The Australian attacks industry colleagues - again

Oxford Dictionary: Misogynist: a person who hates, dislikes, or is prejudiced against women.
Macquarie Dictionary: Misogynist: [the definition includes] a person who has an entrenched prejudice against women.

Tony Abbott:

1.  “I think it would be folly to expect that women will ever dominate or even approach equal representation in a large number of areas simply because their aptitudes, abilities and interests are different for physiological reasons".

2. "But what if men are by philosophy or temperament more adapted to exercise authority or to issue command?"

Even if he was right then that would be a statement that was needless to say.  Therefore, if stated, it is more a belief.  What he is saying is that this is the role that women should have.  If it is his belief then, right or wrong, he intends to bring it about via his public policies.  From that perspective it could easily be seen as a prejudice against women.  On that criteria he is a misogynist.  Or, he has pre-judged that woman are not suited to executive function.  Is that not a general prejudice against women in at least one important area?

In my experience there are many men who are not suited to leadership or executive roles.  Could it be possibly true that both men and women are suited to positions of authority in about the same proportions?  Has Tony contemplated this, or is he just prejudiced against woman taking leadership positions?

I don't think there is any evidence that he hates woman, he just loves them in their place.  Although he may have come to hate the most powerful woman in the land, especially as she took the Prime Ministership from him by bettering him in the game of power, authority and command.  And he has been happy to let the sanctioned militia's of shock jockery do his misogynistic work.

Christian Kerr's article in this weekend's Australian is so biased and obviously so that he should be embarrassed to have written it.  He attempts to beat up a scoop type of narrative around a freelance journalist who did the "hard investigative work" that proved that Tony Abbott was not a misogynist.

The great discovery by this freelancer, Derek Parker, was that Tony Abbott does charity work for a women's refuge.  On this basis he accuses the rest of the press gallery of being lazy.  Does Mr Kerr think that we are all children, or simpletons?  The fact that Mr Abbott does charity work for a women's refuge does not at all prove that he is not a misogynist.  We all know that many of the super wealthy avoid $100mil in tax, then give $10mil to charity and are hailed as great philanthropists.  This works a treat as it is very hard to argue that the new wing of the children's hospital shouldn't have been built, except that if the great philanthropist was not one of the biggest thieves in the land 10 hospitals would have a new wing.

Charity is often used as a PR exercise by those who give.  Notice that most large companies negotiate PR benefits if not outright advertising when they give to charities.  It used to be that true charity could only be considered genuine if it was anonymous.

Political operators are famous for double speak and duplicitous titles; consider titles like National Socialists in Germany in the 30's and 40's and "Peoples Parties" in totalitarian regimes.  Politicians also like to wrap themselves in symbols of moral goodness, like Franco and his 40 year dictatorship's close relationship with the Catholic Church - also the religion of Abbott interestingly.

Narcissists are known for being masters of manipulation.  It is very common for them to claim a greater moral goodness than others, often "proved" by ostensible good works in the community - and narcissists are more highly represented in business and politics than in the rest of the population. I am not accusing Mr Abbott of being a narcissist, just making the point that charitable work in the community, whilst welcome in itself, often does not necessarily shed light on the character or the giver.

The press gallery had more than enough evidence from Mr Abbott's own history and comments, that he had particular views about woman.  It is conservatives like Mr Abbott, more than anyone, that make much of old sayings like, "You are judged by the company you keep", and nobody has any doubt that his good friend Alan Jones has serious questions to answer about his particularly vicious attacks on this our first female Prime Minister.  The press gallery are not lazy on this issue Mr Kerr, its just that they have heard enough.

It may be that Tony Abbott supports and visits a women's refuge because it sits comfortably with his patriarchal view of the world, it may be that it does not threaten his view of women as weak and abused and needy, it is a situation where he can be the masculine hero, and ride in and save them.  It may be the perfect cover, politically, for an entrenched prejudice against woman.  His real prejudice may not be against woman who know their place but against woman who venture further than the traditional roles.    

Kerr quotes Parker as saying that "it is impossible to reconcile Abbott's involvement with [charity] with Labor's claims that he is some sort of misogynist".  Not impossible at all.