Sometimes you’ve just got to admit you got it wrong. This is one of those times. Last week I began an article with the phrase ‘Paul Sheehan has finally lost his stupid fucking mind’. I did so based on the best possible information available to me at the time. I am now willing to say that I was wrong and I apologise to Mr Sheehan unreservedly.
Because if Paul Sheehan indeed lost his stupid fucking mind last week, then he would not be able to lose his stupid fucking mind this week, which is invariably the case. This is just logical. In my defence, his op-ed last week in which he claimed Alan Jones had been the victim of cyber-bullying had all the hallmarks of lunatic ravings, less at home in print on the pages of Sydney’s leading broadsheet than smeared in shit on the walls of an abandoned amusement park.
But then he went and published this. In the bullshit stakes, the piece is flawless. It’s Mozart’s Requiem, Poe’s Raven, The Guy From There Will Be Blood’s Beating Paul Dano To Death With A Bowling Pin. I imagine after finishing his article, Sheehan let out a wistful sigh, wiped a tear away and muttered to himself ‘That’ll do, Paul, that’ll do”, before throwing his typewriter through his closed office window, declaring himself the Queen of Spain and screaming at a cupcake.
Why not start from the very beginning:
The dictionary defines misogyny as “hatred of women”
Mr Sheehan, you are a columnist for the Sydney Morning Herald, not 1st speaker of the Caringbah High debate team. The only time where it is okay to open an argument with a dictionary definition is if you are defending a word you played in Scrabble, and even then you should probably just shut up and enjoy the dinner party. It also robs you of your only possible excuse for what follows; that you have never been exposed to a definition of ‘misogynist’ and that you have been labouring under the assumption that this word refers to a breed of colourful bird, which, I would have to concede, the leader of the opposition is most certainly not.
He presses on:
After sending out two attack dogs, Gutter and Sewer, to do the dirty work, after hiding behind two political zombies, Insufferable and Unspeakable, to stay in power, after using the Minister for Innuendo and the Compromise-General to play the gender card, the mask has finally dropped away to reveal the driver of the politics of hate in Australia.
Now, if you are feeling stupid for not knowing to whom Gutter and Sewer refer, do not. Sheehan, without so much as a lick of warning, has pulled two nicknames (for Albanese and Swan) out of the list of rejected Ninja Turtles henchman names, or far more likely, his arse. As for Insufferable and Unspeakable, these, we’ll learn in the next paragraph, refer to Oakeshott and Windsor because why the fuck not we’ve already come this far.
I only mention this because Calling Things By Things That They Are Not becomes a running theme of his piece. Like when he called Gillard’s speech ‘a low point of political opportunism’.
But let’s get a couple of things out of the way real quick. Gillard and Labor failed spectacularly to manage the Peter Slipper affair, and from his appointment last November to his resignation this week, this has been a depressing exercise in cynicism. Labor should have voted to sack Slipper as speaker after his texts were published, if for no other reason than political expediency. The fact that they did not is testament to how frightened they are of losing their razor thin majority. But Gillard’s speech was not a defence of Slipper. To read the bulk of articles written since her address, you would be forgiven for believing that she said ‘Look, in Pete’s defence, vaginas be cray’. It was a long-overdue and blistering attack on a man who has been getting away with staggering amounts of sexism for his entire career. This point has been made this week, and made very well. You can see two examples of this here and here.
Not so, screams Sheehan, and he counters Gillard’s accusation of misogyny with this:
Why invoke the accusation of misogyny, hatred of women, against an opposition leader whose chief of staff, Peta Credlin, is famously one of the most formidable woman in politics, whose mostly female staff is devoted to their boss and who, unlike the Prime Minister, has raised three daughters?
That last bit, right there, is the point where Sheehan boards the bus to Crazy Town, then hijacks the bus to Crazy Town before driving it off a cliff. Are you, Paul Sheehan, actually arguing that Julia Gillard can’t call Tony Abbott sexist because he has three daughters where she has none? Do you realise that when you type things and send them off to the man from Fairfax that they are seen by thousands of people? The problems with this statement are so obvious, the inherent irony so stark, that it actually looks like lazy satire. But you, or far more likely, someone from the SMH, realised this eventually, because you took that bit of the article out late yesterday afternoon. The only thing worse than an ignorant bigot is one who’s gutless too.
But let’s meet him on his own terms; his argument is that Abbott could not be sexist because he has three daughters. Paul, please read this carefully: That Tony Abbott has daughters does not speak to an affinity with the sisterhood, it speaks to statistical probability. It’s indicative of how dire the situation is when the best his supporters can muster in his defence is ‘Need I remind you that his balls are positively brimming with lady-making sperm?’ Because what the fuck are we actually congratulating him for here? Not drowning them as babies in a sack? I’m not questioning whether he’s a good father to his daughters, by all accounts he absolutely is, but that’s the baseline, that’s the bare minimum. Not discriminating against your own children on the basis of sex is not something that makes you a feminist; it means that you’re not a complete monster. So well done on that front.
Sheehan rounds out his argument with this:
But then why did she mislead the Australian people before the last election on the carbon tax? Why did she leave her law firm under a cloud? Why did she shaft her own leader? Why did she depose a prime minister who had a mandate from the people? Why has she methodically deployed the politics of personal abuse?
Can I answer your five questions with a question, Paul? What the actual fuck does any of this have to do with anything you wrote before writing that? This is not an argument; this is a list of things that are pissing you off. Anyone can do that, check it out. Why are you such a cantankerous shithead? Why are you allowed to write ‘journalist’ on your customs slip? Why is Nando’s so expensive when the quality is not that much higher than other spicy chicken-based outlets? Where did I leave my keys?
So, Mr Sheehan, I’m sorry that I said you had completely lost it last week, in my defence I had not accounted for the staggering depths of delirium you would be able to plumb while still being able to string a sentence together. I am confident now that I have accurately pin-pointed the moment you completely lost your mind. Please do not prove me wrong.
fucking brilliant
You make me laugh too much
This was fabulously hilarious! Bravo! Loved it.
Fantastic stuff. Right between the eyes.
I just flat-out love it.
Outstanding work – love the brilliant asides.
Far more cogent and entertaining than anything Sheehan will ever excrete. Excellent work.
Sensational!!! So glad you went there…
BOOOM!! Thank you very much! Buy yourself a beer!
Brilliant summary of the drunken fools comments. He should be confined to a paddock and spend his days contemplating why cows chew their cud and make gas. He will be in the right company there.
Actually, it was me who was first speaker of the Caringbah High debating team. About 20 years ago.
YES!!!!!
Thank you for writing this! Brilliant!
omhfg subversively brilliant takedown. MORE.
Loved it. Perhaps the message will eventually get through that the MSM no longer speak to their audience and are just throwing out words in exchange for cash.
So where did you leave your keys?
Funny angry stuff. I don’t read his columns so I could barely believe the extracts from him. Are they for real? Such terrible writing and arguments so bad. Do the papers’ columnists all drink from the same lead-lined water tanks? That’s just nutso.
Sheehan should now act like a gentleman and accept your apology!
Totes!
Nailed it with the Nando’s comment
Totally. I’ve wondered this for so long…
Well said.
Sidebar: I don’t see Slipper’s remarks as sexist or misogynistic anyway. Juvenile? Tacky? Not really want from the guy doing pomp and pointless ceremony? Sure. But sexist? That’s a huge reach, but one the LNP want to make to kick up a bit of dust.
Misogyny is about one’s attitude to the ethical claims or standing of the class: women as a whole. It says almost nothing about what one feels about individual members of the class. I’m yet to meet a bigot who can’t identify a worthy and admirable member opf the class he or she hates. Even Hitler could point to some Jews he thought contributed to humanity. A misogynist man who thinks his daughters should get a fair shake is merely prioritising family over misogyny. Of course, Abbott is on the record as describing his daughters’ virginity as “a precious gift”. I’m reluctant to raise this but as he has opened the door … Even in the case of his daughters, his vision of the class as a whole as subordinate to men persists.
Re sidebar para: So I am not alone. I was starting to be tempted to think that I had become desensitized, lost the plot, or should start querying my values and understandings as I age.
I read the SMH revelations and thought it must be missing context or the other texts as so horrific, even the press cannot reprint. So rather than accepting the outrage and inferences and statements that ‘there’s more and it’s worse than these’ and the same few endlessly reprinted lines ( by both conservative and dare I say edgy Australian female mainstream journos) I thought I would read them for myself. (So I admit curiosity and also needing to clarifying).
So I read the Federal Court transcripts – all 360+ pdf pages of text messages. Nup, these were the only few texts in question. So journos of all persuasions and employment don’t or can’t change – to imply and state that ‘these’ were just the tip of the iceberg, and the printable ones.. is scurrilous.
Tacky, juvenile, flirtatious, sad, embarrassing private interchanges that are in the public domain. Behind scenes information, out of context, which do not reflect well and also highlight stupidity of a person holding a public office and one who would always be open to scrutiny at every level. Stupidity (arrogance / narcissism) in not recognising that this era in private is not private.
But sexist or misogynistic? He maybe, but these texts do not support this. Are the texts sexist? I don’t think so.. noone was targeted, noone was hurt, nor did they state a worldview. Coarse and offensive for some – at many levels, but not sexist.
The same who may take umbrage at the few printed text messages may also take offense at the selling of ‘Fifty Shades of ..’ in most Coles supermarkets, assuming they had read the contents – but then that’s another ‘story’ – or maybe not.
Titillation and sexuality is hot, but sexism and lack of true consent (in these books) is not.
So LNP as you say used to kick up a bit of dust – and not one strategist advised take care? Be aware that the lack of direct PM responses over 2 weeks has a warning bell? No one advised that If you go this road you will walk into an ambush. No one advised that there is every sign that the PM (any PM) would have prepared argument, with supportive evidence and is waiting to pounce? That the particular topic in broader society, has years of precedence and argument, tactics and strategy which could be easily accessed and examined?
So I draw two conclusions (other than Tony Abbott and colleagues, and probably other politicians of any persuasion still do not understand sexism and mysognistic means are either surrounded by ignorance and/or amateurs. They are so fixed in their belief systems that they reject the counsel when it is given. I also suggest that the cognitive dissonance and confusion is across genders within LNP, so do not understand what the fuss is all about and if they do and playing politics for survival reasons are simply short sighted and ignorant, reflecting limited capacity.
Extraordinary. Required reading.
I thought the whole thing was published by accident – that angry first draft that you write to get things off your chest, but later delete. Then you write the better, more considered post. But no. How strange!
Agreed that the daughter line is a complete non sequitur. That fact doesn’t answer the more salient point that Abbott CHOSE Peta Credlin as his chief of staff – who pretty much everyone on both sides of politics agrees is one of the strongest women up on “the hill” (That’s Parliament house, for anyone reading this who doesn’t know).
I only know from second hand accounts, but it seems pretty common knowledge that Abbott relies heavily on the advice he receives from Ms Credlin – to the point where Mrs Abbott in her public address last week acknowledged that Peta Credlin was “in many ways the de-facto deputy leader” of the Liberal Party (Julie Bishop? yeee-ouch!). Add to that the fact that Abbott’s staffers are actually predominantly female – and actually apprently hold him in high regard… and the only conclusion I can draw is this: Abbott may hold some very quaint/outdated views about women, but mysogyny? I highly doubt it. All the evidence points to the contrary.
Abbott relying on the advice of someone who believes the same as him has nothing to do with proving he isn’t a misogynist. Rather, Abbott’s misogyny is proved by his attitude to those women he looks down on with suspicion, dislike and distance.
Replay Gillard’s famous 15 minutes and listen to the numerous proven instances of Abbott letting his misogyny run loose.
Shame on him and shame on Paul Sheehan, a drongo if ever there was one.
I’ve worked as an Office Manager for sexists and misogynists in the past, who highly regarded my work, took my advice, and heavily relied on me. They believed I did my job well – just that I (or any other woman) couldn’t do THEIR job.
I personally won’t believe that Abbott thinks a woman can do everything a man can, until I see him support a woman take on party leadership. His approval of women in supporting roles just does not prove anything to me.
And wondering why these strong, capable women support him reminds me of the episode of West Wing, when Sam is asking his gay republican friend why he supports a party that so opposes his way of life – “You know, I never understand why you gun control people don’t all join the N.R.A. They’ve got two million members. You bring three million to the next meeting… call a vote… All those in favor of tossing guns – [Snaps fingers] – Bam! Move on.” It’s possible that they work hard for a party they largely believe in, and that factors more highly in the way they do their jobs than simply that their leader is a misogynist. And that maybe they can best affect change from the inside.
Please, we do not want the younger Ms. Bishop, though it would not surprise me if she believed playing the bridesmaid three times, means it is her turn.
A fucking spectacular summation… I love it
Kudos!
Reblogged this on Ben's Blog.
Are you sure Alan or Ray didn’t write this shit? Shock Jock stuff in the extreme!
Loved your Apology!
Brilliant! If you ever stop writing, I am going to hunt you down and find you…
A: It’s because their franchising and marketing costs are higher than Oporto.
You’re welcome.
Their peri peri salt is also superior.
Yeah, what she said.
Ayatollah Khomeini had 3 daughters
Osama bin Laden had many Daughters and quite a few wives
Many of the worlds most repressive women hating men are married and have daughters. Being married and having female offspring does not prove anything.
Even being female does not preclude one from being misogynist.
Actual tears. Props to you.
Well expressed. Hilarious. True.
Pingback: both kinds of politics
Came out well, mate!
Love,
The Bloke Sitting Next To You While You Wrote (Part Of) This
Pingback: Oh Paul | Bowerbird Blues
Ah, the frustration of it all. The true terror of the rightards is that they honestly don’t seem to see their own toxicity. The rancid rabbott cannot understand why, or how so many people view him as the sexist, misogynist, anti-women joke he is.
Julia Gillard is a lying Yank puppet traitor. All the rest is hot air.
Hear, hear.
Great writing in this blog, nonetheless.
Reading this just made reading Paul Sheehan worthwhile. Thankyou!
Funny work my friend. How he gets a regular section in that paper is beyond me.
To say this is GOLD is a travesty of understatement.
Word.
Well said young man !
Wonderful. And very, very insightful. “Do you realise that when you type things and send them off to the man from Fairfax that they are seen by thousands of people?” Hmmm, that does explain rather a lot.
Love it. I take my hat off to you. By the way, the SMH needs in-house subs (“Peta Credlin, is famously one of the most formidable woman in politics”) – unless this reveals that Sheehan can’t handle even referring to more than one woman
Encore please.
… do you get the feeling that he never quite made the cut to get into the Sun Herald or the Australian?
I think I love you. Brilliance.
Absolutely awesome post. “throwing his typewriter through his closed office window, declaring himself the Queen of Spain and screaming at a cupcake.” is exactly how I plan to imagine Sheehan every time I’m unfortunate enough to stumble on his words in the future.
Interesting to read the group think by the Age / SMH commentators. When Gillard called Abbott on his misogeny, she also called the Age /SMH commentators. After all hadn’t they let Abbott get away with his behaviour? Aren’t they being identified as hypocrits? Embarressed and angry and in denial.
Wonderful – thank you for calling a spade a spade… or an ignorant dipshit.
I broke a vow that I had kept for many years and actually READ Sheehan’s flight of fantasy – though before I read your piece. And in my opinion you have absobloodylutely nailed him!
I did not consider Peter Slipper’s txts misogynistic at all. They were sent in private. I wonder how many of us would like all our txts publicised. Because he made a reference about one female that was derogatory, does not make him a misogynist. Also females can smell like fish down there if they have too much of a particular bacteria. I can assure everyone that my vagina smells sweet, lol. He may have smelled vaginas that did smell of mussels or some fishy thing. It doesn’t mean he hates all females. I think we should leave the poor man alone. He was a good Speaker, isn’t that what matters ?
Leftard
This was brilliant enough to warrant reading it out loud, despite sore throat, to the shortsighted husband.
Genius
Thank you sir, thank you, this is the brain-cleanse I needed after reading Sheehan’s angry-monkey-with-a-typewriter outburst.
Sadly, most of our MSM journos are not the brightest sparks in the fire but they do get a public reaction which is all their publications want of them. It sells newspapers. Fairfax seem to figure News Ltd’s financial success is due to their partisan reporting and commentary (support for LNP) and recent events show they are beginning to follow the same formula. Complain to the publishers not between ourselves if proper and quality journalism is demanded.
Glorious. You aced it.
I have a new favourite writer. All kinds of awesome. And hilarious. And right.
Yeah, well fuck you bencjenkins.
You do realise other people are trying to pen bogs of their own, right? With writing like that ^ going around, who’s going to bother with theunderwhelmingblog.blogspot.com now, eh? Nobody!
Jeez, I’d give my Olivetti Lettera to write half as well as that and you just bandy it about like it, well, just comes to you! How are wannabe bloggers supposed to attract an audience when people can just come here and your stuff?
Thanks for nothing, prick.
(Oh, did I mention my blog theunderwhelmingblog.blogspot.com ?)
Thank you Ben Jenkins, you’re apology to Paul Sheehan actually made laugh at his editorial, a far more appropriate reaction than the seething rage I felt upon reading it originally.
We have to laugh these clowns into the insignificance they deserve
Poetry
The funniest piece of political polemic I have read since I wet myself reading http://newmatilda.com/2012/10/11/greatest-victim-them-all. I didn’t think it could get any better but somehow you did it. What a night! ROFLMAO
Sheehan…spud
Rose said it. Laugh loud and long as this is a terrific article – but – get some quality journos employed by these daily rags. Complain to the editors!
I can’t stop laughing. You magnificent bastard.
All kinds of wonderful
Worth mentioning that the headline on Sheehan’s article (before it was later changed) referred to Gillard “snarling” (like a bitch I guess?)
Holy crap this is a good article.
You are a genious and let decent Australia continue to rise against these maggots!!
Entertaining takedown of Mr. Sheehan but misogyny and sexism can’t hide the fact that Gillard lied about the carbon tax, left her law firm under a cloud (this appears to have a way to run), shafted her own leader, deposed a PM who had a mandate, methodically deploys politics of personal abuse, has been outed as a hypocrite by the Slipper affair and we all know these things.
There isn’t a carbon tax. So explain how she lied.
She left S&G 12 months after doing the work for Wilson, to stand as an ALP candidate. It only has a way to run in the fevered imaginations of RWDBs like you.
Caucus wanted Rudd gone. He chose not to contest the leadership, so Gillard won the leadership unopposed. Even a dingbat should know that if there was no support for Rudd’s removal, he would not have lost the leadership.
The reason Rudd was PM is because he was the leader of the ALP. He was elected by his electorate as their MP. Unless you are in his electorate, you can’t vote for him. Another thing you’d think a dingbat would know.
Politics of personal abuse? I didn’t know Liealot was PM. Oh, of course dingbat projection.
Outed as a hypocrite by the Slipper affair? How so? By defending the integrity of the Parliament? Reminding the Liars that the Slipper case is before the court, which will decide guilt or innocence? The only exercise in hypocrisy comes from Liealot and the Liars Party.
Hilarious put down of another msm ignoramus.
But Sheehan cares about women! Well, at least when it shifts the blame away from racism in the Cronulla riots: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/time-to-pull-plugs-from-tens-false-reality-20120718-22acr.html
God I love this. Is it offensive to retweet things repeatedly? Oh well.
Great response. Thanks.
Well done.
Just FYI, Sheehan lost his fucking mind a looooooooooooooooooooooooong time ago.
legendary!
Bravo! Had to resist the urge to laugh uproariously in the middle of my quiet office, that article was horrendous and you’ve just nailed the response.
To “A POX …”: A lie is a statement made with the intention to deceive. Gillard did not intend to deceive – she honestly meant that she would not introduce a carbon tax. But the circumstances changed, and she found herself leading a minority government, not the majority government she assumed she would lead. Abbott knows that Gillard did not intend to deceive. In accusing her of lying, he is himself lying. How about Abbott’s “Don’t believe what I say, just what I write”? How about Howard’s “core promises” and “non-core promises” (lies)? How about his blatant porkies to get us into the invasion of Iraq, where over a million people have died as a result? Or are you interested only in alleged lies committed by Labor?
My hat off to you. Bloody brilliant; funny and precise.
Absolutely brilliant. Very funny, thank you.
love!!!
Sensational summation. Now you’re in the mood, what do you think of Mr Jones?
“What the actual fuck does any of this have to do with anything you wrote before writing that? This is not an argument; this is a list of things that are pissing you off. ”
Exactly what I was wondering during Gillard’s speech. How did any of it speak to the validity of the motion on the floor?
Brilliant combination of wit and logic! And whatever we think of the Slipper situation, if Gillard had acted differently, then she’d have been ridiculed by Sheehan and Co. for putting her gender before her job as a politician.
Can everybody get the word Misogyny correct: yes it means hatred of women BUT “Misogyny” can be manifested in many ways…i.e.
sexual discrimination
denigration of women
violence against women
sexual objectification of women
So next time you all blurt out, assuming you know it all, that the only meaning of this word is hatred of women, think again and look at the list to see if the hat fits the person you are defending!
Outstanding!! P.S I hope you found your keys.
Positively right on the Nando’s score. Way overpriced chickens.
Thank you this made me laugh but it also makes me feel good when good men raise their voices (or keyboards) against those who denigrate women. In response to some of the comments, Abbott may have appointed a woman as his chief of staff but he also appointed Cory Bernardi Whois not known for having wonderfully progressive views on women or anyone else who is different to him. Even Abbotts comment about his chief of staff being the defacto deputy leader suggests that he thinks she’s really a bit bossy and denies his own power in that relationship.
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/opinion/miranda-devine-gender-card-is-a-loser/story-e6frezz0-1226494961475. Please read and discuss. Should make for another great column.
This is brilliant! Thank you.
leftard dribble
Thank you Paul Sheehan for your article (SMH 11 October). Without your writing we may have wrongly believed that ugly abuse and the language of hate was confined just to politicians and shock-jocks.
http://annesummers.com.au/speeches/her-rights-at-work-r-rated/
not for the faint hearted
This is whole argument is a pointless waste of time.
Even if Abbott is a misogynist, what bearing does that have on how Labor is governing the country?
It’s just a diversion, and you are all being sucked in.
Gillard’s time would be better spent getting in touch with the real world. Understanding that our economy outside the mining sector is really in recession and once the mining boom ends we’re screwed!
It really annoys me when people have to put the F word into articles to try to capture attention. Come on- lets raise the standard of journalism above the language we hear from politicians. Otherwise, good points made.
Brilliant! Well done!
So, according to Paul Sheehan, Tony Abbott shouldn’t have called Peter Slipper sexist and misogynist? Excellent. I hope he sends Tony Abbott a copy of the dictionary, so he can be better informed in future.
Pingback: Tony Abbott’s Salad Recipe, And Other Things We Didn’t Learn From 60 Minutes | Junkee