Subsonic said..

Just normal here.

Born in a generation before everyone had to take a side (which was really just one generation ago), when everyone was allowed to have an opinion on different issues without being labelled one way or the other, but take every opinion with a grain of salt.

Back (about ten yrs ago) when there were only two equally important genders, everyones lives mattered and the word "they" referred to a group of associated people. not someone confused about whether they wanted to have a penis or a vagina from day to day.

As i said, just normal here. But i guess the less corrupt among us would say i'm on the right of centre since we all need to be labelled now. not sure where. I'll leave it to their better judgement.

Just normal here.
What a slept cop out

Born before everyone had to take a side. Have you ever heard of World War 2, a time in the century that you were born in, that all humanity choose to pick a side.
Fascism (Far Right) or Centrism (Democracy)
I'm sure Hitler, Stalin and many other despots all thought their views where just Normal

When has Humanity not been obsessed with Labels. English, German, French, Ranga, Wog, Black, Coloured, White.
We have all been labelled in some way since the moment we have been born, since the beginning of time

I suppose you hit it on the head with your earlier post

Subsonic said..

Normal is the new far right.

It seems as though you are confused about your own sexuality
If you are confident in your own sexuality it really doesn't bother you how others choose to define theirs.
I suppose it's also a bit like knowing your own political alignment. If your are embarrassed about it and try to conceal it, you get upset when others express theirs.

Even if you call your dog a cat, it's still a dog.

Or as the late, great, pale, male and stale William Shakespera put it rather more poetically "A rose by any other name would smell as sweet".

This is a good article on current media that I quite like
theescapeartist.me/2021/05/04/we-dont-just-consume-the-news-eventually-the-news-consumes-us/

Tonz said..

Auntie is so friggin bigoted, would love to see their budget get shafted, they are so against the government (of any persuasion)
If anyone knows a story where they actually agree or support our government please advise.

Trouble is all other media seem to be F**k headed as well.

You might as well say that the government shouldn't have auditors looking at how they're spending money.
What you are attacking is the national conscience. Maybe you don't have one, but that is a fair bit of what makes the difference between man and monkey. The ABC and its like in other developed nations are that little voice in our collective heads that remind us that we know that what we are doing is not necessarily good.
They're not meant to be cheerleaders.

As science advances we discover what we did not know in the past.
Yes, we know there are men and women within homo sapiens. It has also been revealed this is not always cut & dry for all members of the species. To expand on the Shakespeare quote, roses may smell nice but beyond this emotional observation we know there are over 300 naturally occurring variations of roses. All of which are still roses and still smell nice. In other words, all individuals are part of greater collectives and not all individuals are the same.

Having said this, why or what we call each other is semantics and ultimately politically driven, hence the misguided ideological BS currently floating around on both sides of the public conversation.

Uncertainty, in the presence of vivid hopes and fears, is painful, but must be endured if we wish to live without comforting fairytales. Bertrand Russell

At it again. www.abc.net.au/news/2021-05-09/china-urges-un-states-to-avoid-xinjiang-event/100126490

"China has urged United Nations member states not to attend an event planned next week by Germany, the United States and Britain on the repression of Uyghur Muslims and other minorities in Xinjiang."

And just 1 paragraph later... it's your turn to feel bad about your behaviour, Australia!

China says the organisers of the event, which also include Australia, Canada and several other European states, use "human rights issues as a political tool to interfere in China's internal affairs like Xinjiang, to create division and turbulence and disrupt China's development".

I could've sworn they told me the event was planned by Germany, US and Britain... but then all of a sudden it's Australia, Canada and some unnamed European nations... still trying to figure out if the US is in Europe or Canada!

Sloppy ABC, sloppy...

Mr Milk said..
Not sloppy at all. A good story proceeds slowly, not revealing everything in the first sentence. It's like a striptease. Not very interesting if everything goes at once.
But in the actual story there is a little confusion. I read it as China describing all nations attending the meeting as "organisers", not that the original listing was short.

You read it as... and that's the point...

These aren't fictional stories. News should be written in the upside-down triangle structure. News should be internally consistent. Who, what, where, when, why...

ABC wants Australia to feel shame. Just stick to the facts. Tell us about the event, where it is, who's involved, why... then, if needs be, tell us about China's reaction. Instead, this article has been framed to suit a narrative right from the beginning.

It would be nice if the ABC went to as much effort to understand and communicate the Australian perspective as it spends telling us about the Chinese perspective.

It's loaded from the beginning...

eppo said..
I take it most of you haven't spent time in a tertiary institution lately. If you had you would completely understand these journalistic (so called) intentions. These muppets are the by product of this environment. That's the source - no point in arguing over the result. It's worse than you could ever imagine.

This reads like a conversation the church probably had a few centuries ago when discussing Copernicus, Keppler & Galileo.

Land Inundation

News: On 15 October, the ABC 7pm News aired a report on the different climate change policies of the US Presidential candidates. The report described rising water levels inundating residential land in Maryland's Dorchester County as 'one of the more stark examples of the way climate change is impacting on the world we live in'. The report as filed by the US Correspondent made clear that the land had been 'slowly sinking since the end of the last ice age'...... Regrettably, this relevant context was edited from the 7pm News story due to time constraints

Brent in Qld said..

A foreseeable outcome of an educated society capable of thinking for itself outside mainstream dogma.

Whereas the mainstream works in society, relying on satisfying customer demands.

The goal of a university is to satisfy the need for future government funding. They aren't always rewarded on the successful education of young minds.

Brent in Qld said..
... If you consider Uni's haven't been at the forefront of social/political debate, you are ignoring the very public history of the topic...

I am not sure it is the Universities themselves that have been at the forefront of social/political debate in the past.

I think you could certainly argue that university students and even academics have been a political and social force of change, but is that not likely to be due to the fact that Universities are, by default, places where lots of people of such persuasions gather and can also easily form into powerful group voices ? Lots of quiet voices together make a loud noise. Universities are places where lots of people come together.

But I am not sure the actual Universities, being the institutes themselves, have really spoken up and shouted about social and political change in the past. They might campaign on higher education funding issues and the such like that is directly related to their operation, but they haven't historically campaigned on broader political issues.

Maybe the issue is that they are starting to do so, or they appear to be doing so ?

The University itself should be a place of teaching and research, not a place of social or political advocacy. If those being taught want to speak out on some topic, individually or en masse, then fair enough but if they are being taught to speak out about a particular topic in a particular way then that is a totally different issue.

bjw said..
Some years ago my brother came home from school with a list of religions... Buddhism, Catholism, Communism. Seriously. My mother lost her sh about it.

Why?

AUS1111 said..
Even if you call your dog a cat, it's still a dog.

Or as the late, great, pale, male and stale William Shakespera put it rather more poetically "A rose by any other name would smell as sweet".

No.

journals.physiology.org/doi/full/10.1152/jn.00896.2007