|
|
equal
rights administration
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
2013
for updates join Philip Arts on Facebook.
bran nue world
What now? Treaties with First Nations then how about a referendum on equal rights between women and men to enable a republic governed by agreement between women’s, men’s and youth assemblies presided over by Sovereign elders. The States,
NZ, Canada, USA, UK, China follow suit. UN Women gains legislative status. Bran nue world. Ta dah!
6 April, 2013
excised of male privilege
A parliament excised of male privilege would assemble an equal number of women and men in Cabinet, the men appointed by the men’s legislature, the women appointed by
the women’s legislature, with women’s and men’s co-Prime Ministers - governance by agreement between women's and men's legislatures - presided over by a Council of
Sovereign elders comprising an equal number of senior, distinguished women and men.
4 April, 2013
standard of governance
It’s a measure of the abysmal standard of governance in Australia that the Parliament should seek to include Aborigines and Torres Strait Islanders in a
Victorian era document to which the colonial convention that women are the property of men is still attached. If this is the best the Parliament can offer
it’s obviously well over due time to either scrap the Constitution altogether and start gain or update it with a referendum to include a women’s legislature.
2 April, 2013
freedoms
It’s a big ask to claim Australia’s freedoms are worth supporting when women are relegated the legal status of the property of men under the nation’s Constitution -
women were prohibited from membership of Australia’s first Parliament so were enfranchised as male property consistent
with Victorian era law accompanying the Constitution, law no legislation enacted under it’s authority can overcome. Only a referendum on a women’s
legislature can remedy this despicable indignity: “Do you agree to an amendment to the Constitution to enable equal rights between women and men”.
2 April, 2013
legal status
How sick is this! In Australia, women were enfranchised as the property of men with the legal status of farm animals, consistent with Victorian era law
that established settler governance. With constitutional recognition of Aborigines, the settlers intend to raise the status of Aboriginal women from fauna to farm animals.
29 March, 2013
protection
Patriarchy smashed the traditional protection Aboriginal women enjoyed of equity with men in governance, which remedies sexual violence, so the
patriarchy women endure under Australian Constitution is hardly attractive - women were prohibited from membership of Australia’s first Parliament so were
enfranchised as the property of men consistent with Victorian era law accompanying the Constitution, law no legislation enacted under it’s
authority can overcome. Only a referendum on a women’s legislature can remove this despicable indignity: “Do you agree to an amendment to the Constitution to
enable equal rights between women and men?”.
27 March, 2013
male privilege rapes women
The overwhelming evidence from Aboriginal communities is that sexual violenece accompanies patriarchy. Protection women once enjoyed of
equity with men in governance, of women’s business sacrosanct from male control, that removes sexual violence, is under siege. The solution is a
referendum on a women’s legislature: “Do you agree to an amendment to the Constitution to enable equal rights between women and men”.
26 March, 2013
suggestions
Which would you rather be, an Aboriginal woman besieged by male privilege but retaining your the dignity of
equality with men under traditional law, or a farm animal content with your lot.
25 March, 2013
empowerment
Constitutional reform has been a hot topic of debate and parliamentary discussion for a few years now, the preparation is mostly done. All that remains is to
steer the conversation towards the equitableempowerment of women. After all, a Constitution that include Aborigines and enabling equal rights between women and
men through provision of a women’s legislature, are one and the same.
24 March, 2013
knowledge systems
Aboriginal knowledge systems embracing autonomous women's and men's business are far more sophisticated than could ever be imagined from the naivete of Western
culture, notoriously dismissive of Aboriginal traditions.
25 March, 2013
farm animals
Women are relegated the status of farm animal at law under Australia’s Constitution - women were prohibited from membership of the nation’s first Parliament
so were enfranchised as the property of men, consistent with Victorian era law still accompanying the Constitution, law no legislation enacted under it’s authority
can overcome – so it’s just plain laughable to suggest that Western analysis of any cultural tradition can be anything other than abysmal, as has often been
the case with the relentless, racist, ethnocentricity directed at First Nations.
24 March, 2013
none of their business
European men conducted extensive on country ethnographies of traditional Aboriginal communities over two centuries, concluding universally that intense patriarchies
were the rule, that women were subjugated absolutely. Then along came Diane Bell with her 1983 publication, “Daughters of the Dreaming”, which
confounded the contemporary view. Women’s business was entirely sacrosanct from male control, a view alluded to in the Federal Court during the Hindmarsh
Island bridge controversy when Justice John von Doussain discussed autonomous Aboriginal women’s business with the view he
was "not satisfied on the evidence before this Court that the applicants have established on the balance of probabilities that restricted women's knowledge as
revealed to Dr Fergie and Professor Saunders was not part of genuine Aboriginal tradition". [Chapman v Luminis Pty Ltd (No 5) (21 August 2001):400], a judgement
to which Dr Bell gave academic input. It turned out that ethnographers were entirely men or women attached as wives of these men and women’s business was none of their business, so they were never informed, as simple as that.
Dr Bell had gained the confidence of the women because she was one of the first unaccompanied, independent women who conducted ethnographies of Aboriginal communities.
Europeans have acquired extraordinary skills in the material world through subversion of sophisticated social analysis achieved with autonomous women's and
men's business since the dawn of humankind. The combination of Aboriginal social methodology and European material knowledge is the path to a future of peace and
sustainable prosperity in perpetuity.
22 March, 2013
women were prohibited
Australia’s Constitution was enacted by men’s legislatures from which women were prohibited, no women spoke to or voted on it’s enactment. The Constitution
enables two men’s legislatures, legislatures men granted themselves, to which women are admitted with male consent, and no women’s legislature, blatant
misogynist Victorian era discrimination totally out of context with the modern world. In 1902, women were enfranchised in legislation under the sexist terms of the Constitution
as the property of men with the status that of farm animals consitent with English tradition and unreformed to the present. The remedy is a referendum on a women’s legislature with the question: “Do
you agree to amend the Constitution to enable equal rights between women and men”.
21 March, 2013
a fait accompli
Law under which Australia's Constitution was enacted made the distinction between men and their property, which included, contemporaneously, women and farm animals,
law still accompanying the Constitution which a referendum, as required, has yet to remove. Men granted themselves two legislatures, to which they’ve since
allowed what the original intent of the Constitution considers their property, to attend, and women none. That’s Australia’s Constitution, straight up
misogynous junk. And yes, Australians do “already have equal rights for men and women in all aspects of our society” except the parliament, as enabled by
the nation’s primary instrument of governance, it’s Constitution, albeit that those rights offer women such odious protection as the same rates of sexual
violence in communities as men experience in gaol. Moreover, a majority of modern democracies convene a women’s caucus, a precursor to a legislature, at
global level, UN Women. Women’s legislatures are a fait accompli on the global agenda.
20 March, 2013
acknowledging diversity
The assertion that women obtaining the same right to a legislature as men granted themselves is gender apartheid, is a nonsense. Equal rights is about acknowledging
diversity, not sweeping difference under the carpet. If women and men obtain equal rights, all communities comprised of women and men achieve equal rights.
18 March, 2013
continuity of culture
According to Justice John von Doussain’s judgement in the Federal Court during the Hindmarsh Island bridge controversy, Aboriginal tradition affirms equal rights
between women and men by acknowledging difference with governance comprising agreement between autonomous women’s and men’s assemblies. The outcome is continuity
of culture over tens of millennia, the avoidance of social and cultural conflict and peaceful coexistence with others. By contrast, European men imposed on women
the status of either their property, contemporaneous with farm animals, or non-identity, the current fashion of women indistinguishable from men, refusing at
every turn to recognise women as different in their own right. The outcome has been incessant, ongoing warfare to the brink of annihilation in a nuclear winter,
global, irreversible environmental destruction and massive social and cultural disruption. Some claim Aborigines have nothing to contribute to the modern world.
I would argue Aborigines offer nothing less than the difference between human survival and extinction. Recognition of Aborigines in the Constitution is already
firmly on the national agenda, which conducted appropriately on provision of a women’s legislature consistent with trandition, accompanied by sovereign oversight, would ask the question: “Do you agree
to amend the Constitution to enable equal rights between women and men”. Well do you?
16 March, 2013
simple
The simple way to resolve problems in modern Aboriginal communities is to remove the misogyny Europeans introduced two centuries. Aboriginal organisational
behaviour, alluded to by the Federal Court as providing governance by agreement between autonomous women’s and men’s assemblies,
guarantees peace and sustainable prosperity in perpetuity, in stark contrast with the global military-industrial complex male-privileged, European decision-making
has produced. Thanks to constitutional, bicameral, parliamentary democracy this can be accomplished with a referendum on a women’s legislature in about six weeks,
from passing enabling law to conducting a vote, a fait accompli.
15 March, 2013
much attached to law
There’s much attached to law other than it’s black letter content. Australia’s Constitution, for instance, has never been amended to remove the misogynous approach
to governance it retains from it’s Victorian era enactment. Only a referendum on a women’s legislature can bring a Constitution that’s become wildly out of touch with the
people it governs into the modern world.
14 March, 2013
stark inequality
The proof Australia’s Constitution demonstrates stark inequality between the rights of women and men lies in it’s outcome, there’s no women’s legislature.
Australia’s Constitution provides for two men’s legislatures. It doesn’t say specifically they’re men’s legislatures, it would be silly if it did. Law exists
in a historical context with original intent. It's a nonsense to suggest that because the Constitution doesn’t mention “men and their farm animals’
legislatures”, the men who enacted it gave equal status to women? Only a referendum on a women’s legislature can remedy the legacy of Victorian era law under
which the Constitution was enacted.
The obvious way to change attitudes in Aboriginal communities is to change the attitudes of those, empowered by male privilege, who’ve sought to control those
communities, achieved with a referendum on a women’s legislature with the question: "Do you agree to amend the Constitution to enable
rights between women and men?". Bonus is it’s a win/win situation for all Australians.
12 March, 2013
feedback
“Very interesting. It would be good to see SMH and constituationallawyers investigate this?
SA l March 08, 2013, 12.26PM
“Human rights and sex discrimination laws enacted thirty years ago to achieve equitable outcomes for women have had no impact on rates of sexual violence, which
have remained similar for women in the wider community as men experience in gaol. Why? Because legislation enacted under a Constitution still bound by the
Victorian era convention that women are the property of men, can’t overcome inequity embedded in law which enables it’s enactment - women were prohibited from
membership of Australia’s first Parliament so were enfranchised as men’s property consistent with convention accompanying the Constitution, convention which
also accompanies State parliaments. Governance wildly out of touch with community standards is essentially at cause of intractable rates of sexual violence
against women. All efforts over three decades “to demand that our governments treat violence against women as a major crime epidemic”, “to know the extent of
the epidemic”, “to insist that there must be zero tolerance towards those individuals who are convicted of crimes of violence against women” and “to honour
those women who have died in the domestic wars that plague our country” have achieved very little in the shadow of a governance handicapped by Victorian era
dogma. The remedy is the provision of equity at the source of governance with a referendum on a women’s legislature: “Do you agree to amend the Constitution
to enable equal rights between women and men”.
8 March 08, 2013
the stars
Combine constitutional bicameral parliamentary democracy with women’s and men’s business and travel to the stars.
5 March, 2013
International Women’s Day
In a discussion on violence against women on International Women’s Day, it occurred to me that Australia’s Victorian era Constitution treats women as farm
animals. I didn’t say so on the day, it was a day of celebration, but it’s so sad. I don’t want to say at all, but it’s true. There’s no women’s legislature,
only legislatures men granted themselves they allow women to attend. Here’s what I wrote:
“The correct procedure for remedying sexual violence against women under a Constitution which considers women the property of men - women were prohibited
from membership of Australia’s first Parliament so were enfranchised as men’s property consistent with Victorian era convention only a referendum can
remove - is to treat women as farm animals, as was practice at law from which the Constitution is derived. But the RSPCA has no powers of governance over
women, what’s going on? Could it be the members of Australia’s Parliament simply have no idea of the terms under which they govern?”
Do you agree to amend the Constitution to enable equal rights between women and men?
3 March, 2013
not stupid
Australians aren’t stupid. Recognition of Aborigines and Torres Strait Islanders in a document which treats women as the property of men is an insult not an act of
reconciliation. Women were prohibited from attending the nation’s first Parliament, so were enfranchised as the property of men in accordance with the
Victorian era convention the Constitution prescribes, a convention no legislation enacted under it’s authority can overcome. That the Parliament would offer strong
bi partisan support for such a bizarre proposal is testament to how steeped in misogyny and deeply out of touch the legislatures and their enabling document are
from the people. No-one in their right mind would support such nonsense, whereas a proposal to bring the Constitution into the modern world with the inclusion of
a women’s legislature to enable genuine treaty negotiations, would in all probability attract overwhelming support. The obvious referendum question to achieve
reconciliation is: “Do you agree to an amendment to the Constitution to enable equal rights between women and men”.
1 March, 2013
principles
Excellent contribution Dr Foley. Those five Commonwealth principles
outlined in March 1983: (1) Inalienable freehold title for Aboriginal land; (2) Full legal protection of sacred sites; (3) Aboriginal control over mining on
Aboriginal land; (4) Access to mining royalty equivalents; and (5) Compensation for lost land; formulated at the crest of a global wave of male privilege, are
precisely what male genius can conceive. With equality with women the next wave in the set, grounds for the negotiation of a Treaty once a referendum on a women’s
legislature succeeds, are more certain.
28 February, 2013
recognition
NSW Reconciliation Council [Fb], there’s certainly strong bi partisan support and commitment to a referendum insulting Aborigines and Torres Strait Islanders, as
recognition in a misogynist relic seething with the same doctrine of male privilege at cause of the massacres, dispossession and ongoing atrocities, would
achieve. What pompous, disingenuous misfits would contemplate such a strategy, inveigled as it is in the humiliation of women and culture. Such bipartisan
support is just more tiresome evidence of the rank stupidity in which advocates of male privilege have bathed daily for centuries. The way the Constitution
treats women is just plain dispicable. Are you comfortable that the women in your family are considered the property of men, at law? Do you really want to make
that official for all Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women? Since when did reconciliation mean subjugating women to male ownership? Reconciliation is as
much about what washed up on these shores two centuries ago as what was already here, and will be advanced when there’s strong bi partisan support for a
referendum on a women’s legislature to remedy the cause of atrocities, not through thoughtless insults and mindless commitments to misogyny. There’s a clear,
inevitable process here which will in all probability achieve overwhelming public support. The the next step is provision of women’s
legislatures State and Federal, from which genuine treat negotiations can proceed. In it’s present form, Australia's Constitution is anathema to treaty, unless
of course you’re one of the dwindling rump of Victorian era misogynists unconcerned the law condemns women to the status of male property.
27 February, 2013
control
“Constitution of Australia [Fb] "OPINION: Governor-General, Current Prime Minister, and 3 High Court Justices are all female. There are female members in the
federal, state and territory parliaments across the country. There are more women in Australian police forces than ever before. I don't think we need an all
female legislature; that would only further entrench inequality. We need to work together regardless of gender, race, ethnicity or sexuality. What may be true
of the past isn't reflected in practice today. Australia has come a long way since federation though this journey isn't reflected in the current words of the
Constitution.”
Australia’s Prime Minister was appointed by a blatantly sexist and discriminatory Cabinet comprising seventeen men and five women. All senior government
appointments, including the Governor-General and High Court justices, were made by massive majorities of men, same with the State's and Territories. Men control
Australia according to the terms of a rancid Victorian era misogynist relic of a Constitution, the nation’s primary instrument of governance, under which sexism
and racism have always been deeply entrenched. Women in Australia today live with the same rates of sexual violence men experience in gaols. Providing women with
exactly the same right to legislatures as men granted themselves is the remedy for inequality, there is no other. Working together means recognising difference
not pretending difference doesn’t exist. If women and men achieve equality, all communities comprised of women and men achieve equality. Australia’s Constitution
is unchanged since Federation with regard to achieveing equality between women and men. Governance by agreement between women’s and men’s legislatures is the only solution.
The empowerment of women is a transition from subjugation to legislative equality, a journey culminating with a successful referendum on the question: “Do you
agree to an amendment to the Constitution to enable equal rights between women and men?”, which would succeed next weekend since there’s hardly anyone left in
Australia who doesn’t support equal rights between women and men.
25 February, 2013
the question
The referendum question to achieve equitable governance is this:
“Do you agree to an amendment to the Constitution to enable equal rights between women and men?".
A successful outcome would amend the Constitution to deliver governance by agreement between a women’s legislature, elected by women and a men’s legislature,
elected by men, in a Parliament led by a Cabinet comprising an equal number of women and men appointed by the legislatures, presided over by a Council of
Sovereign elders comprising an equal number of distinguished senior women and men, accompanied by Courts of women’s and men’s jurisdiction.
Since there’s hardly anyone left in Australia who doesn’t support equal rights between women and men, the proposal would receive overwhelming support at a
referendum conducted next weekend. It’s simple, inevitable, entirely the streamlining of existing resources to achieve a more equitable and efficient outcome,
and consistent with the global leadership of which Australians are eminently capable.
24 February, 2013
relic
Australia's Constitution, the nation’s primary instrument of governance, is a rancid Victorian era misogynist relic that regards women as the property of men.
Women were prohibited from attending the first Federal Parliament, so the Parliament enfranchised women as men’s property in accordance with the convention
the Constitution prescribes, a convention no legislation enacted under it’s authority can overcome. Men control Australia, at law. Majorities of men control
all appointments to high office, including Governor-General, Prime Minister and High Court justice. By contrast, Aboriginal tradition celebrates equality between
women and men as the First People’s Congress, with an equal number of women and men at all levels, demonstrates. Treaty with Aborigines the fix the Constitution to include a women’s
legislature. If women and men achieve equality, all communities comprised of women and men equality. Anything less is simply more of the same insidious male privilege
introduced two centuries ago at cause of discrimination and dispossession in the first place. A conversation on recognition of Aboriginal and Torres strait Islander
peoples in a Constitution which subjugates women is breathtaking in it’s profound ignorance and intellectual incompetence of the facts under the discussion.
7p>
23 February, 20133
property
Women were prohibited from speaking to, or voting on, the legislation that became Australia’s Constitution, and from attending the first Australian Parliament,
so the Parliament enfranchised women as the property of men in accordance with the convention the Constitution prescribes. Amend the Constitution to provide a women’s
legislature and end this despicable humiliation!
22 February, 20133
gender matters
You can't tell folk who've been discriminated against because of their gender that gender doesn't matter. Obviously it does, sufficiently to have been
discriminated against. Women matter, sufficiently to be included equitably in governance with women's legislatures alongside the men's, surely?
21 February, 2013
transition
Women and men are different from men, otherwise they would never have had to overcome discrimination to participate in governance. The provision of women’s
and men’s legislatures is the purest celebration of difference.
The current inclusion of women in governance by male consent through enfranchisement laws is a transition to governance by agreement between women’s and men’s
legislatures, a transition necessary to provide women requisite experience. Having achieved proficiency in the offices of Governor-General, Prime Minister, Attorney-General,
Speaker of the House of Representatives and High Court Justice, Australian women have already achieved sufficient experience to convene a women’s
legislature.
It should also be noted that a majority of modern legislatures convene a women’s caucus, a precursor to legislative status, UN Women the global example.
20 February, 2013
fix the discrimination, fix the policy
I read once that Ms Gillard was considered by many the better candidate for Prime Minister of Australia before the 2007 election, but Mr Rudd got the job over
concerns the electorate wasn’t ready for a female PM, albeit that responsibility for policy defaults to a blatantly sexist and discriminatory Cabinet of seventeen
men and five women, not the PM. Fix the discrimination, fix the policy, especially since Ms Gillard’s parliamentary career with regard to popularity, thus far, bears significant
similarities with that of UN Women CEO, Michelle Bachelet, who ultimately achieved overwhelming public acclaim.
18 February, 2013
lost the plot
Global warming is the most obvious evidence male privilege has lost the plot; the only way forward is equality with women.
16 February 2013
survival
Parliaments globally withhold women’s rights, there are no women’s legislatures, only legislatures men allow women to attend. Constitutional reform to provide
for women’s legislatures is the obvious option in constitutional, bicameral, parliamentary democracies. It’s for women to decide whether a legislature might equitably
promote their gender, the kudos will always remain with women if the matter is decided in the affirmative. I’m only here because men will become extinct, we all will,
if women aren’t equitably empowered, and soon.
14 February, 2013
appearance
Australia’s Constitution considers women the property of men - women were prohibited from attending the nation’s first Parliament, so the Parliament enfranchised
women as men’s property in accordance with the convention the Constitution prescribes, a convention no legislation enacted under it’s authority can overcome. So
women in politics is about whether men’s property is attractive or not. Under Australia’s Constitution, the notion that women might have something to contribute
to law and politics, other than an attractive appearance as determined by men, is as patently absurd today as it was in Victorian era England. That
a bloke has been caught up in this period drama is testament to the
disconnect between the Constitution and the people which has for some time rendered good governance
dysfunctional, a dilemma that can only be remedied with a referendum to include a women’s legislature.
9 February, 2013
the flag
The Aboriginal flag represents governance by agreement between women’s and men’s assemblies, the Commonwealth flag by assemblies men allow women to attend.
The Aboriginal flag is the flag of Australia.
26 January, 2013
pickle
An imbalance of power between women and men got us into this pickle, women’s legislatures will get us out.
21 January, 2013
soon to become
My view is that once Treaties with First Nations have been transacted, Australia will become a republic with governance in the tradition of Aboriginal sovereignty,
by agreement between women’s and men’s legislatures, presided over by a council Sovereign elders, comprising an equal number of women and men. Sovereignty transfers
from the male privilege model introduced onto the continent two centuries ago, to the equal rights model of Aboriginal tradition. What greater honour than for the
Queen to recognise Sovereign elders presiding over the first women’s legislature of the modern era. A referendum to amend the Constitution to provide
for equal rights between women and men would receive overwhelming support if conducted next weekend. Honours under an equal rights republic would be awarded equitably.
21 January, 2013
Church interferes with equality
Sydney University
appointed five women and five men to the new St John’s college
council, the Church appointed six men. Without the Church the council would be in perfect gender balance, albeit with a discriminatory male Chair and no coexisting
women’s equivalent.
21 January, 2013
organisational equality
Tom Calma put his hand up with a proposal for gender equality in governance when the incoming Labor government sought a national body after ATSIC, which got the nod.
The model provides for male and female co-chairs, and a board of directors and assembly comprised of an equal number of women and men. It lends itself to the
tradition of women’s and men’s assemblies presided over by elders, albeit as yet without the assurrance of autonomous representation separate women's
and men's legislative assemblies provides.
20 January, 2013
none of their business
Male anthropologists and their dependants spent two centuries concluding men boss over women in Aboriginal communities, because women’s business was none of
their business, how stupid is that; thanks Dr Diane Bell.
16 January, 2013
religious organisations
The nub of problems with religious organisations is male control, not religion per se, so fair inclusion laws for women on corporate boards of directors currently
being implemented in Australia by Sex Discrimination Commissioner Elizabeth Broderick should be extended to all organisations in receipt of government funding or tax-free status,
in much the same way as the US Congress implemented fair inclusion laws for women in the financial industry in response to the GFC.
16 January, 2013
misogynist capitalism finished
A male saturated finance industry collapsed the global economy with the global financial crisis of 2007. The the first proactive response of the US Congress was to
enact fair inclusion laws for women. Misogynist capitalism is in it’s death throes, as further evidenced with the global campaign for the fair inclusion of women on
boards of directors gains traction.
14 January, 2013
opportunity
If giving women and men the same opportunity to contribute is the goal the standout concern beyond education, employment, entrepreneurship and equity on boards of
directors, is governance, the opportunity for women to exercise power equitably with men in Australia’s parliaments.
Australia’s parliaments are comprised of legislatures men allow women to attend as provided by a Constitution enacted in legislatures from which women were
prohibited.
The culmination of the transition from the subjugation of women to genuine equality between women and men must, necessarily, include constitutional reform.
A republic governed by agreement between women’s and men’s legislatures, administered by a Cabinet and presied over by a Council of Governors-General, each
comprising an equal number of women and men, accompanied by courts of women’s and men’s jurisdiction, once Treaties with First Nations are transacted, would suffice.
Thank goodness for constitutional, bicameral, parliamentary democracy.
14 January, 20132
women’s reproductive rights
What’s the best way to protect women’s reproductive rights in the years ahead?
To place the question in perspective, modern culture is in transition from the denial of women as equals of men, to parity.
The first, and lengthy stage of this transition is accomplished with the approach women and men are indistinguishable, women can do precisely what men can do,
essential to increase women’s opportunity and access to skill levels equivalent to men.
Biologically, reproduction is overwhelmingly a women’s experience; the contradiction between being the same culturally yet different biologically
can confuse.
However, once a critical mass of equitable skill levels has been achieved, I would argue this is now the case in Australia, the denial of difference collapses
and recognition of gendered rights and responsibilities returns, though equitable and no longer discriminatory in favour of men.
The reproduction debate emphasises difference at a time when difference is becoming in vogue.
What we’re witnessing is the culmination of the transition to equity, when difference is consolidated, women regain control of their reproduction and live
autonomously with men.
The best way to protect women’s reproductive rights in the years ahead is to move on from the cultural mindset women are the same as men, and embrace difference,
where rights are concerned, most especially at law.
The doctrine justice is blind to gender is the first casualty; where once women had no rights, then the same rights men control, in the future women
will secure their own rights, and control those rights in negotiation with men.
Much will be identical, though interpreted in gendered jurisdictions; reproductive rights will be proactive towards women consistent with biological imperative –
men make sperm, women make babies.
13 January, 2013
failed manhood misogynistsy
Failed manhood misogynists should be charged with bringing their gender into disrepute.
14 January, 2013
inclusion
No woman in Australia can vote or become a member of any of the nation’s parliaments without prior male consent. Men control Australia, at law, exclusively,
entirely and autonomously. All offices in the nation, from prime Minister to clerk, are controlled by male privilege. Let the facts be known, inclusion will
follow. A referendum on the provision of women’s legislatures would would receive overwhelming support if conducted this weekend, and would resolve the problem of
achieving women’s equitable empowerment with men, in perpetuity.
14 January 2013
rape arrived with Europeans
"Show me one society in human history that has never had rape", I was asked. Well what can you expect when virtually the entire sample base was assembled from
the ethnocentricity of male privilege evidenced from communities men control. It took male anthropologists two centuries to learn from a female colleague,
Dr Diane Bell, through ethnographies conducted on country independently of men, of the status, equitable with men, of Aboriginal women’s business, ‘because it was
none of their business’. Empowered women don’t permit their own kind to be raped and so it is in Aboriginal traditions. Rape arrived with Europeans. A propensity
to violence has already been largely contained with the equitable empowerment of women; there remains the provision of a women’s legislature to ensure closure.
13 January, 2013
the Middle East
The dismantling of male privilege, not the inequitable distribution of wealth male privilege commands, is the remedy for problems in the
Middle East.The revolution
is already advanced and essentially at cause of progressive reforms in the Middle East and globally. Yet the indifference to women in this article is palpable; of
3914 words, 34 are devoted to women, the majority of which characterise women as male attendants with the claim women “have been taking their scarf pins to help
attach ‘Keep Egypt Clean’ signs to men’s shirts”. Just more of the same male privilege propaganda that’s being destroying the Earth for centuries, in yet another
tiresome package complete with the cynical use of a woman as poster propaganda. The assumption men can liberate the world then liberate women is nonsensical,
misinformed and misguided.
No mention of the subjugation of women. No comprehension an imbalance of power between women and men is essentially at cause of social injustice. Utter
indifference to the wave of women’s attempts to achieve power equitably with men that’s sweeping the Middle East, and to the revolution already well under way,
the empowerment of women globally, that’s making a massive difference and essentially driving progressive reforms. Just more of the same male privilege in another
package, with the cynical use of a woman as poster propaganda. The assumption men can liberate the world then liberate women is misguided, nonsensical and
tiresome. Achieve genuine equality between women and men and all the rest will follow.
10 January, 2013
*Anne Moir & David
Jessel: 'Brainsex - The Real Difference Between Men and Women'
|
|
| |