Last Post, January 19, 2019
Men should fight to retain their masculinity.
As a 1960s feminist, who would have thought 50 years later I would be sticking up for blokes? While diversity and equality sounds lovely, to lump all blokes in the same basket as rapists and sexual predators is stupid and insulting (“How vexed a man can get”, 18/1). It is about time men started to fight back to retain their masculinity — that’s why women marry them.
Virtue-signalling companies such as Gillette forget that you mustn’t upset your market. Producing shaving products is its main task, not trying to tell customers they are toxic.
Everyone, including the manufacturer of Gillette products, is talking about toxic masculinity. But there is a toxicity that no one dares speak its name — toxic feminism.
Belinda Duarte (17/1) may be correct in saying that love and hope can help reduce the incidence of indigenous youth suicide, but I doubt she is correct in saying “two centuries of trauma and dispossession” and “racism” are the principal causes. Were that the case, the phenomenon should have been apparent long ago.
Brooke Boney (“Today reporter ‘won’t celebrate’ national day”, 18/1) would not have the job she is enjoying and using as a political platform unless January 26, 1788, had occurred. The rapes and beatings of indigenous women and children by some Aboriginal men are those males’ responsibilities and nothing to do with 1788.
All of us geography and science teachers teach anthropogenic climate change as a fact. Ian Plimer is a geologist, not a climatologist. We go on the science we were taught at university as well as our professional readings.
Australia Day is just the next pillar of society the neo-Marxists wish to destroy after marriage. Anzac Day will be next in their sights.
Fiji PM Frank Bainimarama’s pressure on Australia to reduce carbon dioxide emissions has a hollow ring. Chinese emissions are 20 times higher than ours. When he knocks back Chinese aid until they cut emissions, I’ll take him seriously.
I see MPs are “outraged” over a payment for a few photos. Why do these MPs find it acceptable for the live export trade to make money out of animal cruelty and yet a poorly paid deckhand cannot make a few bucks out of bringing the truth to the attention of the public?
To join the conversation, please log in. Don't have an account? Register
Join the conversation, you are commenting as Logout