Bob Ellis is a sexist dinosaur

What the hell is this piece of shit from Bob Ellis: Why are heads rolling at the ADFA?

So women, it seems, are tough enough for service on any battlefront but not tough enough to be peeked at in the shower. For the latter they need compassionate leave, counselling in depth, back pay and five parliamentary enquiries.

This is just so offensive that my eyes are bulging out of my head and I’ve had to wipe the flecks of spit from the computer screen. The right to take a shower without some filthy pervert watching you has absolutely nothing to do with being “tough enough” to fight on the front line. I imagine a big part of army culture involves mateship and trust, and how the fuck can you trust your mates if they’re spying on you in the shower? Oh, sorry, “peeked”. Clearly a deliberate choice of word by Ellis to make it seem less creepy. Plus there’s the dig at women who can’t hack a bit of harmless peeking. Jeez, can’t they take a joke? Must be on the rag.

In M.A.S.H. the movie Hot Lips Houlihan is washing herself when a crane lifts the walls of the shower upward and men in uniform gaze at her fumbling nakedness through binoculars. Are these uniformed men thereafter court-martialled, their commanding general sacked, and Congress made to interrogate all participants? No. Extremely hard to see why. They are guilty, surely, as charged.

Personally, I make all my decisions about the treatment of women from a fictional US tv show that was made in the 1970s and based in the 1950s.

Most frat-house movies and all TV comedies at some time involve observed, or interrupted, or bungled, copulation. It is desolating for the copulants but judged good sport by audiences. Events like this occur in The Simpsons. They occur in Seinfeld, and Cheers, and Frazier and The Honeymooners and I Love Lucy. They occur in Shakespeare, Boccaccio, Chaucer, Suetonius and rather notably the Bible, where David gazed on Bathsheba bathing and upon her nude rounded body soon begot a dynasty which included Jesus of Nazareth. In no case do these incidents produce a Royal Commission or a bolt of lightning from heaven.

He’s using the Bible and some long-gone sitcoms to justify perving at women in the shower or having sex? Seriously? And someone at the ABC thought it was ok to publish this rubbish?

Let us consider a tiny variant on what probably happened, as a hypothesis; a hypothetical. Let us imagine the girl agreed to be filmed, and then, afterwards, being mocked for it, and flabbergasted by the number of leering hoons who saw the film, made the complaint. Would that then occasion the sacking of her commanding officer, the court-martial of fifteen or twenty of her fellow recruits, and the bastardising of her lover? Or something less than this? Think carefully about this question. If she were complicit in the filming, would that change everything? Or not?

Oh, we’re playing rape apologist bingo. (And no, I’m not suggesting that the woman was raped. The “she changed her mind afterwards so she wouldn’t feel like a slut” is a classic example of twisting the situation to pretend that the woman is the wrong-doer. Plus, it’s slut-shaming, which we don’t do here.)

Ellis runs his hypotheticals over two paragraphs and it’s completely meaningless. We don’t need “ifs”, we know what happened. Two people had sex, and one of those people secretly broadcast it to his mates in another room. Why is Ellis so keen to defend his right to secretly film people having sex?

It was to be expected, surely, that their fellow recruits would know soon that the couple were ‘at it’. What then was the grave wrong in seeing (if anything much could be seen from that one angle) how they went about it?

Really Bob? You can’t see the difference between knowing that two people are having sex and actually watching them do it without the knowledge of one of those people? Wow, that’s pretty embarrassing for you.

They, and we, should be careful when we attend too closely to what occurs in a bedroom consensually, and how we punish either participant.

And here he eliminates the breach of trust. Ah, it was just two people having sex, why should they be punished? One more time for the slow learners and yes, that means you Bob Ellis: one of those participants secretly broadcast the sex to his mates. That is what this is about.

Is the young man to be sacked from the army now, and ruined, or wounded, or bruised, perhaps, for life? Driven, perhaps, to suicide, as young army men so often are? Is his crime, of going along with an undergraduate prank, so great? Is the young woman, moreover, to be named, and acclaimed, and promoted, and hereafter entrusted with frontline command on some field of battle? Who would trust her in any high army position? Who would be sure she was truthful? Or sound of judgment? Or loyal? Or reliable under fire?

Bingo! We’ve got “oh, the poor man, his life is ruined” and “if he kills himself it will be all your fault” and “can’t you take a joke” and “women just use sex to get promoted” and “women make it up”. Ellis’s dishonesty here is breath-taking. He knows that the woman is the only cadet who is in trouble. And as for trust, who could trust a group of colleagues who thought there was nothing wrong with a premeditated plan to film you having sex?

And then he just goes on and on about how paparazzi shots of celebrities prove that it’s ok to film a colleague having sex (and he gets the Fergie bit completely wrong), and that people living in university colleges watch each other having sex all the time so clearly it’s ok and that it’s no different to seeing a photo of the roof of his house on Google. Oh my god, the rage balls are blinding.

93 responses to “Bob Ellis is a sexist dinosaur

  1. Thanks for blogging exactly what I was thinking (almost verbatim, actually, which is a little creepy…)

  2. Oh, that was YOU! 😀

  3. I am just picking my jaw up off the floor as I type – I had JUST finished reading and commenting on the article when your blogpost came up in my email.

    • I haven’t yet worked out my comment to leave at The Drum because I don’t think I can condense all that is shit about it into a few pithy lines.

      • I said something along the lines of ‘So because a woman is in danger of being attacked by ‘the enemy’ during combat it is ok for her to be attacked by her COLLEAGUES? That doesn’t help the military and it doesn’t help the cause of equality.
        Also a bit stunned that the editorial process allowed this article full of smears and hints and straw-man arguments to be published…not what I would expect from a respectable opinion writer”
        WHich of course is somewhat disingenuous because I don’t think that Bob IS a respectable opinion writer. And having briefly met him once I actually think he is a giant walking sneer. (Small name-drop Alert – I was having a chat with Les Murray when they were filming some doco or other at Sydney Uni – Les is friends with my parents from uni…Bob Ellis isn’t although he knew them – and Les introduced me and I received a sneer and an eye-roll and a turning-away. Polite.) (Dad also sung in a choir with Germaine Greer. Two degrees of separation!).

  4. And yeah….pretty well exactly what I was thinking.

  5. Nice one. Wholeheartedly agree. Bob Ellis’ opinion should never have been published. I am equally angry about his stupid comments. I would also like to add that the pop culture references (and I include the bible here) refered to only further highlight the deeper cultural issues that make people think it’s ok and “just a bit of harmless fun” to violate the trust and privacy of others. This is at least part of the issue that needs to be addressed, that as a culture we think it’s ok to do something like this, regardless of the impact it might have on the people involved.

    • A blog lurker, thanks for de-lurking and welcome to the News with Nipples. You’re right – using pop culture references to justify something is never going to work. It’s like using the history argument – just because we used to do something or have done something one way for ages, doesn’t mean we should continue to do it.

    • If pop culture references can be used as justification, anyone want to go in on some anvils and a coyote?

  6. Even if she had agreed to being filmed, I doubt she agreed to having it streamed over skype or distributed in any other way. Her trust was abused. Her privacy was violated. A crime was committed. Perpetrators should be punished. End of story.

    Though I will say, I take great offence to all of Defence being tarred with this misogynistic sexual predatory brush. And I would kindly ask ‘men’ like Bob Ellis, Jim Wallace and Neil James to stop coming to their defence.

    • Oh but Pirra, think of the poor innocent men who innocently made the plan to film the sex and then innocently watched it. Their careers could be ruined because they planned and carried out the violation of the trust of one of their colleagues.

      • Yes 7 douche bags. Who will lose their careers. They are not the entire ADF.

        I am not defending them, only saying tarring an entire Defence Force made up of more men who do the right and honourable things than those that don’t isn’t justified or right.

        • Yep, I know that’s what you’re saying. Because the seven haven’t been named in the media, the ADF has to cop all the blame as a general big bad bogeyman. Mind you, there’s a fair bit of evidence that suggests there are cultural problems at the ADF around the treatment of women and the issue of homosexuality. But, of course, that doesn’t mean that everyone is a sexist homophobe and usually it’s just a small group that tends to dominate the culture. The challenge for ADF management now is to prove they are finally taking it seriously.

          • Thank you. You’re the first person to actually have acknowledged that.
            Everyone else seems hell bent on branding all ADF men with the same brush.

            • Ah, because if they can brand all ADF men this way, then it means the problem is only at the ADF. It reminds me of those misogynist Cronulla guys who justified bashing anyone who looked Middle Eastern because some Lebanese guys “disrespected their women”. Firstly, they don’t own Australian women. And secondly, they disrespect women all the time. They just wanted to fight someone and used women as an excuse. Kinda like invading Afghanistan.

              • This has been a rough week. I am opinionated and I have a big mouth. There’s so much I would want to say on this issue, because there is a lot that has been misrepresented and quite a few untruths floating around.
                But alas, my husband currently works at ADFA.

                • This is what is so shit about our overly PR’d work culture – that the people who are able to talk about something in an informed and intelligent manner are the ones prevented from doing so. Like journalists – we’re not allowed to say anything publicly (including on the internet) that might be seen as criticism of any part of the company we work for. For example, someone working for The Oz isn’t allowed to say anything about The Daily Telegraph. It’s ridiculous because it means the conversation goes on without us and the public discussion is dominated by people who aren’t in the know.

          • 7 people are not indicative of a culture in the ADF indeed having spent a mere 10 weeks at uni each they haven’t even experienced the ADF. I feels sorry for Kafer – the pollies will ruin him and when all the facts are assessed he did everything right. At least I have dicovered that Houston gave him top cover. Now this incident apparently means that women are suitable to serve on the frontline. That is fine as long as the standards do not get lowered. The infantry is no place for affirmative action, either a woman can do everything a man can do physically or she can’t (elsewhere in the ADF physical standards are markedly easier to achieve for females) She should also be able to handle being screamed at that she is a cunt, be able to put a double tap into the enemy’s forehead and take a shit within feet of her male counterparts with no screening. These are indicative of the infantry experience and even being called a cunt is important as we’re not trying to raise gntleman diplomats but killers.

            • That is my concern in all this also. I think if they can meet the same standards and really want to do it, then who are we to say no? But they have to meet the standards and what the general public don’t realise is that right now, women do not have to perform to the same level as the men. Honestly though, in regards to the SAS and other specialist positions, I don’t think there are too many women who could pass the physical side of the test. (There aren’t a lot of men who can it’s why they are the elite of the elite.)

              I’m glad you joined the conversation. Too often I seem to be a lone voice when it comes to Military issues. I feel sorry for Kafer too. I know for a fact he was working very hard at making sure this issue was not buried and that it was dealt with appropriately BEFORE Kate decided it wasn’t moving fast enough. I want to say more….but I refuse for anything I say online to end up once more in a military court.

              • Kimsonof, I’m also glad you joined in. In any post about the military, I always hope you and Pirra show up to be my experts.

                As I commented to Pirra earlier, I think it’s all rather convenient to blame the ADF for this. These seven men are only 10 weeks into their training. And yes, a lot can happen in 10 weeks, but my feeling is they had a poor attitude towards women before they got to the ADF. This story could just have easily been about flatmates, or residential colleges at uni.

                • And yes, a lot can happen in 10 weeks, but my feeling is they had a poor attitude towards women before they got to the ADF. This story could just have easily been about flatmates, or residential colleges at uni.

                  That’s it exactly. The ADFA is a University. These first year students brought their culture with them, not the other way around.
                  Military instruction is done around academics. The ADFA is not Kapooka.

              • Kate decided that a week was way too long for a criminal and defence investigation to be completed and the offenders to be tried and executed.

          • Oh and ‘culturally’ women are treated far better than men in the ADF. They are expressed through to promotions even if they’re undeserving and get away with far more shit than blokes ever could. You may not like to read that but I don’t care that’s how it is.

            • I can verify that statement.

              Having said that, there are some amazing women in the ADF, who really do deserve their promotions and are very competent at what they do.

              • Which makes the ADF the same as any organisation, with promotions given to some people who deserve it and to some who don’t.

                • Yes it is. Which why we take offence to the statements made that the ADF has a culture of sexism and abuse towards women. That is not the case. It happens no less and no more than any other organisation.

                  Unfortunately, in the ADF promoting an incompetent soldier carries life threatening implications. But there are instances when the ADF has no choice because they are required to have a certain amount of women in their teams. Any man who fails just has to suck it up and miss out.

                  Women in the ADF are not held to the same standards that the men are. And this does a great disservice to the women who can match it with the boys.

                • If it is indeed true that women are “expressed through to promotions” then that is claim that can be demonstrated empirically by comparing rates of promotion across gender.

                  Do you have that data are we just relying on speculation? The US Military has data on this very question (rates are the same – except for in the Navy, where they are lower) . No doubt the Australian forces have similar data. Since you’ve made this claim, I’m assuming that you’ve seen the data for Australia, so maybe you could share it?

                  • I have looked for almost two hours and cannot find any data like the US study you linked. I will keep looking.

                    If such a study exists I will find it.
                    Eventually. (I hope)

                  • Don’t need data I have 10 years of experience observing this very phenomenon. Effectively everyone gets promoted in the ADF eventually it’s just that a lot of CO’s/training officers feel obliged to send females away ahead of males in order to make up for a perceived disadvantage. In any case any data would be skewed as a large number of men serve in combat corps which generally promote a lot slower than the support corps. Clerks for example are supposed to be promoted (from PTE to CPL) within 3 years, sigs even quicker whereas it is not unusual for an infantry soldier to spend 10 years as a digger (there was a well known CPL in townsville who spent over 20 years as a private)

                    • I don’t think there is any data. At least I cannot find any.

                      And as someone who has observed military life for 13 years, women do get preferential treatment at times. They are often granted far more chances to prove competency than men are.
                      As it is, the standards for women and the standards for men are two very different things. And that’s across the board.

    • Yep. Agreed.

  7. The possibility that he believes the shit he is spouting absolutely terrifies me.

    I hate to play this game, but imagine if this was his daughter, his sister? I’m not sure he has either, but one suspects he would be tooting a rather different tune in any case. Why do we have to appeal to this type of imaginative recreation to get people to realise that acts like this are NOT OK? Why can’t women be “not-sluts” independent of their familial relations to the accusers? Am I even making sense? Probably not! Too angry!

  8. Well done!
    There are so many wrong things in this incident and Bob Ellis isn’t helping at all.

    20 years ago this would never of happened. Well, they would still of had sex but he would of gone off to the pub and bragged to his mates (and probably her to the girlfriends). Yes, technology in the hands of kids (because, really that’s what they are) is causing lots of problems to the ADF right now.

    The reactions from the ADF doesn’t fill me with happy thoughts either.

    Just to let youy know, I’m not justifying anything that has happened, just pointing out what happens when you mix technology and lack of thought.

    Again, a great blog.

    • Thanks Alex, and welcome to the News with Nipples. I don’t think the problem is the technology. The technology just enabled them to do it this particular way. This group of men decided that they would secretly film and broadcast footage of the two cadets having sex (so it’s a pretty safe bet there was an attraction between the two, which makes his deception even more revolting) and set up the camera and skype link beforehand so they could do it. If they didn’t have skype they probably would have hidden in the cupboard.

      • The problem is that they persist with bringing dickhead children into the officer stream in the mistaken belief that hey will having studied arts at uni become effective military leaders. Shit like this just confirms to me that officer candidates should have served at least 5 years in the ADF before applying.

    • Alex, yes you are justifying what happened. You’re equating bragging that you nailed some chick is the same as video taping someone without their permission, and distributing that video, again without her permission, to people elsewhere. That’s a crappy justification Alex.

      • Adam, welcome to the News with Nipples. It’s a really good point you’re making – talking about a sexual encounter, even in graphic detail, is not the same thing as filming it and showing the footage to others. The violation of trust in the latter is astounding.

  9. Comments are not turned on on the Bob Ellis piece. Deliberate?

  10. Rhiannon Saxon

    One of the commenters on the original article has said, ‘Now where do I get my t-shirt that says ‘What Would Hot-Lips Houlihan Do?”

    It is good to see so many of the comments are along the lines of, ‘SO because something happens in a 40-year-old sitcom you think that is a good thing to base behaviour on?”
    Leaving aside the fact that not one of his actual references or metaphors were anything like what actually happened…!

    • I’d like one of those t-shirts. Do you like the one I’m wearing today?

      • Rhiannon Saxon

        Yes, it’s great!
        I wish I liked wearing t-shirts and then I would get one. I wonder if I should get one for my husband? He’d wear it, too.

      • I love the shirt. Is it innapropriate to say that I’m appreciating what’s under it as well?
        : )

        • Yep, nwn rack is looking particularly good in this pic x

        • Alex, maybe you should stop being a creepy-as-hell sexist pig for just 10 minutes each day. It would be a great start.

          • Adam, I ummed and ahhed about publishing this comment, and I’m still not sure I made the right decision. Please check out my comment policy – there is to be no name-calling here. If you and Alex know each other from a different blog and are bringing your argument here, please don’t.

            Now, this is where it gets difficult. I took three photos of myself in this shirt and this is the one I posted because it made my boobs look great. So it’s not surprising that a few people will comment on my boobs and it’s all a bit of fun. But I can’t reconcile that with my belief that commenting on a stranger’s boobs in real life makes you a douchebag.

            I have no problem with K’s comment, because I know her IRL and there’s been motorboating. But how can I justify Alex’s comment about my boobs – and I don’t know Alex, nor whether Alex identifies as male or female or both or neither – when I hate random men in the street staring at them? I guess it’s about delivery. If you leer, I want to punch you in the face. But here, well, I guess I make assumptions about people based on the comments they post. I assumed Alex’s comment was meant in a light-hearted fashion, and so I took it as such. I’m clearly going to have to think more about this.

  11. Thanks so much for this witty, angry and intelligent response. I am appalled the ABC published this kind of bigotry – seemingly based on a financial decision as somehow clicks = $$. I thought we had come so far that views like this were too offensive to publish. I wish that articles like yours were given the mainstream stamp, sick of these journalistic dinosaurs being the only people allowed to have an opinion (and being paid for it!!).

    I of course agree with you and there isn’t much to add, but I am so happy this woman went public.

    • Thanks Marlaina, and welcome to the News with Nipples. I’m still amazed that Ellis’s piece got published – it’s so full of factual errors that it’s a joke.

    • Sorry to probably go off topic here, but I just wanted to respond to this:

      I am appalled the ABC published this kind of bigotry – seemingly based on a financial decision as somehow clicks = $$. I thought we had come so far that views like this were too offensive to publish.

      I don’t know if the ABC would have published this because of the bucks. I don’t think there is any advertising on their site and there wouldn’t be any money made on this article. Needless to say Bob wouldn’t have been paid much for the article either if the pay rates that I hear for The Drum are correct. The ABC would more than likely say that they decided to publish this article because they are committed to give “insights of all persuasions so that all voices of the Australian communities can be heard as much as possible” or something along those lines.

      Sadly, views that are sexist, archaic and loony exist and are sometimes expressed in forums like The Drum (or many other places, that’s what opinion is all about, really).

      • Rhiannon Saxon

        Yes I noticed and wondered about that…did the commenter not notice that there were no ads surrounding the Drum articles?

        As for the sexist and loony views expressed on the Drum and on other furoms – I still think that it wasn’t even the views that made me wonder it had been allowed to be published so much as the not-very-subtle smearing of the woman-in-question’s reputation, even down to hinting, ‘but what if she agreed and then regretted it later?” sorts of things. Urgh.

        • “but what if she agreed and then regretted it later?”

          That’s doing the rounds of the ADFA rumour mill. Whether she agreed to being filmed or not is irrelevant. I highly doubt she agreed for it to be broadcast to other people. That’s still a betrayal. That’s still a violation. And it’s still something she did not consent to.

        • Well, if there is a smearing of a reputation of someone, then I suppose the ABC could be in trouble somehow in regards to defamation (I’m not sure, someone more media law savvy than I would be able to say).

          The lawyers surely would have had a look at this though before publishing it? One assumes so. Although in saying that, someone somewhere did agree to air The Chaser’s ‘Make a Realistic Wish Foundation’ skit. But that was more about a satire piece being pulled off because it’s offending people.

          I have no doubt that people are offended by by Ellis’ article as well, but what is different is that it is still up there. Is there a reason to keep things online or there for people to see if it’s opinion as opposed to satire or comedy?

          I think I might be reading too much into this, so forgive me.

        • Hvaing worked in Marketing in government, its not just ads that make profit. There is profit in reading and interaction through comments. There is profit to be made in link sharing and promotion. There is profit attached to reputation and ‘brand awareness’ (godd and bad). Salaries attached to big and popular projects can be weighted too.

      • I think that more clicks is going to be of benefit to the ABC one way or another, particularly when it comes to funding. It is not just about advertising (or lack of), it is about the people who are invested in The Drum being successful (i.e managers, workers, people who use it for self-promotion etc) and more clicks = success.

        • Exactly. Its not just ads that make profit. There is profit in reading and interaction through comments. There is profit to be made in link sharing and promotion.

    • The ABC is not alone in publishing offensive bigotry….otherwise Andrew Bolt would have been out of a job a long time ago.

  12. Thanks for writing this. There’s just so much wrong with the article, I didn’t even know where to begin. Ta for paralleling my own rage/disgust/offense, and channeling it into a witty and brilliant response to such sexist bullshit.

    • Thank Pen, and welcome. When I first read it I didn’t know where to start, so ended up just going through it line for line until I couldn’t read any more of his rubbish. There are so many other things I didn’t rant about here because it would just be too long.

  13. Pingback: hot cold showers

  14. This guy makes Ellis look like a champion for women’s rights. (Well not really)
    WARNING: By reading this blogpost, I found my threshold for fundamentalist bile.

    My head exploded when I got to the part about the feminist cause and feminists wanting men not to care about women….cause that’s totes the point of feminism. Right now in our rape apology slut shaming victim blaming culture men care about women and feminists don’t want that. *dead from epic rage balls*

    • Rhiannon Saxon

      Oh the NAZIS found it more efficient to use underage boys instead of women…not because they had a hardline ‘Woman’s place is with kitchen, children and church’ policy? DUH.
      Yep. Illogical AND misogynist.

    • Oh … I just read that article you posted a link to Pirra. Now I get it. It’s the Christian thing. I surely hope the lord cometh again so he can take all his brethren to some far away land in the clouds where the chocolate bunny and the cross man hang out … or whatever it is those wacky people believe.

  15. His abc colleague, Marieke hardy’s dog is called bob Ellis, I wonder if she is regretting that decision now.

  16. If Ellis wants to share his vast disrespect for women on the InterNet, he is certainly entitled to spew it all over his personal blog. The question is, why has the ABC given him a platform?
    If the content had been anti-semitic or racist the piece wouldn’t have been published. There would be no discussion about free speech: it would be held unacceptable. Ellis would be ashamed to admit to holding such ideas: he would lose all respect.

    How the bloody hell is misogyny still so acceptable in our culture?
    It’s days like this, I want to go rad-fem.

  17. Pingback: Bob Ellis and believing you own someone else’s body | the news with nipples

  18. “where David gazed on Bathsheba bathing and upon her nude rounded body soon begot a dynasty which included Jesus of Nazareth. In no case do these incidents produce a Royal Commission or a bolt of lightning from heaven.”

    Actually, while it didn’t come in lightning form, David’s misdeeds towards Bathsheba did result in some pretty serious divine retribution. If you’re going to try to use the Bible to justify your hateful stupidity, at least get your Scripture right.

  19. Bloody Hell! I’m stunned. Who … what … hang on … what the … I can’t seem to get my words out. Who is this Ellis idiot and from what rock did he crawl out from under? What an embarrassment for the ABC.

  20. Thank you for writing this piece, Bob Ellis’s article and the comments left on the article condemning him made me raging mad, and I’m glad to know that I am not alone. I do disagree with those people who wish that the ABC had not published it. I am glad to know that Bob Ellis thinks that way, as I used to respectfully disagree with him, but now there will be no damn respect.

    • Hi Leah Jaclyn, welcome to the News with Nipples. I don’t think the The Drum should have published it, but not because Ellis’s views are offensive. The Drum only publishes one opinion piece per day per topic, so instead of choosing one that added something to the debate, they went with this one which adds nothing and derails the debate completely. What a wasted opportunity.

      • My position is still: “Bugger free speech, I’m sick of this crap”.

        I absolutely agree about the wasted opportunity. Just imagine if the two articles on the topic had been by people like Pirra and Kimsonof: we’d be talking about cultural values, bastardisation and affirmative action.
        Much more useful.

  21. Just wish to add that in the old days (like 6 or 7 years ago) before that thief from 3RAR went to 60 minutes 10 years ago and the ADF was subsequently forced to go soft, this incident would have been dealt with via some dead ground counselling and neither the perpetrator (if he indeed remained) or any other male would have stepped out of line with the values ofthe ADF again. Now instead of the threat of a hiding, potential wrongdoers have the threat of counselling – far less effective.

  22. Just occurred to me that if Ellis is going to use ancient examples to justify a lack of consequences for this behaviour, balance demands he remember what happened to Actaeon. It’s all about the comparative power of who you perve on, isn’t it?

  23. Bob Ellis writes a lot on The Drum about the plight of civilians in war, Palestinians, indigenous struggles, refugees and all the usual left-wing human rights concerns. But when it comes to women, he’s as hard right as an Alabama anti-abortionist.

    And it’s not just Bob Ellis. This double standard compassion seems to be a common condition of celbrity soft-left gurus the world over – like Christopher Hitchens, Philip Adams and Michael Moore, to name a few. They all seem to love women in a personal sense, but are scared witless at the first sign of women engaging in gender politics.

    Most hard-left men I know seem to ‘get’ feminism, but most of the soft-left men I’ve encountered just don’t have a clue.

    • Hi kellsy, welcome to the News with Nipples. I’m always surprised when people who have views I generally agree with then come out with something that is so at odds with their other views.

  24. Yep, in regards to the Bible comment, when David perved on Bathsheba he was in SERIOUS trouble. He had her husband KILLED so that he could take her for himself, ad the baby that was born from the affair ended up dying. It is a horrible, tragic story of lust, adultery, murder, the death of a child, and a whole lot of devastation.

    The lesson of the story is that you DO NOT have the right to another man’s wife, visually or otherwise. This bastard has taken a story meant to teach the value of respecting women and not being entitled to them, and turned it into an excuse for repulsive, selfish behaviour.

  25. Ah, I feel fresh air! I’ve just been reading yet MORE of Ellis’ revolting tripe (seriously, this guy has a WIFE???) and needed to wash my brain out and make sure I wasn’t the only one finding Ellis’ logic tenuous and reasoning ridiculous.

    [just thought I’d add my comment and keep the post rolling!]

  26. Oh, and with contemporaries like Murray, Greer and James, no wonder Ellis needs to wave his soiled nappy at the world to prove… something!

Go on, you know you have something to say...

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s