinks to ask Abbott for his views on something that on previous form he is likely to find squick, but which the rest of us learned how to cope with when we were eleven years old. It seems to me that interviewers are already doing this to some extent.
I vote he be asked what he thinks about PMT.
Kim @ 23 – Ok, I get what you’re aiming at here, and I won’t say its good news that Tony thinks like that, compound that with his previous record on personal judgment in policy and you have a potentially toxic mix. But to say a few fumbled words in an interview is a call to arms is a stretch.
Yes, some people are going to take that as an OK to enact homophobic attacks, but it’s just an excuse to do so. They were already both willing and able to perform those attacks long before Tony stepped in, and I’m sure there would have been another trigger had it not been him. Exactly at what point does personal responsibility for you actions step in here? It doesn’t make the comments any less irresponsible, but come on.
Yes, he should learn to keep it to himself, or grow up a bit and judge people on merit not demography. That said, his merits as a potential PM should range past this issue, IF he is good managing the politics and presents a range of policies that suit the desires of the country then he is suited to be PM.
PinkyOz
@Kim
Nope – that’s an invitation (or perhaps a threat?). Predators just pounce.
Tony Abbott’s biggest fear is – being ignored!
What exactly is there to feel “threatened” about? Is he worried some guy is going to come on to him? I really don’t understand. I wonder if a lot of the fear in heterosexual blokes comes from a fear that they may find a gay man attractive? (quelle horreur!)
You’re entitled to that view Pinky, but can you see you’re making a circular argument? Your position is that, from founding principles, a politician’s personal views expressed publicly aren’t a valid criterion for deciding their fitness from office because…well, just because.
You defined the problem out of existence and then declared there isn’t a problem. By your standard, the ideal politician is a grey managerialist technocratic empty suit who vanishes like the Cheshire cat when asked to nail his colours to a mast – and if that’s what you really believe, you should vote for Kevin Rudd.
But if enough voters and citizens feel that a politician’s personal convictions publicly expressed *are* a relevant criterion in their fitness for office, then they are relevant, regardless of your a priori statement on the matter.
Especially as, for the 18,000th time, I remind you that this guy in particular (and to be fair, most politicians in general) has form in distilling his personal convictions into political action. That’s part of the essence of politics, when you think about it. And it’s for that reason that Tony doesn’t get a pass on his personal beliefs, and no amount of definitional sleight-of-hand can make the pea disappear from under the thimble. You can keep moving the thimbles around and lifting them to reveal a plain tablecloth, but we know the pea is still there…
Pinky@Oz,
The fewer “excuses” such people have, the less self-justification they will find. It is irresponsible to give them yet another excuse for moving from hatespeech to violence.
Rinse and Repeat: The fewer “excuses” such people have, the less self-justification they will find. It is irresponsible to give them yet another excuse for moving from hatespeech to violence.
Nobody has said that violent thugs are likely to be able to use Abbott’s remarks as defence in a court of law, so stop being so dishonest.
See, even you acknowledge that making remarks knowing that some people will take them as encouragement to commit violence is irresponsible.
Surely Tony would fit nicely into that picture of the budgie smuggler sporting group? Among those thousands of shots of near nekkid Tony there must one be that’s just right to superimpose? What an interesting choice to illustrate Bolt’s story. Or was it some imaginative subeditor on night duty who thought it just right?
Tone always only manages to “say a few fumbled words in an interview”, with a peppering of “Um’s” and “Ah’s”.
It’s the mark of a man who desperately doesn’t want to issue forth with what he really thinks.
And people notice this.
I thought Steve Fielding didn’t do much better than Tony last night on Q&A. Though he had no problem with ‘the gays’ as he so eloquently put it.
Interestingly, a fundamentalist Christian colleague of mine wheere I teach who watched Q&A thought Fielding did a dreadful job and that Dawkins did a fine job of exposing Fielding’s cherrypicking
It’s the mark of a man who desperately doesn’t want to issue forth with what he really thinks.
I couldn’t agree more. Everything Tony Abbott says these days is carefully circulate around in his Tiny Brain to consider the potential impact before he finally utters the banal words.
The problem for Tony, as CMMC points out, is that “people notice” the careful, cautious Tony, when he so desperately wants to blurt out whatever homophobic, conservative views are really going on in his Tiny Mind.
This is “the real Tony Abbott” that he is currently carefully restraining, and one which I imagine we’ll get to see more openly, should (may God have mercy on us all) he one day becomes Prime Minister… *shudder*
As far as being “threatened” by homosexuals, maybe he’ll issue all those newly Govt-funded, God-fearing, upstanding and morally righteous families with “be alert but not alarmed” fridge magnets?
Nobody else has said it, so I will. Is it possible Abbott’s homophobia has its origins in the likelihood that years ago when he was in the seminary, somebody put it on him. (btw, predatory gays do exist and it is very disconcerting if you’re straight and you’ve told them you’re straight and they still, repeat, still put it on you.
Well, Paul@42, maybe so. I must say I am more impressed by Red Symon’s suggestion, this morning, that his real fear might be, he would actually enjoy a bit of man on man action.
paul burns, that just sounds kind of like, well, like men to me. It’s your own damn fault for being so sexy.
Got a gay son here and he is far from frightening Mr Abbott. Keep your superstitious mumbo jumbo out of my boys bedroom! And if the kids want to get married they have my blessing.
joe2,
In that case, he should have tried it so he could make up his own mind if he was that way inclined, instead of the Church making it up for him. Obviously, unless its a deep, dark secret he has not yet revealed to the TV cameras because it would not go down well with those who would instinctively vote for him, he hasn’t.
Reading the linked transcript, the context also makes it clear that Liz Jackson wasn’t asking about his personal reaction, but about policy views on issues where his conservative Catholocism is seen as of concern. The three previous questions are about his view on abortion (“it should be safe, legal and rare. And I underline rare”) support for IVF (yes) and then homosexuality. It was Abott that took the question into the personal space with his over-revealing “threatened” comment.
I think you’re giving him too much credit to say it was a deliberate dog whistle. I think it was more something that just came out like word vomit – hence his backtracking in his following sentence.
sg @ 44,
Well, I was when I was younger. I had a beautiful mother. So I guess it was inherited.
As a gay man, I have to admit that I do happen to have some straight friends.
I try to “treat” them the same way I do everyone else (there is ‘treatment’ available for that sort of thing right? Kevin Andrews told me there is).
And y’know, I don’t like to pigeon hole straight people. But they can be a bit threatening at times.
“That said, his merits as a potential PM should range past this issue, IF he is good managing the politics and presents a range of policies that suit the desires of the country then he is suited to be PM.”
Not at all. This issue should be included. If he shows himself, as he has here, to be driven by irrational fears, when it comes to a particular and large group in the community, we have a reason to question his suitability for high office.
He would be in charge of making policy that would directly effect those people and you cannot just give him an easy pass because it is convenient.
And so the Tony Abbott Freak Show rolls on…
He displays his genitals in tight pants, on the beach, on a bike, and in his hotel room (just ask Barnaby). He tells the world how his daughters should manage their virginity, after claiming to have fathered a child out of wedlock. He nearly gets totalled by a truck on the highway. He hoons around on a quad-bike and gets “lost” in the desert, phones his press secretary, and eats a wichetty grub. He dog-whistles to the homophobes, and hints at his own latent desires. On International Womens Day he sticks it up the feminists by delivering an addled thought bubble on maternity leave with a great big company tax and absolutely no intention of following through.
And the Australian media reports all this, week after week, with a straight face, showing us what a bunch of brainless suckers they really are.
Well said Grace!!!!!!!!
Mercurius @ 35 – I certainly hope there is more to the policy process then just what the leader thinks about something, that it might include the views of several people including politicians and public servants. But I see what you’re getting at here, and that’s fair enough. I would rather have decisions made based on research and thought without colouring the water with ideology, but I understand that it just doesn’t work like that, and it probably never will. And your right, Tony is really good at letting his beliefs get in the way of good policy; It’s why I probably won’t vote for him.
I still get the distinct impression however that it’s been blown out of proportion though, it just seemed like he is worried, and that’s probably a sign of a lack of understanding. This is probably why he should take up the ACE’s offer to meet with people of that background.
tigtog @ 36 – I wasn’t trying to mount a defence really, They’re stupid comments. But we should be able to express a view in society without having to feel like we’re spawning a lynch mob, regardless of stupidity. They weren’t hateful comments; they were ill-informed, confusing and worrying comments from a man who should know better, it wasn’t a call to arms against gays. And personal responsibility is not just for a courtroom, it should be part of our lives, if we commit to an action that causes a problem, we should take responsibility for that and make an appropriate correction.
To be honest, I would rather focus on how we can address discrimination in society rather then trying to stop every possible trigger to homophobic outbursts. You know, treat causes not symptoms.
PinkyOz
Abbott is not a threat to Rudd’s second term. He is committing the rookie opposition mistake of making the stories all about him, and keeping the spotlight off the incumbent.
The vast majority of electoral wins in Australian history were based around voting governments out for perceived problems, not oppositions in. With the exception of insulation, Abbott’s insanity has basically given Rudd a free ride and the conservative public – whilst happy to flirt with a “maverick” will never, ever vote them in (aside from the extreme unlikelihood of a one-term government in Oz). This would, of course, be obvious to a first year pol sci student, yet it’s a point that political “journalists” seem quite content to glide over.
It pays to remember at this time prior to his first election as incumbent, John Howard was in a _far_ worse position and still got in with reasonable comfort.
“They’re stupid comments. But we should be able to express a view in society without having to feel like we’re spawning a lynch mob, regardless of stupidity.”
PinkyOz, it’s true, but the trouble is, it’s Tony who wants lead a lynch mob. And the silly rabbit appears not to have even considered that the main culprit, that fits the description in this country is his old boss.
“Well, you know, what would you do with someone who cold-bloodedly brought about the deaths of hundreds or thousands of innocent people? I mean, you’ve got to ask yourself, what punishment would fit that crime? That’s when you do start to think that maybe the only appropriate punishment is death.”
I’d be more concerned about Abbott’s opinion if I wasn’t pretty confident it’s shared by most of the Labor front bench. There’s no place for hearing poofter jokes like a union officials’ pissup.
… except perhaps a senior managers’ pissup in the building industry.
There seems to be a fascination in the media and blogosphere about this man’s personal views on what are personal subjects – and a completely irrational fear that he wants to inflict them on the country. I wonder why.
PinkyOz is correct in stating, “And honestly, sexuality IS a private thing between partners; it’s not a government or general public concern”. You only make anything a public issue when you flaunt it – and if you do, be prepared for whatever comes your way.
This is an extraordinary statement given Abbott’s position on any legislation concerning womens’ bodies, plus his own propensity to flaunt his nearly-naked bod and/or Too Much Information about his and others’ sex lives in the national news at every opportunity. Please examine the pot you are defending before you complain about GLBT kettles.
Legal Eagle: if your around? My recall is that feeling “threatened” at being approached by a gay man for sex was once and may still be a successful defence whereby assault is turned into self defence. That is, the approached hetero-male, feeling “threatened”, belts the gay guy by way of saying “no thanks”. I’m sure this has been used in court but cannot find the ref. Any thoughts?
Last I heard Anthony, women weren’t able to respond this way when approached by heterosexual males. Even fairly aggressive sexual harassment wouldn’t be a defence to violence.
If Abbott were consistent (ha ha) he’d have to concede that if he is entitled to feel threatened by the mere possibility that he would be propositioned by gay men, then women — all women, are entitled to feel threatened by the possibility of being propositioned by heterosexual men.
Anthony, what you’re talking about is the Homosexual Advance Defence (HAD), aka in the United States and UK as the Gay Panic Defence. Ben Golder has written about it.
I think we’re all entitled to our opinions. He’s just answering the question honestly. Would you prefer him to be dishonest?
Our Mad Monk has more closet gays on his front bench than the ALP. Tony will never divulge the secret life of his clutch, but he is quite willing to attack women’s rights over abortion. The Mad Monk treats Australians as if they should all be paid up members of the Vatican. Will Australians tolerate a religious bigot in the Lodge?
Thanks Liam.
Fran: of course only men would be allowed the defence as stated. You girls are used to it, aren’t you?
On second thoughts: THANKS Liam for the link.
A taste:
“The former term was originally employed by American academics and activists to refer to US cases in which a defendant would plead insanity, or diminished responsibility, in answer to the charge of murdering a gay male victim, where that victim had made an unsolicited sexual advance upon the defendant. The plea rested on the rather dubious clinical basis of a psychological disorder entitled ‘acute homosexual panic’, a condition first identified by the psychiatrist Edward J Kempf in 1920″.
There we have it. Abbott has a recognised (if discredited) psychological disorder.
Laura @ 30:
I vote he be asked if he’d let one of his daughters marry one – is it one of “the options that I would like for my own daughters”?
Anthony said:
Not only used to it but we’re supposed to be affirmed by it … though that does raise an interesting point. If Tony in his smugglers was approached by a gay man, perhaps another ex-theology student like himself — ought he not to feel affirmed?
The perfect response to a bloke who feels threatened in the presence of teh homosexual male is to respond:
“Now you know how women feel around you.”
Maybe he did feel a-firmed. And that was the problem.
I dunno. If you strut around the beach clad the way Abbott does you could hardly call a sexual approach unsolicited. I reckon he’s asking for it. How’s that Fran?
Sounds like a cue for a remark about cat meat to me …
Last I heard Anthony, women weren’t able to respond this way when approached by heterosexual males. Even fairly aggressive sexual harassment wouldn’t be a defence to violence.
Which is a shame because the RAAF flight attendant who was psychologically assaulted by Kevin Rudd could have pre-emptively defended herself when she was attacked for not preparing a man’s dinner at the end of a long day.
I dunno. If you strut around the beach clad the way Abbott does you could hardly call a sexual approach unsolicited.
Presumably you are aware that the guy’s a surf lifesaver?
I find Abbott’s homophobia as objectionable as anyone, but these “two-minute hate” style threads are seriously lowing the tone at LP, IMHO.
Lib bot trolling …
I notice that Tony Abbott does not feel threatened by Alan Jones. In fact he spends quite a lot of time sucking up to him in the privacy of one of those sound proof booths.
Moo to “lowing the tone”.
Touche.
I would love to dismiss the moron’s latest utterances with an exaggerated eyeroll; however, having experienced the consequences of his last anti-gay adventures with JWH over lesbian parents accessing IVF – which seemed to encourage the less highly evolved amongst us to threaten physical violence and offer helpful suggestions involving their own genitalia – and as I was trapped in Tertiary Education Sectorland at the time, I shudder to imagine what it might have been like for those of a happy and gay persuasion working in less enlightened and supportive environments – well frankly, this fool’s utterances are not of mere academic interest. They have an impact, and not a very bloody pleasant one.
Consolation? Whilst the iron may be back in the soul of the Liberal Party, the funding from supporters is not. Particularly not from the big end of town. And landing them with a 1.5% tax to pay for maternity leave aint gunna encourage those donation cheques to start pouring in. So, in the interests of us all, keep it up Tone.
Exactly right Bernice. Self-annihilation by shooting off at the mouth is the desirable result.
Harsh but fair, Daisey May @ 75.
Sadly Fran, C.L is all to real and familiar to long term visitors to LP. Just keep rocking yourself to sleep, CL, it’s all part of a biiiiiig conspiracy, etc etc.
And also, Bill Clinton was worse.
I’ve swung back to enjoying the Abbott Ascendancy. That big, toothy, gormless, simple grin. The blank “tilt” pinball eyes while the gears are grinding in the background trying to formulate sound bubbles to fill the dead air.
Most of all, I love the ears, enormous but barely capable of hearing. He’s Ginger Meggs, all growed up. Gangly, clumsy, blinking blindly at reason and holding firm to faith, committed to mischief but torn by loyalty and obedience.
How the hell he ended up at the head of the Liberal party has me gobsmacked – it’s hard not to conclude that the shifty, evil Minchin faction have decided that lipstick on a pig won’t fly in Australia but we’ll eat up this affable, barely controllable, pounding wave of larrikin like the sausages on the barbie that are slowly killing us. This wave, of course, will leave them sputtering in the sand as his ego dumps them like body surfers in a big swell.
That, most of all, is why I love it.
Uh, uh, uh, Bernice @78. It’s not a tax, but an investment in future budgie smuggling and fanciying. And anyway, it’s only a little tiny
taxinvestment.@82 – much worse.
And you know how this gonna end up Tony, don’t you? With the next Sydney Mardi Gras parade featuring a stepping and vogueing team called the Abbott Smugglers. Or the Big Eared Budgie Boys.
Youtubed and facebooked all around the nation… and the world. Those that aren’t already polarised will be laughing instead.
Funny, but I feel threatened by Abbott, and I would mostly pass for straight in most situations!
Nice one Anna @82: Also, Al Gore is fat and lives in a big house and flies in aeroplanes!
ute man @83:
“That big, toothy, gormless, simple grin. The blank “tilt” pinball eyes while the gears are grinding in the background trying to formulate sound bubbles to fill the dead air.”
Perfect.
And Meggsy too!
@Nabs
You just know that it’s going to be both teams, don’t you? as well as teams called So Many People Are Threatened By Lycra and Fire-fighters Are Frequently, Secretly Fond Of Each Other. They’ll have a swagger-off at the after-parade party.
I find Abbott’s homophobia as objectionable as anyone, but these “two-minute hate” style threads are seriously lowing the tone at LP, IMHO.
No, read Bernice @78 and others. Homophobic utterances have real consequences and strong criticism and mockery is the least it deserves.
……Sorrow At Sills Bend
And please, some journo, ask Tony if he has ever had a gay liaison.
“uh, uh, I inhaled once in the sixties and, and……..
Things I have learned about Australia in this thread.
-If you are a man and you think another man is looking at you in such a way that might be interpreted as threatening your sexuality you can claim provacation and beat the crap out of them. You are also allowed to or can encourage others to help in your defence.
-If you are a woman and feel threatened, are threatened or even attacked you must remember at all times that you do not have the right to beat the crap out of the alleged male attacker. Especially if he is a sportsman or a ‘top bloke.’
-If you are a bit homophobic you can talk about how teh gays make you uncomfortable under the defence of ‘telling it like it is’, ‘keeping it real’ or ‘telling the truth.’
-If you are straight you can hold hands, kiss or even angage in lewd conduct in public. This is openly encouraged by the media and popular culture. You can wear skimpy clothes at the beach every day of the week.
-If you are gay you shouldn’t make it everyone’s business. This means not participating in once a year events. Not holding hands, kissing or even talking about your partner in company that might find it ‘uncomfortable.’ This secrecy is encouraged by the media. You also shouldn’t flaunt your sexuality in the way that you dress lest you be mistaken as predatory and have the rule of pre-emptive violence/justice meted out by any straight man with issues or a blood alcohol reading over over .05.
The next time I even think about saying to one of my gay mates that ‘chin up, at least it’s not as bad as the old days’ I’ll keep my mouth shut.
With few exceptions, when I’ve encountered some straight guy worried about being hit on by a gay guy, they really shouldn’t because they’ve got a face only a mother could love and Tony’s no exception. Maybe there are guys out there who get turned out by flappy ears, weather beaten skin and a bald spot but they would be few and far between.
As for the stuff on Bolt’s piece and some of the views expressed here, when someone who wants to be Prime Minister expresses hostility to a whole section of the electorate he should be scrutinised for his views, after all, imagine the outcry there would have been if he’s said he finds Asians threatening or Judaism threatening. Wouldn’t it be a fair assumption that if he won he’d bring his views to bear as Prime Minister? Would doing so make Australia a better place to live? No. Hence the scrutiny.
Perhaps the reason he finds gay people threatening is because he knows we won’t vote for him? Who knows, but gay people have far more to feel threatened about from him than he does from us.
Mercurius – that was an awesome description of heteronormativity
And as for this crap about predation, I’ve encountered plenty of women who when they’re hitting on me and I tell them I’m gay take it as an invitation to try and turn me. Lesbians have it much worse of course –
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/mar/12/eudy-simelane-corrective-rape-south-africa
Now that’s predatory.
Helen @90:
That would be the comment that appeared after mine? Yeah, I read it, thanks. Bernice’s comment was far more effective, IMHO, than sniping about lycra and budgie smugglers.
@ 93 cheers Alex, but I can’t claim full credit. I was trying to paraphrase something I vaguely remember reading about 6 months back in an AATE journal which to my eternal disgrace I now can’t locate to cite properly or credit the original author whose point I was trying my best to re-iterate. Plagiarism by blog and memory lapse!
In the light of Glenn Milne’s display of consummate professionalism on this morning’s Insiders this probably belongs here rather on the Lazy Sunday thread, though it did contribute much to my enjoyment of the day, particularly after I watched the Walkley footage again. I do hope this becomes a hot issue this week.
A journalist lacking discretion,
Betrayer of Abbott’s confession,
The poisonous dwarf
Has had to run off
To hide from the Mad Monk’s aggression.
Paul and Patricia WA, I get the feeling that Abbott and co felt they needed to clean up, after focus groups and other feed back had indicated Tone was looking like the homophobe, he most likely is, from the interviews where he touched on the subject.
Who better to announce bad experiences in the seminary, on his behalf, than Milne. No one would seriously confide in Milne. He is a right wing megaphone.
Yes, joe2, I thought of that later, but still it was a fun idea to play with. I guess if they want to dog whistle on the issue that’s a good way to get it out there too. Mind you the group they’d be signalling to would already be well and truly on side with them. How they play it from now on will give us some idea of whether they fed Milne this deliberately.
Lassie, you’ve forgotten Whitlam, teh devil incarnate and teh fucking Vietnamese Balts!!!
Jesus, joe2 and Patricia, you’ve put a really disturbing image in my head.
Here’s Our Tony, in the seminary (suggestive word, innit?), busting for a root, thinking that some other trainee priest looks cute, …
I don’t think we want to go there.
DUI(nr) But you already have! These are seminal thoughts, DUI. Others will want to follow you into this fertile field. The sods are already turned and new seeds scattered. Overturned old roots are shooting out new growth. Even I have conceived an idea.
Poor little Tony, all unwary,
Went to a Cath’lic seminary,
Freed of all worldly tutelary
Found the experience all too scary.
It’s too late to expand on this, but other rhymes come easily to mind – chary, cherry, vary, hairy,confectionary, parliamentary, fairy -
Oh, whatever! Goodnight!
Mother, mary ‘n jozuf, wish they’d all go away!
If Milne was given this information in a background breifing he had NO RIGHT to reveal it publicly and behaved GROSSLY UNETHICALLY in doing so. What he should have done is what the Parliamentary journalist F. T. Smith did in the 1040s. Make an extensive note of it and lodge it in the National Library with the rest of his papers not to be opened till 30 years after his death.
If OTOH his revelation was agreed to by Abbott and his minders this augurs very badly indeed.Is it possible Abbott intends to make homophobia one of his election-winning straegies. It sure looks like it to me, and if one is realistic about it, its a strategy that would work out in the wider electorate. It probably wouldn’t win him the election but it would get him more votes, and make it easier next time round.
Paul, it was gays yesterday, aboriginals and the unemployed today. My bet is Tony will take a swipe at single mothers tomorrow.
From there he will just rotate these groups, and any other mob less able to defend themselves, and use them as handy targets right up to the election. Dog whistling while he works.
I just watched 4 Corners, and am even more sure than I was before that Nick Minchin is clinically insane.
I was disappointed by tonight’s Four Corners. I was hoping we’d get more of the juicy seminary stuff but all we got was loathing and boxing and “fighting his true nature”. On the other hand we got a lot of Tony vs Malcolm stuff and how Tony’s politics has always operated on the flashy media statement on day 1 and the backpedal on day 2.
joe2 is correct. This guy doesn’t care so much about consistency because he (correctly) figures that most people won’t pay attention and their memories are short. He’s playing with the dog-whistle to see how well that angle will work in a real election, because he’s got no wiggle-room on real issues. If his party is pretending they have a real chance in the election, and John Howard is trying to take all the credit for “discovering” him, then what we have is the Telegraph Liberal Party (or the Herald Sun Liberals for us Victorians). And Crikey tells us how PR-ridden those organs have become…
My lasting impression from tonight;s $ Corners is that Tony Abbott is John Winston Howard’s puppet and is/will be just as proficient as his master at telling evasive lies. It weren’t a good look.
The ban on same-sex marriage busts the ‘sexuality is a private affair’ argument right out of the water. By legislating in this matter the federal government has put a coercive regime in place when dealing with interpersonal human relationships.
Why do I claim this is coercive?
One of the commonly touted reasons to ban same-sex marriage is to protect religious beliefs, but whose beliefs are being protected and at what cost?
Those who choose to proscribe get their religious beliefs privileged over the religious beliefs of those who don’t proscribe. How is it legitimate having a government who wants to be like the Inquisition or Taliban in supressing diversity in religious practice?
This issue adversely affects the whole body politic not just the GLBTI community.