Wednesday, April 13, 2011

Australian soldiers are, like all males, sexist bullies

A little known fact from PP boy Jeremy Sear:
As Bernard Keane pointed out in yesterday’s Crikey, social conservative commentators have lost their biggest support in their opposition to ending restrictions on women serving in Australian defence forces: much of the defence establishment itself is now keen for such reform.
This is, of course, bullshit, as this Wikipedia summary reveals:
Women have served in Australian armed forces since 1899. Until World War II women were restricted to the Australian Army Nursing Service. This role expanded in 1941–42 when the Royal Australian Navy (RAN), Australian Army and Royal Australian Air Force established female branches in which women took on a range of support roles. While these organisations were disbanded at the end of the war, they were reestablished in 1950 as part of the military's permanent structure. Women were integrated into the services during the late 1970s and early 1980s and can now serve in most positions in the Australian Defence Force (ADF), including combat roles.
But according to a Pure Poison commenter, Australian soldiers are rampaging rapists, as are all males should they be presented the opportunity:
I have been castigated on another thread for suggesting that mistreatment of women, particularly rape of women in occupied counties, has been widespread in the Australian defence forces and is inadvertently promoted by military culture. Accounts of this have been subject to cover-up and censorship since before WW2.

I welcome the Australian piece, and a similar one in the SMH today by Lynda Voltz as a vindication.

Military culture brutalises people, encourages bullying and sexism, and brings out the worst tendencies towards bigotry, racism and misogyny which I am afraid are buried deep within all our male souls.
Not every Australian soldier will behave honourably, of course, but unsupported blanket smears of diggers are unwarranted and intolerable.


Anonymous Chistery said...

That commenter, Anga, is pretty appalling. One of her comments was the last straw for me and the reason I no longer swim in that swamp.

8:26 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Are you suggesting that a comment left on a blog implies that the blog owner endorses that comment? Or only when it suits your argument?

10:16 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

All of the comments here at RWDB are obviously supported and heartily endorsed by Beck.

10:52 PM  
Anonymous Chistery said...

Who cares if the blog owner supports a comment or not? That person is a regular commenter and her comments are never challenged by the blog owner or other commenters. She is not regarded as a troll. Therefore, her views are acceptable for that blog.

5:13 AM  
Anonymous Chistery said...

Oh, and that assertion is made ad nauseum by Jezza and Dave and their gang of fans over at PP in regards to comments they find offensive over at Bolt's site. You wouldn't want to appear hypocritical, would you?

5:22 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

So offensive comments at Crikey are representative of Crikey's writers but offensive comments at Andrew Bolt's blog arent representative of Andrew Bolt. Got it.

7:46 AM  
Blogger Minicapt said...

1. While fluorescent idiocy and general pig-ignorance frolic in the fertile fields of no-names.

2. Beck only supports the comments with which he is in agreement.


11:12 AM  
Anonymous Chistery said...

>Are you suggesting that a comment left on a blog implies that the blog owner endorses that comment?

Listen, whoever you are, that's your projection. Beck never implied it and neither did I.

PP does imply it when they post about some comment left on Bolt's blog then bitch and whine about why it wasn't moderated back into the ether.

You've got nothing, so fuck off.

11:57 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yep, when you start losing the argument just start swearing and abusing anyone who disagrees with you.

9:07 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home