As the weekend approaches, so does the football. My beloved Demons are getting stronger and more resilient. There is still a big difference between our best and our worst, but I think overall, whatever Paul Roos is doing with them, it’s working. We are up against the Doggies, who we beat last time. Yes, they’re on a roll, but the Melbourne boys will fancy themselves.
But I am sparing a thought, a little unusually, for Pies fans. Although I sometime feel pity toward them, I rarely feel genuine concern for the scum of the earth. They have the Swans this week. And despite my silver spoon, which I make no effort to hide, I reckon I can tell you what a great deal of them are thinking:
“What happens when Goodes clips someone from behind, stages for a free kick, or does a war dance for no reason? We’ve been slagged off as the most racist fans in the AFL for the last month. I don’t know what I’m going to do.”
It has been said that under Communist regimes, what would ultimately break the mind of someone wasn’t the violence, the imprisonment, or even the fear. The way to truly break someone’s will is to force them to say something they know isn’t true, force them to consciously deny reality. This is what political correctness does, and it is the source of the anxiety many Footy fans will feel in coming weekends.
Already, people will be making mental notes to curb their natural instincts – NOT racist instincts, but footy instincts, the instincts every human feels when they see unsportsmanlike behaviour, a poor decision from an umpire, or when the opposition’s best player gets the ball and you want to help your team from the distance of the stands.
There is so much good in life, so much good in football. I want to see how many goals Jesse Hogan can kick this year, to see him win the Rising Star award, and to see if the Doggies and the Tigers can stand up under the pressure of finals football. Is it worth risking expulsion from the ground, humiliation, arrest? What kind of a world are we living in if this is even a possibility? Better to chant along with the rest. It is impossible to do otherwise. To dissemble your feelings, to control your face, to do what everyone else is doing, becomes an instinctive reaction..
And this is how it works. Because the left never stops.
It is in this spirit that The XYZ would like to invite you to take part in its Viewer Poll:
Sorry, there are no polls available at the moment.
Environmentalists, in defence of their push to ban helium balloons, have lashed out against accusations that they hate children, by pointing out that children don’t just like helium balloons, but they also like turtles. An environmental “spokesperson” clarified the issue to The XYZ:
“If we can make children feel guilty about things, if we can make them think that if they let go of a helium balloon while outdoors, it will kill a turtle, it makes them easier to control.”
The environmental “spokesperson” elaborated:
“What is more important? The happiness of a child, or the life of the planet? If we can destroy the happiness of a child, it is less likely that they will want to have children in the future, and this is good for the planet.
It’s your XYZ.
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/national/brisbane-ekka-favourite-environmentalists-want-helium-balloon-ban/story-fnii5v70-1227482931501
Katy Faust, who serves on the council of the International Children’s Rights Institute, and is the daughter of a lesbian couple lobbies against same-sex marriage on the ABC’s Lateline, last night:
When did this referendum happen? Why weren’t we told? When Catholic Ireland voted for gay marriage the ABC more or less devoted its radio, television and online platforms to continuous, rolling coverage, lavishing the vast riches of its resources, kindly provided by your taxes, on a multi-media orgy of ‘progressive’ joy. But when Catholic Croatia voted against gay marriage… No, you never heard about it either did you?
http://www.euractiv.com/socialeurope/croats-reject-gay-marriage-refer-news-532062
Gay website expresses its outrage over same sex marriage debate in Australia, but look who they were slamming as “despicable” just a few years ago, labeling her “quite clearly, a charlatan and a traitor to the LGBT community, more concerned with politics and appearances and towing the line than equal rights.”
Three cheers for Senator Wong, charlatan and traitor. And might we add, archetypal Labor blowhard and hypocrite.
Source: queerty.com
Penny Wong, Australia’s Despicable Lesbian Senator Suddenly Slamming Gay Marriage.
I find the movement for same-sex marriage quite an intriguing one.
In my undergraduate days in the mid to late 1990s, like my co-editor David Hiscox who states in his article Most Aussies don’t care about same-sex marriage, marriage was a roundly criticised institution, branded and condemned by feminist and queer theorists as oppressive and patriarchal. Philosophers gleefully predicted, or outspokenly worked for its demise. In 1995, the idea of same-sex marriage was unheard of, and the concept would have appeared absurd to conservatives and radicals alike.
But it wasn’t only academics and cultural elites that were critical of marriage. By the mid 1990s most young people had come to regard marriage as unnecessary and old-fashioned, if not a completely pointless and an outdated institution. I remember many conversations with friends who stated their firm conviction that a piece of paper from the government (or a church) wasn’t necessary to affirm the love between them and their partner. In fact, such a piece of paper would be unwelcome. Following the changes in cultural practice surrounding relationships and marriage, laws governing ‘de-facto’ marriages and co-habiters were introduced. And the same kind of legislation was enacted in the early 2000s for same-sex couples, ensuring them the same kind of rights when it comes to access and inheritances.
As far as marriage and relationships go in 2015, for the vast majority of the population, very little has changed. Heterosexual couples continue to tie the knot officially in every diminishing numbers. People don’t really care about gay marriage, let alone any marriage for that matter, and as such, show this in the way they vote with their feet.
Then some time after the year 2000 the idea of same-sex marriage appeared to pop up from nowhere, seemingly in defiance to the social theorists’ and past generation’s attack on, and diminution of the value and importance of marriage.
Until very recently most political leaders affirmed their belief that marriage is between a man and a woman. The leaders who have changed their mind on this in only a handful of years include President Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Julia Gillard, Kevin Rudd, Penny Wong, as well as an increasing number on the conservative side of politics, in Australia and abroad.
And in only a few years, these former opponents of same-sex marriage have become some of it most outspoken and shrill proponents.
Whist in the United States, many states in the union had legislated against same-sex marriage, only to have these laws overturned by the Supreme Court. As far as I am aware, the only place that same-sex marriage has been affirmed by popular vote is Ireland. Indeed, such a step in Ireland could be interpreted as more of an attack against the Catholic church and its failures to address cases of sexual abuse, than support for same-sex marriage. Despite testifying that some 70-80% of Australians are in favour of same-sex marriage, advocates have already spoken out against the government’s intention to take the issue to the people in the form of a referendum or plebiscite – perhaps fearful that gay marriage will fail when put to Australians in tangible, rather than theoretical form.
Nevertheless, these are quite a peculiar turn of events. In only a few years, same-sex marriage appears to have come from nowhere, and those who are cautious of such change or oppose it have been branded ‘homophobes’ and relegated among the most hateful people in existence. Yet, the push for same-sex marriage represents one of the greatest social changes in Western civilisation in more than a millennia. What was in fact still illegal in many Western jurisdictions up until recently, has become something that everyone is called, indeed, must celebrate as good and wholesome. How did we get to this point?
There are a number of other questions that remain largely unanswered, or at least, insufficiently answered when it comes to the same-sex marriage movement.
In the second part of this article, we will discuss some of these issues, namely:
1) Where did it come from?
And
2) What does the movement seek to achieve?
Recruiting centres for Islamic State have extended their reach from prayer halls led by shady self proclaimed Imams in the suburbs of Sydney and Melbourne to our northern neighbour Indonesia, whose authorities are none too pleased that the mosque that lies in the geographic heart of Indonesia’s power elites is an active recruitment centre for Islamic State.
http://www.theage.com.au/world/allard-is-contagion-growing-in-indon–seo-20150804-gir4vk.html
The ABC heroically searches out the big stories of the day. How many hours in the replay lab did it take this intern to find the footage? At taxpayers’ expense of course. Would the ABC be investing the same time, energy and passion into some lame attempt to ridicule Bill Shorten, or Julia Gillard, on social media? Of course.
It’s their ABC, after all.
Warning: Readers are advised that the content of the following link has nothing, absolutely nothing, to do with Islam, which, as everyone knows, is a religion of peace. The British people should continue to feel good about uncontrolled migration from Muslim majority countries, and seek out opportunities to demonstrate how affirming they are of “diversity” and “inclusion”.
http://www.skynews.com.au/news/top-stories/2015/08/12/investigation-reveals-uk-terror-threat.html
It is Quote of the Day time at The XYZ, and on this day when Prime Minister Abbott has infuriated the Australian left by suggesting that a minor issue should be settled democratically, we can’t but help cast our mind back to when the left had the numbers, but blew their chance. Thus Quote of the Day goes to Penny Wong, for her statement on the 25th of July, 2010:
“The party’s position is very clear… that [marriage] is an institution between a man a woman.”
But hey, that was 2010. It obviously wasn’t time.
XYZ.
The Liberal Party, under Tony Abbott, has made a very savvy political decision today, and an appropriate decision for Australia, in delaying a plebiscite on the issue of same-sex marriage until after the next election.
I am reminded of an article which The XYZ shared a little while ago, which discussed the phenomenon whereby marginal yet vocal pressure groups can make themselves appear larger and more important than they actually are, simply by making a lot of noise and not shutting up.
I think that the reason Labor, the Greens, the ABC, and even Malcolm Turnbull, have made such a fuss today, have carried on as though a decision to allow the Australian people to decide the decision via the direct democratic process of a referendum or a plebiscite is morally wrong and politically stupid, is this:
They know that most Australians aren’t in favour of same-sex marriage. Not because they are religious. Not because they are homophobic. Not because they are jerks. Simply, because they don’t care.
If my hunch is correct, and it is a very good hunch, that a popular vote for same-sex marriage would not succeed, while it is highly likely that with an official policy by Labor and the Greens, and a conscience vote for Liberal MPs, there would probably be the numbers to get it through parliament, what does this say about the manner in which the same-sex marriage issue has been presented?
It would surprise many to know that the actual proportion of gay people in the population is below 2%. A false statistic is often mentioned by those lobbying for same-sex marriage that it is somewhere around 10%, but this is complete nonsense.
It has only been within the last decade that the push for same-sex marriage has become a “thing.” Before that, it would have been the last thing most gay people wanted, and I suspect it is still the last thing many of them want. Back in the oh-so-progressive 90’s my own university lecturers banged on and on about what a repressive institution marriage was, and how it must be destroyed, or delegitimised. Now it has become the ultimate symbol of the final acceptance of gay people in the community.
But the thing is, people have memories, and they are not falling for it.
In elite, high profile circles, such as politics, the media, entertainment, I think the majority are in favour of same-sex marriage, or at least, they are very aware of saying the right things. This became very clear to me yesterday when I was listening to Melbourne’s Gold 104.3. They have a dating show called “Elimidate” on their morning program which follows the fairly standard formula of a panel of suitors asking questions of a potential mate, and visa versa, and usually a match is made. For the first time, they had an all gay male “Elimidate.” Great. Whatever.
I thought it was a little odd that a female host made an excited “ooh!” but hey, maybe she thought she could acquire herself a new gay handbag in the process. In a bizarre episode, the first-up suitor, whose name was “Pedro,” was asked if he had an accent, and the hosts were quite obviously disappointed when he didn’t. The XYZ has published thousands of words on the Adam Goodes booing affair, (because it is not racist goddammit,) but I can honestly say I personally would never do that to someone. Because it is racist.
So, moving on from this can of worms of the issue of white people thinking that being progressive about gay marriage means they can bully someone over their name.. Suddenly one of the gay contestants asked a question, and asked this question so innocently, that it was a breath of fresh air. He asked words to the effect of, is marriage important to you, or do you think that it is something that is just a bit outdated?
I wanted to cheer. For just a moment, it was as though the last 10 years had never happened, and young, single horny people were open and honest about the fact, once again, that marriage is the last thing on our minds. But then the shutters came down. The potential mate stated, very rigidly, as though reading, words to the effect that he thought that it was very important that everyone have the opportunity to marry whoever they want. Then everybody, hosts and guests included, chimed in very quickly, with faint panic in their voices saying “I agree.”
It was as though I were listening to an audiobook of 1984.
Was I the only one who noticed that he didn’t really answer the question, or at least, not the way it was meant?
As Sarah Hanson-Young would say, it’s 2015.
The Canberra press gallery went into mourning last night, as news broke that the Liberal Party would keep its pre-election commitment and not allow a conscience vote on “marriage equality” in the current term of parliament. As news spread to the Canberra press gallery, despair set in. The corporate weeping coming from the ABC bunker soon turned to something akin to a herd of elephants in deep distress, whilst paramedics were called to the Fairfax offices when one “journalist” (activist?) was so overcome that s/he (The Age and SMH are proudly gender neutral environments) went into cardiac arrest and had to be revived.
Really you ask? No, not quite, but close. Strangely, there was no such reaction when a Labour government, only two or so years ago, led by an atheist Prime Minister and including front-bencher Penny Wong, decided not to force a vote on the issue either, despite having the numbers to pass the measure if they really wanted to.
The current government has had the outrageous audacity to ask the people to decide the matter by plebiscite. WTF you cry! And rightly so – what has democracy become!
Memo to the Canberra press gallery. Grow up and maybe enroll for that resilience training offered by the taxpayer funded life coach.
This article was originally published on August 12, 2015, and satirises Obama’s underwhelming response to the Charlie Hebdo massacre:
Barack Obama, President of the United States of America, has brilliantly harnessed the power of new media and social media to communicate and interact with younger generations, both in the US and abroad. His finely-tuned instincts for new trends in the digital marketplace were well on display when his aides approached the fast-growing XYZ for an interview:
XYZ: Mr President, of all the qualities we admire in you, it is your sense of humour. Your handling of the Charlie Hebdo massacre in Paris at the start of the year is a case in point. Would you care to expand on this?
Obama: Thank you! Yes, it is one of my pet hates, that people just don’t get how funny I am. When those cartoonists were executed for their blasphemy, I wanted to find a creative way of responding to the affair.
XYZ: Which is why you responded to the shooting of cartoonists with a reference from a cartoon?
Obama: Well, no, The Simpsons were an animated sitcom, not a cartoon. I wanted to find a unique way of communicating my position by utilizing a complementary art form. That is why I chose to reference the episode “Deep Space Homer,” from The Simpsons’ fifth season, by sending James Taylor, accompanied by John Kerry, in place of myself, to sing, “You’ve got a Friend,” to the French.
XYZ: Could you expand more on the context?
Obama: Yeh, what you seem to be missing here is the fact that in “Deep Space Homer,” when James Taylor sings, “You’ve got a Friend,” he has to make it clear to to the astronauts that despite their preoccupation with a passing in-flight emergency, it was more important that they absorb his message to them. Likewise, I wanted to point out that although the French seemed absorbed with their own perceptions of personal loss, it was important that they reflect on how their own actions were responsible for the retribution inflicted upon them, and, when they were ready, I would be there to help them understand this truth. But of course, I wanted to find a humorous way of doing this, to, you know, soften the blow, because I’m not an asshole.
XYZ: Exactly. And there is more to it than this. We know your humour works on multiple levels – were you also referencing the Overlord Meme?
Obama: Look, nobody does humour as well as I do, seriously. That episode is the source of “The Overlord Meme” – when an ant, which has escaped from an ant colony which has been brought on the shuttle mission, gets close to an onboard camera, viewers on earth, including news anchor Kent Brockman, mistakenly think the shuttle has been overrun by giant ants. He responds:
“One thing is for certain: there is no stopping them; the ants will soon be here. And I for one welcome our new insect overlords. I’d like to remind them that as a trusted TV personality, I can be helpful in rounding up others to toil in their underground sugar caves.”
What people need to be made to understand is that this is basically what I do every time there is an outburst of violent extremism, whether in the US or overseas. I have no problem when the oppressed subvert traditional political channels to express their resistance against the dominant white-imperialist narrative. I welcome the way they are challenging our outdated cultural practices, and I am using my position to promote tolerance and inclusivity toward them.
And hell, Saïd and Chérif Kouachi! They could have been me 35 years ago!
XYZ: Thank you, Mr President. As aspiring satirists, we could do worse than pick the brain of the most powerful satirist on the planet.
Obama: Great! I think you learned something today. ¡Adiós!
Photo by stevegarfield
In one of the more bizarre stories I’ve read in a while, a Melbourne transgender ‘man’ has reportedly said that he feels ‘blessed’ to give birth.
The ABC reported on Monday that “Melbourne man AJ Kearns says he is just an ordinary father living in the suburbs with his two young children. But there are many who would disagree.
At 41, he is a transgender man who chose to become pregnant and have a baby.”
Gender specialist (whatever that is) Dr Fintan Harte has labeled Mr Kearns a “trail blazer.”
I can barely contain my impressedness.
As the ABC continues, “it is the first time in more than 30 years of practice that the psychiatrist has encountered a ‘trans-identified male’ who had planned to become pregnant.”
Mr Kearns said that he felt nervous about telling his his psychiatrist he planned to have a baby.
“I was concerned that he wouldn’t see me as a man or I guess maybe I wouldn’t be trans enough or it would be misconstrued as a desire to be a woman,” he said.
But Mr Kearns’ psychiatrist assured him that there was no reason why he should not have a baby.
Despite giving birth to a child, Mr Kearns has always regarded himself as the father of his two children.
Mr Kearns and his partner Zu White say they have been honest with their children about how they were conceived.
“Most probably my greatest fear is that my children will bear the brunt of people’s ignorance,” Mr Kearns said.
“Ignorance”? Really?
Perhaps what you’re most afraid of is that people will know the truth that despite an attempt to change your appearance, you are still biologically female?
One wonders how AJ and Zu are going to go about explaining the birds and the bees to their children…. but perhaps that’s just my ignorance speaking.
Our Quote of the Day comes from J.K. Rowling.
We think J.K. Rowling is right on point about adults taking personal responsibility here. What do you think?
One of the most remarkable sites on Facebook is My Stealthy Freedoms. It is a site on which Iranian women post photos of themselves, without any head covering, so you can see their hair.
I know. What?
What is so remarkable, is that something so innocuous has gained 869 000 likes.
That’s eight hundred and sixty-nine thousand.
I love the looks of sheer delight on the faces of the women, and the accompanying stories of where the photos were taken and how they managed to avoid the eyes of the ubiquitous morality police. They also report more harrowing stories of horrors committed against women in Iran.
It is considered so subversive that the Iranian government has labelled it the work of foreign spies. It even went so far as to publish a bizarre false story that its founder, Masih Alinejad, an Iranian journalist living in Britain, was assaulted, stripped naked and gang-raped in the presence of her son. The apparent implication of this – that she brought such an outcome on herself – is an indication of the authoritarian nature of the Iranian regime, and the depraved, warped view of human nature of its purist Shia Islamic doctrine.
Furthermore, the fact that a site displaying women without head coverings can arouse so much support from ordinary people, but provoke such an over the top response from the Iranian government, is exhibit A in the case that there is something seriously wrong with the Islamic Republic of Iran, and why it should not have nuclear weapons..
One has to ask the question why a Facebook page which has gathered nearly one million likes, about such a controversial subject both in the West and in the Middle East, is not a major news story. I argue that it is because it contradicts the dominant progressive narrative that racist Westerners are racist toward Muslim women who confront racist bigoted Western culture with subversive foreign culture. The desire to be free of head coverings, or to at least have the freedom to chose whether or not, and it is a very strong “not,” to chose, resonates among Muslim women themselves. And the fact that it is not a major news story in the West undermines the narrative that Muslims in the West face unrelenting assault against their religion, culture and identity.
Iranian girls are cute
It also tells us that ordinary Muslims yearn for freedom and democracy, that freedom and democracy are natural human desires, not arrogant imperialistic concepts invented by degenerate Westerners, and there is hope for peace between our two civilisations. But on the flip side, it reveals the catastrophic waste that was President Obama’s decision not to throw the American government’s support behind the Green Revolution in Iran in 2009. It was a once in a generation, hell, perhaps a once in a century opportunity, to foster democracy in Iran.
But, as the Iranian government continues its inexorable path towards developing nuclear weapons and an inevitable confrontation not just with Israel but with every one of its neighbours, there is one more thing we can be sure of.
Iranian women have courage. And many of the, are quite cute.
After the ABC made it clear last week that being alive is no longer a barrier to fulfilling the role of Speaker in the Australian House of Representatives, The XYZ concluded that this threw the field wide open with regard to Bronwyn Bishop’s replacement. After a gruelling, and frankly, bitter process amongst XYZ staff, the field was whittled down to eight contenders, and it was put to XYZ viewers to decide the favourite,
Thus, although Tony Smith has been officially named Speaker, the people’s choice for a political resurrection, in more ways than one, is Margaret Thatcher, with a strong 37% of the vote. It is telling that a good two years after her death, the Baroness can still inspire such love, reverence, and terror from friend and foe alike.
It is also telling that for a position which requires the utmost respect for authority, and the necessity to follow through with threats of punishment, she was favoured over noted warlords such as Vlad the Impaler, (19%) Genghis Khan, (14%) and Joan of Arc (4%). It appears that not even the threat from Vlad of, well, you know… is considered as effective as a withering glare from the Iron Lady. Likewise, it is clear that her clarity of vision and foresight are valued higher than such noted philosophers, law makers and peace makers as Moses, (6%) King Solomon, (12%) and JFK (8).
Responding to the results of this poll, a “spokesperson” for one of the left wing parties said that “The last thing the Australian parliament needs is another dead white male telling others what to…. wait a minute…” The “spokesperson” later clarified their comments, saying that Margaret Thatcher is not the “right kind of woman” the Australian parliament needs.
Come and visit The XYZ to participate in the new Viewer Poll:
Sorry, there are no polls available at the moment.
There is so much good in life, so much good in football. I want to see how many goals Jesse Hogan can kick this year, to see him win the Rising Star award, and to see if the Doggies and the Tigers can stand up under the pressure of finals football. Is it worth risking expulsion from the ground, humiliation, arrest? What kind of a world are we living in if this is even a possibility? Better to chant along with the rest. It is impossible to do otherwise. To dissemble your feelings, to control your face, to do what everyone else is doing, becomes an instinctive reaction..
And this is how it works. Because the left never stops.
It is in this spirit that The XYZ would like to invite you to take part in its Viewer Poll:
Sorry, there are no polls available at the moment. 
