The March for Injustice

More than 75,000 people attended the March 4 Justice rallies across Australia to protest violence against women, those crowds summoned by former Liberal staffer Brittany Higgins’ allegations of rape in Parliament House and historical accusations against Attorney-General Christian Porter. Apart from the apparent lack of substantial evidence to support the latter accusation, there is also, as Keith Windschuttle puts it,  ‘the lack of reliability of [Porter’s] accuser, who had long-term psychiatric problems that eventually ended in her suicide in 2020’.[1][2]

Prime Minister Scott Morrison offered to meet personally with the organiser of the Canberra march and “a couple of guests of her choosing”. However, in an explosive Twitter post, she rejected the invitation. Nonetheless, Mr Morrison stated: “Today, here and in many cities across our country, women and men are gathering together in rallies both large and small to call for change and to act against violence directed against women.”[3]  Opposition leader Anthony Albanese also expressed his support for the march and attended the Canaberra event, which he said “shone a light on the scourge of violence against women and against children.”[4] One would like to think our politicians are keen to combat all forms of domestic violence, regardless of gender, age and ethnicity. However, in focusing only on women they are guilty of a blatant if unthinking sexism by endorsing the feminist false narrative that men are always the aggressors and women their inevitable victims.


The Truth About Child Abuse

I had the opportunity to receive in my office one morning last week a dear friend who broke into tears while telling me of attending the trial of a 38-year-old woman charged with the brutal murder of her two young daughters. Milka Djurasovic murdered the girls — Mia, 10, and Tinaan, 6 — at their family home in the Perth suburb of Madeley in October 2020.[5]  Philip, whose daughter was in Mia’s class, related how his daughter could neither comprehend nor accept she would never again see her friend. Unfortunately mothers killing of children is not an entirely uncommon phenomenon in this country. Indeed, Australian women account for more than half (52 per cent) of the country’s child homicides.[6]

What is more, Australian males are far more likely than females to become the victims of filicide (murder of a child — 56% to 44%), parricide (murder of a parent –54% to 46%), and homicides involving other domestic relationships (70% to 30%).[7]  In other words, not only are Australian women more likely to kill their biological children than Australian men, they also represent more than half of child-maltreatment perpetrators, a fact confirmed by the Australian Institute of Criminology.[8]

Curiously, one of the greatest risk factors in child abuse and neglect, confirmed by virtually every investigation, is children living in female-headed single-parent households.[9] According to US sociologist David Popenoe, child abuse overwhelmingly occurs in households from which the biological father is either voluntarily absent or involuntary removed.[10]


The Truth About Domestic Violence

For those who accept the feminist narrative that domestic violence is primarily a gender issue defined by men inflicting appalling behaviour on wives and children, I would recommend a book by Paul Kidd, Australia’s Most Evil Women, which asserts that Australia has the world’s highest percentage of female serial killers.[11] As the author points out, “Women murder for a variety of reasons – the most common being the slaying of a husband after [alleged]  years of abuse.”[12] But he also reminds us that only a small number murders actually fit this particular category. There are crimes, writes Kidd, that “could only be classified as pure evil, as no other reason has been found.”[13]  “Who smothers four of her little children to death over a ten-year period and blames cot death? Who stabs her husband to death after sex and then skins his corpse, hangs the pelt in the doorway, then cooks his head in a pot and bakes his buttocks in the oven for the kids’ dinner?’[14] he asks. Or what of the Victorian woman found guilty in November 2018 of brutally murdering her husband by dousing him with paint thinner and setting him alight in front of their children. Victorian Supreme Court Justice Lesley Taylor said Bendigo woman Kate Stone “showed no remorse for what was a barbarous and horrific act”, describing her actions as the “ultimate act of family violence”.[15]

The truth is that women can be as violent as men; the fact that both genders commit violent acts in the home in roughly equal numbers clearly established by so many studies that it requires no reiteration.  However, the Morrison government has spent at least $400 million in a domestic violence campaign based on the feminist premise that this is entirely caused by Australian men and their “toxic masculinity”. Due to that prevailing narrative, domestic violence by women against men is notoriously under-reported. Frequently men do not conceptualise the physical violence they sustain from their female partners as a ‘crime’.

As noted by Sarah Wallace, a senior research fellow at the University of South Wales (USW) who interviewed abused men, there are numerous reasons why domestic violence against men flies largely beneath the radar, including fear of retaliation and a lack of trust and/or confidence in the police. [16]


The Truth About Sexual Harassment  

The feminist protest organisers of the March 4 Justice drafted a petition that calls for immediate actions to be taken to protect women from sexual harassment and assault in their workplaces. Make no mistake, accusations of sexual harassment are very serious, must be properly investigated and dealt with accordingly. However, the feminist approach to sexual harassment traduces that ideal.

During the confirmation hearings for US Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, convened in the wake of the #MeToo movement, three women made utterly false and unsubstantiated accusations of rape. While there were no legal consequences for those false accusers, what any reasonable man might conclude after watching the attempted lynching of Kavanaugh’s character and career is that open, collegial conduct with female colleagues can result, perhaps decades later, in claims of assault and harassment against which there is no effective defence. Bearing this in mind, a wise and wary male will avoid being alone with a female co-worker lest accusations requiring him to prove his innocence arise. Is this really what feminists see as the path to gender equality?

Needless to say, a false accusation can destroy the life of an innocent person. Women who make such false claims not only do real damage to the innocent victims (in addition to genuine female victims of rape and sexual harassment), but also bring the entire credibility of our legal system into disrepute. Such individuals do enormous damage to our society and should not go unpunished. Rather, simple justice — more often observed in the breach — demands they must face justice for their destructive lies.[17] The system is in urgent need of reform so that basic principles of natural law are properly applied, justice prevails and the truth can be more properly ascertained. Alas, all movement is in the opposite direction. A 2018 Pew Center Research survey of 6,251 adults concluded the #MeToo movement “made it harder for men to know how to interact with women in the workplace” and to “navigate workplace interactions”.[18] That study also suggests a plurality of men and women now see “the increased focus on sexual harassment and assault as potentially creating challenges for men at work while not necessarily having a positive impact on women in terms of career opportunities.”[19]

According to political theorist Cathy Young and Houston University legal scholar Dr Michael Weissof, feminist jurisprudence has resulted in “increasingly loose and subjective definitions of harassment and rape, dangerous moves to eviscerate the presumption of innocence in sexual assault cases, and a broad concept of self-defence in cases of battered wives that sometimes amounts to a license to kill an allegedly abusive spouse.”[20] In early cases, plaintiffs were able to challenge unwanted sexual overtures in the workplace by using the common-law remedies of tort and contract.[21] Feminist scholars now reject this approach, decrying “the conceptual inadequacy of traditional legal theories to the social reality of men’s sexual treatment of women.”[22] Under the new perspective sexual harassment is truly in the eye of the beholder, based on feelings about a phrase, gesture or behaviour and how they might subjectively be perceived by the person on the receiving end. As such, even the “appearance” of harassment is sufficient to be construed as an “anguishing female experience” and punishable by law. We should be extremely concerned at how easily a genuinely innocent man’s life can be ruined by such frivolous or false accusations, also that false accusers rarely face negative consequences for their actions.

The organisers of the recent rallies promote the implied mantra that all men are violent and abusive by their very nature; with all women the innocent victims of gender oppression in their private lives, at work, and in society as a whole, and it is this radical feminist narrative the political class has allowed to utterly dominate the agenda.  Of course, if our politicians were genuinely concerned about violence and sexual harassment, they would acknowledge that, contrary to the dominant discourse, these are not gendered issues and that women are sometimes part of the problem.[23]

Dr Augusto Zimmermann is Professor and Head of Law at Sheridan Institute of Higher Education, and Professor of Law (Adjunct) at the University of Notre Dame Australia, Sydney campus. He is also a former Law Reform Commissioner in Western Australia (2012-2017) and President of the Western Australian Legal Theory Association (WALTA).     

[1] Keith Windschuttle, ‘Women Power Gets Contagious’, Quadrant Online, 14 March 2021, at https://quadrant.org.au/opinion/qed/2021/03/women-power-gets-contagious/

[2] Sarah Steger and Sarah Ison, ‘Mass March for Women: Ex-Wife of Attorney-General Adds Her Voice to Thousands Protesting’, The West Australian, 15 March 2021, p 3.

[3] Adeshola Ore, ‘‘Good and Right’ to Protest Gender Violence: PM’, The Australian, 15 March 2020, at https://www.theaustralian.com.au/nation/politics/politicsnow-scramble-to-contain-covid19-leaks-from-hotels-in-brisbane-and-sydney/news-story/d5e445da72a237b4fab32a0410cdc1a9

[4] Ellie Dudley, Angelica Snowden and Jess Malcolm, ‘March 4 Justice Protest Organisers Rejects Scott Morrison, Marise Payne Offer to Meet in Parliament House’, The Australian, 15 March 2021, at https://www.theaustralian.com.au/nation/politics/scott-morrison-marise-payne-to-meet-womens-protest-organiser/news-story/e4a1a38d49457d60bb6d6d4a13b79d5a

[5] Phil Hickey, ‘Mum to Face Trial for Double Murder’, The West Australian, 29 October 2020, p 15.

[6] Tracy Cussen and Willow Bryant, ‘Domestic/Family Homicide in Australia’, Australian Institute of Criminology, No.38, May 2015, p 2.

[7] Ibid., 

[8] Ibid., p 3.

[9]  David Popenoe, ‘Life with a Father’, U.S. Department of Education, Educational Resources Information (ED 416 035), November 2000, p 12.

[10] Patrick Parkinson, Judith Cashmore and Judi Single, ‘Post-Separation Conflict and the Use of Family Restraining Orders’ (2011) 33 Sydney Law Review 1, pp 32-33.  See also: Patrick Parkinson, Judith Cashmore and Atlanta Webster, ‘The Views of Family Lawyers on Apprehended Violence Orders After Parental Separation’ (2010) 24 Australian Journal of Family Law 313, p.315. See also: Jennifer Hickey and Stephen Cumines, ‘Apprehended Violence Orders: A Survey of Magistrates’ (Sydney/NSW: Judicial Commission of New South Wales, 1999), p 37.

[11] Paul B. Kidd, Australia’s Most Evil Women (Scoresby/Vic: The Five Miles Press, 2013), p 1.

[12] Ibid., 1

[13] Ibid.

[14] Ibid., 2.

[15] Beth Gibson and Natalie Kerr, ‘Woman Gets 34 Years in Jail for Setting Partner on Fire’, ABC Central Victoria, 12 July 2019, at https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-07-12/kate-stone-sentenced-for-darren-reid-murder-in-bendigo/11301216. The report says: ‘Kate Stone, 41, was found guilty last November of dousing 45-year-old Darren Reid in paint thinner and setting him alight at their home in the Bendigo suburb of Long Gully on December 18, 2016. He suffered burns to 95 per cent of his body and was flown to the Alfred Hospital in Melbourne, but died on the following day… In sentencing Stone, Justice Taylor said she took into account the vicious manner of the murder, the fact that it was done with children present’.

[16] Jenny Ress, ‘Male Domestic Abuse Victims Suffering in Silence’, BBC News, 11 March 2019, at https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-wales-47252756

[17] Janet Albrechtsen, ‘Let Us Now Praise Masculine Men’, The Australian, 17 August 2019, at https://www.theaustralian.com.au/inquirer/let-us-now-praise-masculine-men/news-story/591acb01fa932b0620748d2f19ff67ae

[18] Nikki Graf, ‘Sexual Harassment at Work in the Era of #MeToo’, Pew Research Center, 4 April 2018, at https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2018/04/04/sexual-harassment-at-work-in-the-era-of-metoo/

[19] Ibid.

[20] Michael Weiss and Cathy Young, ‘Feminist Jurisprudence: Equal Rights or Neo-Paternalism?’, Cato Policy Analysis No.256, 19 June 1996, at http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-256.html

[21] Ibid.

[22]  Catherine MacKinnon, Sexual Harassment of Working Women: A Case of Sex Discrimination (New Haven/CT: Yale University Press, 1979), p.27.

[23] Bettina Arndt, ‘Flirting with Confected Outrage Fails to Impress Women’, The Australian, 7 January 2016, at https://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/flirting-with-confected-outrage-fails-to-impress-women/news-story/13b5e0c486c037fce7f0a3fd625f801b

39 thoughts on “The March for Injustice

  • Michael says:

    Many men, especially the responsible ones with families to support, are indeed concluding in the wake of #MeToo, Kavanaugh, and other cases that open, collegial conduct with female colleagues can result, perhaps decades later, in claims of assault and harassment against which there is no effective defence, and bearing this in mind, are avoiding being alone with a female co-worker lest accusations arise.

  • Harry Lee says:

    We are actually in a war for power.
    And the people whose power-lust is combined with the highest degree of native talent for garnering power and who exert effort to garner power are, of course, winning/have won.
    Two tactics, among others, that are used by these very successful power-lusters are these:
    1. Gather the support of evil people while portraying their acts of evil as simply the results of a bad society (eg Western Civ, with its free enterprise, and notion of personal responsibility by contributing citizens.)
    2. Garner the support of naive idealists who are pleased and energised by the idea that evil, and inequality and unfairness, can be eliminated if only the Big Statist power-lusters have control of the society.
    These naive idealists are inspired by the idea that they themselves, and all others, can lives of material abundance, with feelings of great virtue -all without personal effort- if only the Big State Commissars did indeed run the place, and make it all so.
    This is the genius of the Left -the neo-marxist/post-modernist inspired people who inhabit the ALP and the Greens, and who hold influential roles in the education systems, in the mainstream media, in the public services, and in the law industry.
    Lest We Forget eh.

  • Alice Thermopolis says:

    In any complex system, be it the climate or society, a group of ideologues invariably arise claiming to have discovered the sole causal factor that controls it. In the former case, it is “carbon” (dioxide), in the latter case, gender.

  • lbloveday says:

    6 years ago Raina Mersane Ina Thaiday, killed her 7 children and a niece, and no conviction, no condemnation in the media, just the normal “She was a loving mother, how have we let her down?”, which is, rightly, never applied to men who kill their children.

  • Harry Lee says:

    The headline mentions “Injustice”.
    I say that there is extreme injustice -extreme malignity- in this:
    Funds created by battling, striving White Australians are being transferred to non-Western and anti-Westernist individuals and communities right here in Australia.
    This treasonous abuse of funds has this consequence:
    Resources that should be spent on improving the culture of White Australians -starting with rectifying the causes of White violence- is actually being spent to promote and expand anti-Westernist/anti-White activities.
    Yes, it’s outrageous -started by the ALP, naturally, and now embraced by the Libs and Nats, naturally.
    “Multiculturalism” is a smokescreen for anti-White-ism.
    The ignorant and malign fools of the ALP who started “multiculturalism” -to stick it to Britain (England, actually), and to replace proper contributory citizenship with parasitism- possibly did not foresee that anti-Westernists of all colours would use multiculturalism against all Whites.

  • Harry Lee says:

    Yes, feminism (post-modernist, male-hating, vicious, power-lusting, variety) has brought us to this:
    Must now segregate by gender all places of human activity:
    All kindergartens, schools, universities, and all workplaces, public and private sector, and all restaurants, take-aways, supermarkets, and bottle shops.
    And as post-modernism dictates that there are as many genders as declared by any individual, the Big State Commissars must now busy themselves with creating all the requisite places of segregation.
    Just like Islam, only more so.

  • RB says:

    Being in a position of some minor authority within my organisation I chose more than 20 years ago to never be alone in my office with any female except my wife.
    Interviews, promotions and reviews were all done with at least one other person. All people present are noted in my diaries.
    It wasn’t ego on my part it was fear.
    My predecessor had lost his job to an accusation.
    That was more than 20 years ago. This is the same BS but on steroids.

  • bobmbell39 says:

    As a young and relatively untrained secondary school teacher in the UK in 1961 the words of advice from the science master were not to be alone in a classroom with one of the older girls. Misunderstandings or worse. Not much has changed

  • Stephen says:

    Jordan Peterson has addressed this issue. He made the point that men and women working together is a very new thing. Only 50 years or so and that here needs to some rules and the rules are as yet undefined. If a young, good looking women, wears a tight dress with a short skirt, make up and red lipstick, can she then complain about the male gaze? One of the women who complained about harassment from Parliamentary staff said that a man placed his hand on her thigh which he removed at her request but the context was that she had been drinking with him in a bar for about 2 hours after work!
    Men must behave like gentlemen but women must at least have reasonable expectations.
    I have a friend who employs about 20 people in a Software firm and he is now considering whether employing women is worth the risk.
    Certainly if women (or men) lie about it to the police or the courts they should be charged with perjury or perverting the course of justice and face the consequences,

  • DG says:

    I am in the mentoring program with one of my alma maters. On a couple of occasions I’ve been allotted to mentor a young woman. In each case, I’ve turned up with a chaperone. I always meet in a public place, and I plan to record the meetings from now on too. The MeToo cabal has destroyed trust between the sexes (note ‘sexes’ not that fake idea ‘genders’). Maybe that is their intent.

  • Greg Williams says:

    I teach in an all-girls school. There have been several major renovations over the past 20 years or so, and the architects have had the nous to make just about all walls in classrooms, adjacent to the hallways, glass. Yep, it’s a bit like teaching in a. fishbowl, but there’s no problem for a male teacher, like myself, helping a girl between lessons or in breaks. There’s always enough traffic in the hallways to make the one-on-one tuition in a classroom a non-problematic event.

  • Harry Lee says:

    Non-predatory males!
    A female is your enemy until she proves she is not.

  • Harry Lee says:

    Predatory males!
    Get off the booze.
    Join with other males who seek to live productive, peaceful lives -club together and help one another.
    Be of service to your community.
    And keep off booze and all recreational drugs
    And exert effort to learn and to enact the requirements of living a flourishing life.
    (The education systems and the mainstream media will not help you.)

  • Hypatia Hypergirl says:

    What nobody here, seems to be able to absorb and digest, is that sexual abuse, occurs for all intensive purposes, in asymmetrical power scenarios which are therefore toxic and, must be eliminated.
    Enough, is enough, no man, must EVER be permitted power over a woman or multiple women, the answer is EQUALITY of all for all and consensus, consensual decision making not patriarchal hierarchies like some foul fearful feudal fiefdom from the “good” olden, days when men were, like, MEN.
    The incremental, ABC, model where the structure, remains, but only the women, get promoted works albeit, eventually, as we can see burgeoning today, but, no longer do we have time to wait in this day, and age.
    The future is female and when do we want it, I hear, you say?
    I’ll give you three, guesses, mateys. Get used to it or get out, of the kitchen.

  • PT says:

    Well Hypatia, I assume your rant is pure sarcasm

  • Doubting Thomas says:

    PT, you’re being far too kind.

  • Harry Lee says:

    I’m all for the tax-payer-funded re-culturing of White males.
    Non-white males who have had their residence to date in Australia funded by tax-payers should pay for themselves, for a change.
    Now, no new taxes.
    To pay for the cultural upgrade of White males, I say scoop together a billion a year from various taxpayer-funded sinks:
    The ABC, the arts-humanities-law faculties in the universities, and the budgets now used to pay for “task forces”, community grants, and Centrelink payments -all currently being spent to maintain the many growing non-Western and anti-Westernist communities now spreading across Australia.
    And stop bringing in more nett-cost immigrants and refugees who only come for the freebies and to vote ALP.

  • Stephen says:

    At High School in the 1960s I was at the boys school. The girls school was next door with a 7 foot high fence with barbed wire on top. Maybe modern offices should also be like this. Alternatively perhaps we could all wear what we like to the office but once we are there all staff of all sexes have to change into a neck to floor hessian sack with hair up under a cap with no make up allowed. Any other suggestions? Maybe if we transformed the country to be more like Afghanistan we wouldn’t have tis problem. We would have a lot of much worse problems but at least not this one. Yes, I am joking, my apologies for not being a very good comedian.

  • lhackett01 says:

    Much is made today to extrapolate the hysterical fervour of some women to all women. The recent marches, supposedly about rape and respect, are such. Not all women support the hype of the present marching horde.

    The male and female of all species inherently have a need for sex. That is how nature has made them. It is nature’s imperative for the survival of the species, any species. Study after study shows that men’s sex drives are not only stronger than women’s, but much more straightforward. The sources of women’s libidos, by contrast, are much harder to pin down. This is why a man is usually proactive and will try many approaches to excite and convince a female that he is worthy. It’s common wisdom that women place more value on emotional connection as a spark of sexual desire. So, she is able more easily to shy away from and discourage a male.

    Given the male has a strong sex drive, he will have sex with a woman who gives him the slightest opportunity. At least he will consider doing so but may be stopped by a stronger commitment to another. This imperative and behaviour is a fundamental part of human relationships. To deny it is ignorance or to have unrelated agendas that can be enhanced by this issue.

    The reality is that until today, a man could ‘ogle’ a women, ‘wolf-whistle’ her, speak suggestively to her, and touch her with the obvious understanding that he was interested in her. How she responded told the man whether to continue his approaches or not.

    A woman joining a gathering that included men would expect some men to approach her. Indeed, most women would hope so. They would be devastated to be seen and treated as a ‘wall-flower’, as undesirable. Men and woman would expect such approaches to be towards establishing a friendly relationship that might or might not involve sex. Mutual respect would be the norm.

    However, if a woman acts in a way that is provocative, disrespectful, sexually explicit, or otherwise places her in a situation of vulnerability then she can expect advances from men that she may or may not want. Women who disport themselves in dress or behaviour that they should know will excite men’s sexual drive can expect sexual responses. Prostitutes know this well. Women who drink to excess are deliberately making themselves vulnerable.

    The inherent sexual drive of people, especially of men, must be understood and recognized. Such drives must be managed. Because they are innate, they cannot be changed without harm. The drive in some men can be so overpowering that they will act without thought when the opportunity presents itself. While this does not excuse the act, the fact must be recognized. Women must take the lead in managing these sexual interactions. As has been the case in the past and is still the case in many societies today, women must act with modesty and care if they want to be respected and avoid unwanted sexual encounters.

    The majority of women know about this need for modesty. Those who rant and rage in the belief they can dress and act without care do not. It is they who should change.

  • Wyndham Dix says:

    The reality is that Western women have won all major cultural battles, but lost the war.
    All male concessions such as not being alone with another woman except his wife, wise though they are in the culture that has existed since women entered the workforce in large numbers, merely contribute to those battle victories.
    The lost war is continuity of the most innovative and technological people of all times: Europeans.
    Rising dominance of the female in the workplace and declining reproduction rates are two sides of the same coin. Any people whose total fertility rate is less than 2.0 per female (plus a bit extra to allow for infant mortality) will eventually become extinct.
    The problem is greatest in European countries, notably Malta 1.2 and Italy and Spain, both currently 1.3 each. Australia’s rate is 1.7 (one-half of what it was 60 years ago), probably less for women of European extraction after adjusting for the fecundity of introduced people of Middle Eastern descent. https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/total-fertility-rate
    Yes, there is a handful of mostly small Asian countries at the foot of the list, but they face the same fate.
    No, Earth is not running out of space to accommodate its 7.9 billion people. At Greater London’s population density of circa 4,800 people per square kilometre the entire world population would fit comfortably in an area less than the size of the State of Queensland (circa 1.73 million sq. kms.)
    Female dominance in the West is a Pyrrhic victory. The shrieking harpies who get the publicity today, and many of their accomplices of like cupidity, have not the wit to comprehend this.

  • Andrew Campbell says:

    I have this consent thing sown up. 50 years ago, a virgin, I said ‘I do’ to a woman and she said ‘I do’ to me. Then we signed a covenant, a promise, to love each other, for better, for worse, for richer, for poorer. Consent all round. Now making a marriage work is not as simple as that, sure. And I still have to woo my wife. But that makes it more fun. I advise my grandsons and any young men that the best way to get consent is to wait until marriage, then bust yourself to make your marriage work. Consent all around! Strange. Isn’t that old fashioned Christian morality?

  • lbloveday says:

    I had FCA-ordered shared residency of my daughter.
    When my daughter was 8, her mother’s boyfriend took a belt to my daughter – legs, back, arms, covered in welts and bruises, photographed and witnessed by others when I came back from interstate the next day and took my daughter.
    His sworn rationale in an affidavit to the FCA “She threw the remote at me, I thought want to be tough do you, so I took the strap to her”. Her story, he tickled her mercilessly, when he finally let her go, she threw the remote that she was holding in anger/frustration/reflexively. For that a grown man bashes a little girl black and blue with a belt.
    I got retraining orders (heard as an urgency in the Magistrates’ Court, later in the FCA) against him being alone with my daughter or physically disciplining her (cost $10,000), but the police, so ready to get a restraining order at no cost if a biological father so much as raises his voice, so willing to kick in a door to arrest him, would not even serve it, let alone charge the boyfriend with assault, despite the Magistrate marking it “Urgent”, claiming the boyfriend would not open the door! So another $100 for a process server.
    Fathers=bad, mothers=good. I should have paid a bikie the $10,000 to beat the crap out of him, with a promise of worse to come if he touched her again or reported the beating. I did not do it myself as it would almost certainly be considered grounds for the FCA excluding me from my daughter’s life.

  • lbloveday says:

    Abbott winked in a radio studio when a granny who, along with the listeners, could not see him, saying she worked in the sex trade, and the media went into melt-down, News Ltd reporting Hanson-Young’s response “He’s a creep. A total creep”, and on and on went the hysteria.
    Contrast that with this video of Bill Shorten leering at Kate Ellis as she walked past him IN PARLIAMENT, sniggering like a 15yo boy who’s snuck into a strip club, and exchanging smirks with the male Labor MPs either side of him. From SHY, the female Labor MPs and the feminist reporters….. NOTHING.

  • lbloveday says:

    “said”, not “saying”

  • JamesBowen says:

    As a retired senior Crown prosecutor, I have been wondering why a charge of rape has not been laid in support of the allegation by Brittany Higgins. If she has made a statement to police in support of her rape allegation, why has no charge been laid against the man alleged to have committed the rape. The mob protests are likely to continue until a charge is laid and a jury is given its province to determine guilt or innocence.

  • cbattle1 says:

    “Every man is a potential rapist!” So I read in a feminist periodical some years ago. I also remember feminists demanding women safe zones in public places, as being the only remedy to the inherent nature of men. But of course that appartheit solution would only apply to heterosexual men. Until we have created the ultimate society, which is that of matriarchially-lead anarcho-communism (with Aboriginal voice), it only makes sence to place restrictions on hererosexual men.

  • bomber49 says:

    From my reading of crime stats here and around the world, the old fashioned concept of marriage seems to be a factor protecting both sexes from murder and violence committed on them by their partner. Unmarried women with a child or children not sired by their current partner seem to come off worse. Interestingly in a few cities in the US more men die at the hand of their partner/spouse than the other way around. Having said this women need a safe escape mechanism from a violent relationship.

  • Harry Lee says:

    JamesBowen, could it be that the circumstances of the alleged rape, as attested by the complainant and by witnesses, do not present prosecutors with a plausible case?
    And that the ABC-led media show is part of the wider leftist campaign against the Libs in the run-up to the next Fed election?
    The local Left, emboldened by the current successful onslaught of leftism in the USA, will be using all tactics to increase their control of the daily lives of Ordinary People by way of Big Statism.
    And in all of this, facts and logic are put aside -demonised- in the Left’s pursuit of Total Permanent Power uber alles.

  • lbloveday says:

    I assume Paul Kidd referred to Kathleen Folbigg when he wrote: “Who smothers four of her little children to death over a ten-year period and blames cot death?”
    Interesting development in that case.
    CNN: https://edition.cnn.com/2021/03/19/australia/kathleen-folbigg-children-deaths-sids-intl-hnk-dst/index.html
    Kathleen Folbigg has spent the past 18 years in prison for one of the most horrific crimes imaginable: killing all four of her babies.
    But new scientific evidence suggests that’s not what happened.
    Genomic testing shows at least two of the Australian’s babies likely died from a previously undiscovered genetic mutation that led to heart complications — meaning she may have been wrongfully imprisoned for almost two decades.
    The finding has prompted 90 scientists — including two Australian Nobel Laureates — to ask the governor of New South Wales to pardon Folbigg and let her walk free. If that happens, Folbigg’s case will be one of the worst miscarriages of justice in Australian history.
    More forensically, from Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kathleen_Folbigg
    On 4 March 2021, evidence cited by 90 prominent scientists called for Kathleen Folbigg to be pardoned. Genetic evidence published in November 2020 showed that at least two of the children had genetic mutations that predisposed them to heart complications.[16] The researchers concluded that the CALM2 mutation carried by Kathleen and her two girls altered their heart rhythm, predisposing them to heart conditions aggravated by medications such as Sarah’s antibiotics and Laura’s paracetamol and pseudoephedrine.[5] The other two children, Caleb and Patrick, each carried two potentially lethal genetic mutations in the gene BSN (Bassoon Presynaptic Cytomatrix Protein), which is linked to early onset lethal epilepsy in mice,[17] likely inherited from their father Craig.[5] None of the four showed signs of smothering in the autopsy.[17] The new evidence led to Folbigg’s lawyers launching a new case in the New South Wales Court of Appeal.[5]

  • Rebekah Meredith says:

    Well said, Andrew Campbell! Biblical standards of morality would prevent all this trouble. I’m not saying that Christians always follow biblical standards; I’m saying that, IF people (Christian or not) followed them, abuse would be history because abuse is always an act of immorality.
    Physical abuse, of course, breaks the command to love thy neighbour as thyself. But then, modern society has “moved beyond” the Bible. And we see the results!

  • JamesBowen says:

    Harry Lee raises a good point but if the ACT police regard the evidence as insufficient to justify prosecution why are they remaining silent on this point of considerable public interest?

  • lbloveday says:

    I assume Paul Kidd referred to Kathleen Folbigg when he wrote: “Who smothers four of her little children to death over a ten-year period and blames cot death?”
    Interesting development in that case.
    From CNN:
    Kathleen Folbigg has spent the past 18 years in prison for one of the most horrific crimes imaginable: killing all four of her babies.
    But new scientific evidence suggests that’s not what happened.
    Genomic testing shows at least two of the Australian’s babies likely died from a previously undiscovered genetic mutation that led to heart complications — meaning she may have been wrongfully imprisoned for almost two decades.
    The finding has prompted 90 scientists — including two Australian Nobel Laureates — to ask the governor of New South Wales to pardon Folbigg and let her walk free. If that happens, Folbigg’s case will be one of the worst miscarriages of justice in Australian history.
    More forensically, from Wikipedia:
    On 4 March 2021, evidence cited by 90 prominent scientists called for Kathleen Folbigg to be pardoned. Genetic evidence published in November 2020 showed that at least two of the children had genetic mutations that predisposed them to heart complications.[16] The researchers concluded that the CALM2 mutation carried by Kathleen and her two girls altered their heart rhythm, predisposing them to heart conditions aggravated by medications such as Sarah’s antibiotics and Laura’s paracetamol and pseudoephedrine.[5] The other two children, Caleb and Patrick, each carried two potentially lethal genetic mutations in the gene BSN (Bassoon Presynaptic Cytomatrix Protein), which is linked to early onset lethal epilepsy in mice,[17] likely inherited from their father Craig.[5] None of the four showed signs of smothering in the autopsy.[17] The new evidence led to Folbigg’s lawyers launching a new case in the New South Wales Court of Appeal.[5]

  • Gardenjan says:

    The statistics which Mr Zimmerman quotes in regards to the role of women in violence and aggression towards men, women and children are very interesting.
    But one very important statistic was omitted. Women are always complicent in the killing of 80,000 + unborn children in Australia and millions around the world every year. This is unacceptable violence and breach of the most fundamental of human rights . Women are not the innocent gender that so many of them want us all to believe.

  • Harry Lee says:

    JamesBowen, in my observation, police follow guidelines on certain matters as presented to them by the political party that controls the govt entity under which the police serve.
    Perhaps I am mistaken but if the ACT police are under the guidance of the ACT territory govt, then one thing would lead to another.

  • Stephen says:

    New information about the Higgins case emerged just emerged just yesterday. A female Security Guard on duty that night has reported that Higgins and the accused returned to Parliament House at around 2am on the Saturday morning in an obviously drunken state. The man was seen to leave about 1/2 hour later. The guard later found Ms. Higgins naked on a couch in the Ministers offices. Higgins opened her eyes, looked at the guard and the rolled over. The guard then left her to “sleep it off”.
    In my previous post I stated “Men must behave like gentlemen but women must at least have reasonable expectations”. Why were they there? Didn’t Higgins state that she rejected this mans unwanted advances in the past? Was there some urgent matter of state that required their attention? Why would she allow herself to be in this state with this man and the go with him to a private place (an unusual place it’s normally my place or yours)? What on earth did she expect?
    I’m loath to blame the victim but culpability looks to be at least shared. There ae no witnesses to whether she said no at the vital moment.
    This may be the reason the Federal Police haven’t, as yet, charged the guy involved. He sounds like an entitled, arrogant cad but whether a court would convict him of rape doesn’t sound all that likely. I’m not a Lawyer so I’d be interested in the opinion of someone who is. The plot thickens I suppose you could say.

  • Rebekah Meredith says:

    Gardenjan–you’ve hit a very ugly nail right on the head. Surely “mothers” are now the class of worst mass murderers in history. That’s some record.

  • JamesBowen says:

    As a senior Crown prosecutor, I have prosecuted many rape cases to conviction in front of juries in three Australian jurisdictions. I have also lectured police on aspects of criminal investigation at police academies in Canberra and Melbourne. I have felt that the oddest rape case was one in Canberra where a young woman claimed to have been raped twice in the same car on the same night outside two different Canberra hospitals. She had been illegally staying overnight with a nurse friend at one of these hospitals. She met the accused man at a nightclub and he had promised to take her to a wedding and horse riding at Cooma on the following day but when he was about to drop her off outside the Woden Valley hospital he admitted that this had been a lie. She stormed out of his car in fury and found herself locked out of the nurses quarters. She broke a window and claimed to hospital staff that rape had occurred on the two occasion that sexual intercourse had taken place on that night on the front seat of the accused man’s car and outside the Canberra Hospital and the Woden Valley Hospital. Medical evidence did not support force by the accused to achieve sexual intercourse. A jury with six women and six men dismissed the two charges of rape in less than one hour. The foolish young man was punished for his lies with massive legal costs of a prominent Sydney QC. But turning to the Brittany Higgins case, I find it impossible to understand why no charge of rape has been laid in response to her allegation. She appears to have been found naked by a female security officer on a couch in the minister’s office and made no complaint of rape to the security officer who is recorded by News.com as observing:
    “The sound of the door or the breeze of the door opening has then made the female (Brittany Higgins) open her eyes, look at me. And then she’s rolled over onto her side. So, therefore, my [take] on it was that she’s conscious. She’s breathing. She doesn’t look like she’s in distress. She’s just sleeping off her night. And with that, I shut the door, and I exited the room. I was trying to do the right thing by keeping her dignity intact.”
    This appearance may not appear to be consistent with rape, but it is open to Brittany Higgins to claim (and this is now happening more often) that she was too drunk to give informed consent to sexual intercourse or that she was in a drunken sleep when sexual intercourse took place. The point I am making is that nothing that we have read would prevent a charge of rape being laid and left to a jury to consider. The ACT police need to explain why they appear to be dragging their feet in this case.

  • Harry Lee says:

    JamesBowen, it looks like -looks like- the police are simply holding back -but for what purpose and to whose advantage?
    In my observation, there are occasions when police follow guidance of their political masters.
    And we perhaps can assume that the political master of the ACT police is the ACT Admin -an ALP outfit.
    And we can thereby surmise that the beneficiaries of delays in charges would the ALP, and the closer to the coming Fed election that the charge is made, and the more that similar charges, of anti-Lib nature, can be brought, the greater will be the benefits to the ALP, all over the country.
    And yes, there might well be other causes of the delay by ACT police.
    Now, the ACT police might have further info on various matters pertaining.
    For example, there’s the reputation for certain behaviours, perhaps widely-known, of the complainant and those assisting/advising the complainant.
    And there’s the possibility that this sort of use of locations within the parliament building is frequent.
    And that there are certain obligations and understandings, debts and gratitudes, among a wide variety of persons associated with the parliament building, that must be honoured, at least for the moment.

  • Harry Lee says:

    News now that Morrison will remove Porter and Reynolds from their current duties.
    Yes, the Left has successfully lynched two Cabinet ministers.
    And Morrison is tired and is making mistakes.
    Do the Libs have the smarts and the resources to counter-attack?
    Possibly not.
    But I’d suggest that they hit the Left where the Left, in all its parts, least expect it.
    And do not necessarily start with high-profile Leftists.
    But do start, and start with the intention of finishing with many scalps.

Leave a Reply