You Say Misogyny, I Say Hypocrisy: Julia Gillard And Kyle Sandilands

JULIA GILLARD has principles on misogyny: it offends her “personally” and, presumptuously, “on behalf of all women;” she’ll crucify anyone for it — if his name is Tony Abbott. If it’s a man who calls a woman “a fat slag” with “not enough titty,” no worries; for whatever else she may be, Gillard is a hypocrite.

I wasn’t actually going to post tonight, but I saw a post published last night by a fellow blogger I know in Queensland; entitled “Some Misogynists are OK,” it talks about Julia Gillard’s recent appearance on the Kyle and Jackie O show on 2Day FM.

Can I ask readers at the outset to read/watch/listen to the material I link to here; my actual post will be relatively short (by my standards) — more an exercise on this occasion in connecting the dots to reveal the picture of a total, shameless, unabashed hypocrite.

Readers will know I am incensed by the “stand” Gillard took on misogyny last year; safely hidden in the coward’s cloak of parliamentary privilege she ripped into Tony Abbott, selectively quoting, misrepresenting and distorting whatever suited her argument, and all in the defence of former Speaker and serial grub Peter Slipper, the bona fides of whose misogynistic and sexist credentials are easily established by his own words.

For a quick look at the calibre of the guy she was defending (whilst crucifying Abbott for “misogyny”), check this article out.

Gillard’s thunderous principles are instructive; for the first time at The Red And The Blue I have decided to share a link to that infamous parliamentary speech; watch this video recording, remembering as you do that the speech is opposing a motion, moved by Abbott, to have Slipper — remember the article you just read — removed from the Speakership.

So even by the time we get this far, we have clear evidence of two sets of standards being operated by Julia Gillard in her “war” against misogyny.

On one hand, we have Peter Slipper, with his disgusting pronouncements about women, and especially in relation to their genitalia (it’s actually a bit sick to be talking about elected representatives with published comment on record of genitalia at all, but there you go).

On the other hand (if you accept that Abbott is a misogynist, which I don’t), we have Tony Abbott, whose utterances have been picked over for the Prime Minister’s political convenience, but which even if blindly accepted in the context the Prime Minister sought to convey would seem relatively benign compared to those of Slipper.

The Prime Minister defended Slipper, but attempted to crucify Abbott.

Now — suitably flushed from her “victory” in the ALP leadership stakes — Gillard has made a beeline for Kyle Sandilands’ Sydney radio show (which just happens to pull in millions of listeners across Sydney and around the country on syndication).

For a quick revision lesson on “Vile Kyle,” here’s an article I wrote when he went to town on a female journalist 18 months ago; the only crime of the journalist — Ali Stephenson, an entertainment reporter with the Murdoch press — was to write a moderately critical review of one of Sandilands’ TV programmes.

If Gillard’s rage and principle and standards over such issues as misogyny and sexism were authentic rather than driven by political expediency, Kyle Sandilands would be the last person she has anything to do with.

Alas, the Prime Minister is a hypocrite.

Just as she could brazenly seek to defend Slipper, there’s no issue whatsoever when it comes to Kyle Sandilands either; the most natural thing in the world, having seen off the latest threat to her tenure as Prime Minister, would of course be to go and talk about it with Sandilands and his offsider, Jackie O.

Here’s the link to the radio interview; ten minutes of pure, unadulterated, soft-soap corn.

“Misogyny” aside, this would have to be one of the most sycophantic interviews faced by a politician in this country in quite some time; free to spruik her wares with as positive a slant as she cared to put on them, it’s no wonder Gillard sounds like she’s enjoying herself.

I note the PM was to participate in an Easter charity activity with Sandilands, which they spent a little time discussing, but it’s scarcely the point. There are literally thousands of deserving causes Gillard could support without having anything to do with Sandilands.

Just listen to the banter (and remember the articles you’ve read thus far, too): it’s all a bundle of fun; a barrel of laughs to be sure. Hell, the banter between Gillard and Sandilands might even be characterised as moderately flirtatious, but of course we couldn’t definitively call it that because to do so would probably be misogynistic.

Join all the dots. What is wrong with this picture?

The simple truth is that those thundered principles go straight out the window when several million listeners, skewed to a young demographic, are on offer in one place at the same time, even if a misogynistic pig is in charge of the show.

And the point is that we’re talking about some pretty elastic principles here — if, indeed, one could properly describe them as principles at all.

Enough people were hoodwinked — temporarily — by Gillard’s petulant performance of mock outrage and confected fury over “misogyny” to put her government, e’er briefly, in what most reputable polls found was not far short of a winning position; indeed, there was speculation late last year of an early election on the basis of precisely that.

Some might argue that an elasticity in the application of principle is simply a (low) common denominator of politicians in general, and that no more (or less) could be expected.

I think it’s a bit bigger than that; she made too much noise about the issue for pure political gain, using the dubious pretext of defending someone who is the very embodiment of exactly the kind of thing she was claiming to be railing against.

So Gillard breaks the bread with Kyle Sandilands, and all the fulminating rhetoric about stamping out sexism and misogyny was just a lot of expedient hot air.

Julia Gillard is a hypocrite, and it’s not the first time she has been exposed as such.

But then if you take the high moral ground — with absolutely no justification or entitlement to do so — it’s as likely as not to collapse under your feet.

It tends to happen when you stand for nothing other than self-interest, and Julia Gillard certainly stands for that.


6 thoughts on “You Say Misogyny, I Say Hypocrisy: Julia Gillard And Kyle Sandilands

  1. So true! I don’t think Abbott is necessarily an Angel, but Gillard certainly cherry picks her targets for her faux-feminist missiles. As has been pointed out in numerous discussions like this, if she truly cared about women’s rights, she would be dealing with the NewStart situation a lot better, and not slashing the foreign aid budget,..

  2. When I see her performing in Question Time, she attacks Tony abbott all the time, she mentions his name all the time, but hardly ever looks him in the eye….I personally think she likes him in way that maybe she is actually a scorned woman…. just my thought on human nature, body language and hormone reactions…

    • There’s probably something in that too, Bonnie; little kids are mean to members of the opposite sex they like, so I guess there could be something similar that’s applicable here. We have to be careful talking about such things though: we might get attacked in a parliamentary speech too…

    • I could be mean and point out that she has a record of chasing married men, but I won’t. 😉

  3. Julia with hormones?
    When disussing the sad and sorry state of The Australian Parliament with friends and what Juila Gillard has done to the prestige and honour of the role of Prime Minister – it was noted that the next step in a population losing respect for their Government is an uprising.
    Far fetched you say – just think about it.

Comments are closed.