Woman loses election. "Yes, I am bitter and disappointed. Once again, Labor failed women" she screeches. She admits "the bulk of people – both men AND WOMEN – didn’t vote for me!" but blames "faceless men being firmly in control."

Pecanpig · 2013-10-15T01:06:22+00:00

She's full of it. She knows it's the doing of factional deals, knows even the women voted against her, yet tries to sneak "sexism" into the mix. She seems a rather weak person who just can't take defeat without throwing a very public tantrum. Weird, given that as Speaker of the House it is her job to stop everyone else acting like brats. There are 11 women on the front bench, this asshole thinks that isn't enough? Get stuffed, madam speaker.

Edna69 · 2013-10-15T01:19:05+00:00

To be fair, the term "faceless men" has connotations in Australian politics. It comes from a political crisis in the 1970s that saw the ousting of our prime minister. "Faceless men" were blamed, being a small number of elected representatives with links to spy agencies (both our own and foreign) that had a disproportionate influence. The emphasis being on the "faceless" rather than the men.

Now whenever there are back room deals done it is said to be the work of "faceless men" even though some are no doubt women.

The complaint here is that the makeup of the opposition front bench is being controlled by an anonymous minority and the result is a front bench that is not representative of the party or the electorate. It is not so much a complaint about being a woman.

cynwrig · 2013-10-14T22:25:56+00:00

Patriarchy is to Feminists as "Zionist Occupied Government" is to antisemites.

TracyMorganFreeman · 2013-10-15T01:28:41+00:00

Having left a room where I must admit the bulk of people – both men and women – didn’t vote for me to get the chief opposition whip job not on the basis of merit or perceived capability but on the numbers and the deals done beforehand, one has to question the newly found "democracy" in the Labor party, and the notion that we all have a say.

Something tells she doesn't understand what merit actually means.

The problem with women is that they think effort will be rewarded and recognised. They work like girly swots and naively believe that they will get meritorious selection. But there is no meritocracy.

Meritorious selection is not a participation trophy or gold star. If someone is a better candidate than you it doesn't matter how hard you tried.

but our process remains one where the most senior women in the Labor party were accorded no positions going forward

Most senior women=/=most senior candidate.

Then again seniority isn't exactly merit either.

and no ability to actually argue their case and demonstrate why they would make the best candidate based on immediate past performance.

Can't say whether this is accurate or not. Could it be a function of how Australian politics/parliamentary rules work?

After a ballot took place, where the leading contender and indeed winner of the process declared the party must ensure greater diversity and promote women, Indigenous people and people from our LGBTI and non-english speaking background communities, the very same leader has failed to deliver any progress for women in the party.

Even granting for the sake of argument the inherent value of diversity, co-opting all those groups into one diversity pot is a double edged sword. If any one person who belonged to one of those groups gained a seat, then diversity overall increased.

the same caucus that bemoaned Abbott’s lack of women on the front bench must have a fair representation of women in senior roles

Define fair.

Yes, there are 11 women on the front bench but, yet again, the majority come from the left with no advancement by the right or the new leader.

Ah so she doesn't actually care about having more women, but trying to the use the "more women are needed!" card to get more candidates that agree with her.

Perhaps my audacity in asking this, and again asking for a vote today, demonstrates that I don’t like accepting what is given to me as a fait accompli. But if someone in the tent does not test the boundaries, who will?

Translation: I don't like accepting that maybe it's a fact I was selected against based on merit.

Another article, another politician blaming everyone but themselves for their lack of political savvy.

tallwheel · 2013-10-15T02:20:10+00:00

If she's right, then a candidate running under the "Patriarchy Party" should have no trouble winning the election.

JayBopara · 2013-10-15T08:07:33+00:00

The 1 in 5 vs 1 in 71 skewed statistic has been debunked by avfm.

geengaween · 2013-10-15T01:07:22+00:00

Ugh.

Labor had a woman in charge and she sunk us into a giant debt black hole.

She put her communist agenda above the well-being of the nation.

Darkling5499 · 2013-10-15T11:10:49+00:00

typical feminist. "Waaaah i didn't get my way waaaaaah evil men waaaaah patriarchy"

5th_Law_of_Robotics · 2013-10-15T13:25:56+00:00

No man has ever lost an election. Her outrage is justified.

2013-10-15T15:40:04+00:00

Ohhh, you didn't win the popularity contest? Must be misogyny, right?

Never mind that plenty of women also didn't vote for you. ...But let me guess, they're just brainwashed tools of the patriarchy, right?

Thank god she lost. The last thing we need is more victim-mentality idiots like her in positions of power.

JaydenPope · 2013-10-15T21:09:54+00:00

Yes a democratic society said no to a woman so she cries sexism...

I lost faith in humanity long ago.

Tusse · 2013-10-16T21:29:58+00:00

And there I was, wondering what the gentleman in the niqab was doing taking over my pen and ballot paper in the ballot box at the last election, forcing me vote for the raving monster loony party.

Comments