Home » Gender and sport » Sport » Eddie McGuire, Caroline Wilson and violence against women: the AFL must act.

Eddie McGuire, Caroline Wilson and violence against women: the AFL must act.

Tonight, the Western Bulldogs are playing Geelong in the White Ribbon match. It is a game designed to raise awareness of domestic violence and violence against women. But at the very time the football world is casting light on the issue, it is allowing dangerous, toxic and violent language toward women to be part of mainstream football conversations.

The most recent incident happened on last Monday’s episode of “The Rub” on Triple M. Prior to the “Big Freeze” at the MCG, they crossed live to Eddie McGuire, who was preparing to take part. The event consisted of a number of high profile figures going down an ice slide and landing in a pool of icy water, all to raise money for the very worthy cause of research into Motor Neurone Disease. The horrifying exchange involves not one but two current AFL Club Presidents (McGuire and James Brayshaw)

But during the cross, McGuire made the following comments (Audio is from Triple M’s The Rub. Clip use covered under fair use provisions):

 

(Transcript)

McGuire: In fact I reckon we should start the campaign for a one-person slide next year. Caroline Wilson. And I’ll put in ten grand straight away- make it twenty. [laugher] And if she stays under, fifty. [louder laugher] [laugher]

What do you reckon guys? Who else is up there? I know you’re in JB?

Brayshaw: No, yep, Straight in

Danny Frawley: I’ll be in amongst it Ed

McGuire: Is Duck there?

Wayne Carey: Yes, I’m here mate.

McGuire: Duck’s in. Danny’s in — already spoken up.

Frawley: Yeah I’m in Ed.

McGuire: I could do an auction here today.

Frawley: I’ll actually jump in and make sure she doesn’t — I’ll hold her under, Ed.

McGuire: I reckon we could charge ten thousand for everyone to stand around the outside and bomb her.

Damien Barrett: I’m on Caro’s side now, Ed. I’m on Caro’s side these days, Ed.

[indecipherable]

McGuire: She’ll burn you like everyone else, mate. She’s like the black widow. She just sucks you in and gets you and you start talking to her and then BANG! She gets you.

Brayshaw: If you ran that auction from down there, I reckon you’d start grabbing some bids out of the seats too. There’d be money piling in everywhere

McGuire: It’s be magnificent. I think we should do that next year. It’s all good for footy.

Brayshaw: Bloody oath!

Bloody oath indeed, though I suspect for entirely different reasons.

The first notable thing about this is, of course, that is is absolutely awful. These are some of the most high-profile men in football joking about hurting one of football’s most prominent women. So much of our discussions about violence against women acknowledge the importance of language and of attitudes in shaping the way men think about women. As the current government campaign says, “violence against women doesn’t just start.” While McGuire and co were undoubtedly joking, the underlying attitude is dangerous: it reenforces the attitudes of those who are willing to take their hatred of women beyond a “bit of banter”.

The image of a woman being held under water against her will while people jump on her body is a horrifying picture of violence. It is nothing less.

And make no mistake, the damage McGuire and co are doing by normalising attitudes of disrespect and violence toward a woman does more harm than a thousand themed matches and white ribbons on uniforms do good.

The other notable thing about this incident is that it happened a week ago, yet has received very little coverage: until yesterday, it seems only to have been covered in a short piece on SportingNews titled “Eddie McGuire’s controversial Caroline Wilson comments“. Then, on yesterday’s episode of the wonderful “Outer Sanctum” podcast, the hosts discussed it, which led to others paying attention for the first time. But to now, that’s it.**

How was this missed? How has violent language against one of the most prominent women in football so accepted? I absolutely count myself as part of the problem here — I’d rather not endure Triple M’s football coverage, so I don’t listen to it. But without attention from people who care, this sort of thing goes on unchecked. By ceding these airwaves to those with these attitudes, we allow them to survive and to thrive.

At some point, enough has to be enough.

If the AFL and its clubs are genuinely committed to doing something about violence against women, they need to respond to this, and not just brush it under the rug. This is absolutely unacceptable. Something must be done.

 

**As an aside, I think this incident shows how important the rise of podcasts, and new voices, is in footy. They can help direct attention to things and start conversations that the mainstream media largely ignores.

*** Edit: Originally this post incorrectly said the incident happened on the Sunday edition of The Rub. It was the Monday edition.

Edit 2: the sound was updated to be hosted on Soundcloud rather than on this site to preserve bandwidth.

246 thoughts on “Eddie McGuire, Caroline Wilson and violence against women: the AFL must act.

  1. I dont think this is an issue about sex, as oppose to an issue about Caroline Wilson as a person.

    It has nothing to do with her gender, and it ONLY becomes about her gender when you say it is ‘because she is a woman’

    I don’t buy it. If we are equals, why cant we make a joke about Caroline Wilson in the same vain as if it was about Sam Newman? This is more of a witch hunt as oppose to a gender issue.

    Eddie doesn’t get along with Caroline Wilson thats the issue, NOTHING To do with gender or the fact she is a woman. This hurts women because its basically saying we can’t critise, have a laugh at someone if we don’t like them if they are a woman.

    Everyone is equal and should be made fun of the same as anyone else. Stop looking for stories that aren’t there.

    1. One might agree that it was not about her gender and was about her personality but how that makes it right that violence towards someone we don’t like is ok is beyond me. It is not right to make fun of people we don’t like. That is bullying. Criticise and even make fun of something a person actually did or said if you like but advocating harming (under the disguise of it just being a joke) the person and conjuring up your flying monkeys to do the same is just not acceptable.

      1. Why did nobody speak up when ch9 held a vote on if Eddie should stay under after being dumped in the water?
        The rediculousness of this whole situation is breath taking

        1. Don’t bother pointing out their own hypocrisy to these clowns. They’re too busy looking for the next big thing at which to become outraged.

          1. This is the best you can come up with, eh?

            Must be hard for you to get trounced by people who know more than you and can back their opinions up with evidence.

            Cheer up, mate. One day you’ll get off your backside and do some research. Maybe then you too can have an intelligent conversation rather than being your vacuous virtue signalling self.

      2. When Eddie refers to her by calling her a black widow spider, it’s about gender. He’s not dumb enough to say her opinion is of less value because she’s a woman.

    2. When people like Eddie McGuire make veiled threats of violence against a women, it continues the ongoing belief that it is acceptable, and it is not. It should not even be mentioned in jest as the issue of violence against women is one of societies major issues to be fixed. People is positions of celebrity should know better.

      1. No it doesn’t. We all know (thanks to the continual pc activists harping on about it all day bloody long) that ‘Violence against (replace women with anyone)’ is bad and anyone who doesn’t understand this is a joke has serious issues.

        1. So somebody being murdered via drowning is funny to you? I think you’re the one who needs to be checked mate.

          1. I reckon you might need to be checked, mate. It appears that your mind is unable to separate reality from jokes. That sounds like it might be an undiagnosed psychological issue.

      2. I agree. Making jokes about violence again men is ok. But it is never acceptable to make jokes about violence against women. It’s quite simple formula to follow.

    3. Dave domestic violence It starts off with a hatred of women. An example of that hatred is Eddie McGuire and his co workers all men threatening to hold a strong professional woman under water and not let her up.. The sooner this generation of men leave the media the better.

      1. no it doesn’t start with that. It starts with some prick beating up his GF because HE has the issue. The rest of us don’t have this issue and don’t need to hear about it all the friggin’ time.

        1. But you MUST hear about it all the time.

          You have a penis, so you must be beaten about the head with this issue. You have a penis, so you are a potential wife beating rapist. We must get to you and make you see the error of your actions before you even engage in them.

          You have a penis!!

    4. This is a violent comment and young boys and girls interpreting this would take it that violence to a woman is not just condoned but good fun and ought to be done.

      1. Yep, because people these days aren’t able to tell the difference between a joke and reality.

        Oh, wait. That’s not true, people can tell the difference. It’s just whinging snowflake Social Justice Warrior Feminists who can’t tell the difference. So, what’s their motivation for being perpetually outraged at everything you ask?

        Well, there’s a lot of money being made by a lot of people out of the new victimhood industry. Social justice is the modern day fascism. Thought and language policing is the new black.

        1. Dear oh dear. Again. It may seem taking the issue too far, but it what this country has got a bad name for – casual racism, casual sexism and general intolerance. Pick up any Murdoch paper. These men are supposed leaders. Not nearly good enough.

    5. You are completely missing the point. If Eddie McGuire didn’t like a male media personality of equal stature to CW he wouldn’t dare to attack him in the same way. This is a misogynistic attempt to silence someone who won’t be bullied into silence. Name a male media personality that Eddie has threatened violence towards and your post may gain some credibility. What ever happened to disagreeing with someone respectfully if and WHEN you disagree rather than making tasteless and cruel jokes

      1. Bulldust.

        In the past he’s threatened jokingly to get Melbourne mafia identities to sort blokes out that he doesn’t like.

        But that’s different to now, right? Because vagina.

    6. Really? When was the last time you heard anyone make or female talk in such a way about a male in a public forum? Not even about characters like Wayne Carey or Shane Warne….

    7. read the article – it is well documented that this kind of language and attitudes foster the attitudes by men who perpetrate the violence – Eddie McGuire is normalising talking about committing violence against women. When women are murdering men at the rate of men murdering women (ZERO men have been murdered by a woman in a domestic violence situation in over 2 years – 100s of women have been murdered by men) we’ll have equality – is that what you mean? Its never equal between men and women when it comes to violence – and everyone knows that. Read up on domestic violence and the culture that perpetuates it. Rosie Batty and the police commissioner have plenty of educational information you can resource to educate yourself.

    8. I agree. Having savagely suffered all forms of violence inflicted by men, I know what abuse is… This has gone too far. How come it would have been ok if the person concerned were male? Women demand sexual equality, right? Stop the publicity. Get on with more important issues on violence, domestic or otherwise!

    9. Whether the joke is about a person and not a gender, public figures have the responsibility to control language so as no to give bad impression. In Australia, it seems, presenters are not chosen by their education and integrity. Banter and lines have boundaries and all journalists should know the dividing line. Or else ought to choose another profession.

    10. I totally agree. Even our DP Julie Bishop said it has been taken too far. “If we are going to take offence at every silly, offhand remark or an attempt at humour, then we’re not focusing on the really important issued of the day” unquote.

    11. Dave, can you point out any examples of Ed and his gang joking about taking violent actions against Mark Robinson? Or Greg Denham? Or Patrick Smith?

      He’s had a go at plenty of journos and AFL people over the years. Why did they feel the need to create a mini violent fantasy around hefty blokes holding a woman under icy water? That’s weird.

      Can you honestly imagine a world where Eddie and crew fantasize about holding Mark Robinson under water? See the difference?

  2. Wtf are you on about lmao. It’s a personal attack on Caroline, not a gendered attack on her. If it was a man that did what she had done, they would be saying the same shit to him.

    The only sexist person here is you. This kind of “boy cries wolf” outrage demeans real violence against women.

    Groups of feminists outwardly claim “KILL ALL MEN” and your response is “YASSSS YOU GO QUEENS! GO YOU GIRL BOSS!”

    What a joke.

    You’re all hypocrites.

    1. Where are these groups of feminists calling for all men to be killed? Where are the responses saying ‘yasss queen’ or anything even remotely similar? It doesn’t happen, you comment is garbage and you know it.

      And what exactly has Wilson done that’s so bad? Been a journalist who doesn’t just write fawning fluff pieces? Where are the examples of male journalists who write critical pieces getting anything like the vicious hate Wilson receives? Also I don’t really get how it being a personal attack makes it any better.

      1. Guardian columnist and feminist Julie Bindell claimed in an article a few years ago that all men should be placed into “some kind of camp” where their relatives could come and visit them and take them out to enjoy them for short periods of time, like a library book. Does this or doesn’t this put what boofhead McGuire said in the shade?

        This comment is from one of modern, third wave intersectional feminism’s most noted leaders. Of course, it didn’t get much publicity – now I wonder why? Imagine if this was said about women; what do you reckon the response would have been?

        Would you like me to provide more? Because there’s a ton of these feminist inspired comments out there if you care to give a damn. Unless it’ll upset your convenient little victimhood narrative.

        1. Both comments are unacceptable as far as I am concerned. Just because females act in this manner as well, does not make it right.

          1. Apparently me pointing out that feminists have advocated culling males down to 10% of the population or that Father’s Day be replaced by International Castration Day is enough to be moderated.

            You may believe that these comments are unacceptable, but the chirping of crickets from social justice types and feminists whenever these comments are made by their own is a clear indication of where they sit on equality.

            This is about hypocrisy. Bald, open, unchallenged hypocrisy.

          2. No, it was your use of a derivative of the R-word that got your comments moderated. I have a zero tolerance policy on that.

    2. There is no way they would have run this gag about a male journo. It’s all about Caro ‘not knowing her place’ in their boys’ club.

    3. Drake i think you are a very sick insecure ignorant person to make such ludicrous anti women comments. We need to cultivate a society where men and women are equal, have the same opportunities and same pay and should never ever have violence directed at them even couched as a sick makeitworse joke. Eddie McGuire should be sacked fined and sent for treatment as a very sick person.

    4. No, they wouldn’t be saying the same shit to a man. They may not like CW but the awful way they treat her in a public medium is mediated by her gender.

  3. Except the reality is that the overwhelming majority of violence is perpetrated by men, most of it against women and children, and so there is no “neutrality” when it comes to violence because VIOLENCE ITSELF is heavily gendered. I wish it wasn’t but it is.

    Or try this, slip “Carla McGuire” in to replace Caroline Wilson – or your wife, girlfriend or daughter’s name, instead. Still funny? Seriously, try it. Let your mates say it for you, if it’s too hard. Piling on, because it’s fucking hilarious to joke about drowning a woman.

    Oh wait, but Caroline Wilson deserves it, right? Which is pretty much the way family violence is justified in hundreds of thousands of homes around the world every single day. I mean, seriously, it was the same week as White Ribbon day. Do you not at least understand how incredibly hypocritical this makes Ed and his mates appear when they’re out there advocating for the fight against family violence?

    1. Well said. I’m so sick of these ignoramuses claiming it’s the same as if the men said it to a man, & that it’s got nothing to do with her being a woman.
      That might be true… The day that woman are murdering their partners at the same rate (currently 2 a week in Australia), & causing the terror & injuries, often permanent disability, at the same horrendous rate. That’s not gonna happen though, is it?

      Domestic violence, rape, attacks on women are all influenced by the prevailing talk about women and attitudes. Influential media types like these guys unfortunately impact societal attitudes. Their stupid talk shows they’ve learnt nothing about their responsibility or attitudes toward (some) men’s violence. And the ignorant just don’t get it.

      1. Why did the chicken cross the road?
        Oops theres real animal cruelty out there perpetuated by knuckle draggers telling jokes, what was I thinking.
        F off seriously you must be kidding

    2. I’ve read the article and totally disagree with your comments, anger seems to have clouded your judgement. If it was a male journalist instead of s female would you say it was boys being boys? I see this simply as Eddie doesn’t like Caroline as she has sucked him in and he has told her something he probably rushed he hadn’t and she made it news.

      1. She has not commented at all as far as I am aware. How also did she `suck him in`. By saying things he did not want her to say, by not knowing her place? If it was a male journalist, it would not have been said at all.
        Stupid response, moronic logic, incorrect facts. A pretty clear case of starting at the end point, of justifying this sort of talk about women, then coming up with some sort of bullshit logic to get there.

    3. Totally agree, WEEK AND PATHETIC, Boys club and bullies the sooner Brayshaw and Magquire are out of Football the better. Dont watch the footy show and havn’t for a long time biggest boys club show, Nrl footy show leaves it for dead and I dont follow nrl. Its just indicative of the attitude which is rife in the inner circle of the afl which is accepted by the people who should be showing leadership mclaughlin is a very week person to be running football.

  4. Well put. Funny thing is, when it comes to blokes ‘joking’ about physical violence against another bloke, there could be half a chance of a fair exchange. When that person they don’t like is a woman, and joke about violence, the power balance is well slanted one way.

    No, we don’t expect some blokes to get it, but hopefully the promised coversations in most sports this year will help them to try.

    1. Equal rights means equal fights. Don’t like it? Don’t call yourself equal.

      Oh, and here’s some statistics all you little Social Justice Warrior sooks commenting on this article should consider – yes, I know they’re inconvenient, but consider them anyway:

      A 2010 Harvard study shows that 70% of unprovoked domestic violence is committed by women against men and 50% is reciprocal.

      The demographic with the highest incidence of reported domestic violence? Female same sex couples.

      Put that in your pipe and smoke it, you namby-pamby whingers.

      And here’s a little tip for all you “go girl!” types: if you want to initiate a physical engagement, it’s probably a good idea to first consider the relative damage dealing capacity of both parties to the engagement. If you think you’re outgunned in that department, it’s probably not a great idea to engage. But if you do decide to engage, expect cold hard equality.

      Because equality is, after all, what you really want, right?

      1. First time I have ever heard the comment that equal rights are about equal fights. To me equal rights are about everyone being kind to each other and respecting each other. Unfortunately we are are not on the same page or even in the same book so we might as well agree to differ on this.

        1. There are male and female a**holes. I’m one.

          But, if I decide to be an a**hole to a larger bloke, I can expect to potentially cop a thrashing. Consequently, I try not to be an a**hole to bigger blokes. I do a simple cost benefit analysis.

          There is compelling evidence that non-reciprocal domestic violence is perpetrated by women against men 70% of the time – I’ve already provided the link to the Harvard study. My theory, and it is only a theory, is that women and men have been conditioned to think that men should never hit a women. Ever. Regardless of what the woman is doing or has done. Women know this, hence the high percentage of non-reciprocal violence being perpetrated by them. Women know who the authorities will side with in this sort of situation, should the authorites be called.

          True equality would demand that if a woman hits a bloke, she should expect to cop a clip around the ear in response, including in self defence. Alternatively, if we accept the modern paradigm of namby-pambyism, the woman who assaults the man should be deemed a criminal and punished as severely as any man who commits domestic violence. If any of this is somehow unpalatable to you, then you do not believe in true equality. You simply believe that women should get a free pass where men should be punished. That’s not equality and anyone who believes in it is a fraud.

          Equal rights, means equal fights.

          1. “A clip round the ear”… do you ever read the descriptions of the injuries many women receive? You’re being deliberately disingenuous by trivialising male on female violence. When did you last read a biography where the author recounted his mother regularly coming home from the pub and thrashing the husband and kids? Your perspective is ludicrously skewed. You’re not dumb so the obvious conclusion is you don’t like women. Male victimhood is alive and well in 21st century Australia.

          2. Here’s an actual theory from a front line police officer – men report having violence perpetrated against them with the ‘she asked for it tag line’ at nearly every job I go out on. So given the ‘evidence’ is based on subjective accounts of being victimised – I’d probably have to go with the real evidence that violence has occurred like 2 women a week ending up dead

          3. Some of the logic herein seems to miss the point.

            Firstly, I would suggest that people try not to be a**holes. Not because the other person is bigger, because of their gender or for any other reason, but because that is what your mum taught you. That said, just because someone is an a**hole to you, I don’t condone hitting them, irrespective of their size or any other reason.

            Whilst there is debate as to whether it was an implicit attack on Caroline because of her gender or not, it strikes me that this is on the assumption that Eddy has not called Caroline’s gender into question. This is simply not the issue at hand here. Eddy referred to her as a Black Widow. Black Widow’s are most notable for the female spider to latch onto the male, procreate, and then eat the male. It is clear that this was not a gender neutral dialogue, and Eddy’s suggestion that he does not think of her as a ‘female reporter’ but just a ‘reporter’ seems to ring hollow.

      2. Wow, how educational. Hospital wards around the world must be full of lesbian and male domestic violence victims. Just odd that this is the first I’ve heard of it.

        1. I don’t care that this is the first time you’ve heard of it.

          Dispute the bloody evidence, don’t just plead ignorance.

          1. Once last comment Oddie ..because we are not just on a different page and different book we are also in a different library and we will never agree. The one last comment is that the study you quoted showing that 70% of violence started by women is a red herring. While not a good thing, that violence must be something more less sinister than when a man is violent to a woman.
            At least 2 women are murdered by their male partner every week in Australia with many more injured and maimed. We don’t see figures like that with men. Most murders of men are committed by men.
            You are evidently a very well read man and clever too I suspect. You seem to hate women or at least women who hate men but that is your right. I hope you are kind and respectful to the women in your life. That’s all. With Eddie it is different because he has a public profile and has a great influence on both young boys and young girls which you do not.

          2. I hope you don’t push your misandrist views onto the men in your life, just as I hope that you aren’t a woman who abuses her children. You know, since it is women who abuse their children more than men.

            “…that violence must be something more less sinister than when a man is violent to a woman.” Well, ignoring the obvious grammatical error, you base this comment on what? Is it based on misandry? Why is one form of physical violence more “sinister” than another? Is it because vagina?

            I have three daughters and a son. My daughters won’t grow up expecting special treatment just because of their genitals. My son will grow up proud of, not ashamed by, his masculinity.

            None of them will believe fairy-tales like the “gender wage gap”. All of them will understand that when someone is trying to ram an ideology down your throat, it is usually that same person who benefits most from acceptance of that ideology.

            Right now, the profitable game in town is victimhood. Feminists and SJWs revel in it, all while they profit by it.

            By the way, the reason we’re not in the same library is because the books you like to peruse are filled with bright and colourful pictures. One day you’ll graduate to the ones filled only with text.

      3. Let me guess.. you get most of your ‘facts’ from American conspiracy nut / white male victimhood Web sites?

        1. It’s from a Harvard peer reviewed study. 11,000 men and women were questioned.

          It would seem that you struggle to address evidence. It’s not my fault that you’re ignorant. Though perhaps lazy is the better term.

          1. Links, please – to the actual research, I mean, not just some other angry white guy with mother issues quoting it.

          2. Thanks for the link. Unlike you (let me guess – ‘disability’ pension?) I’m at work so will have to study this later. I’ll get back as and when.

          3. Typical SJW, beaten by the evidence, so he tries to diminish his opponent by creating a label. How very predictable of you.

            Let me guess, by the level of your intelligence, you work at a 7/11?

            See, misguided labels work both ways, don’t they hero?

      4. Opt-in sampling, limited age range in the sample AND self-reporting. No wonder it was considered scientifically invalid.

      5. Try “The National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey | 2010 Summary Report” for a larger cross reference without relying on 3/4 survey questions answered (dis?)-honestly.

      6. strange that it is women who are being murdered in huge numbers, but the men were pressured and forced to take this course of action in self defense. Man up you child

  5. I personally cannot stand Caro. I switch off if she is on a programme. I never read her articles. However, these male clowns have no clue. Eddie has a track record. He is meant to be an influential leader – we obviously have a long way to go.

    1. “…we obviously have a long wa to go.”

      Don’t lump me in to your little pity party, mate.

      The only ones who don’t want true equality are the social justice morons and femitards who think they should be treated like special little snowflakes. Social justice is the new fascism.

          1. Links to this ‘evidence’, please – from the source of the research, not some fellow misogynist quoting it.

      1. Right, I’ve had a glance at your Harvard study. The key finding (in terms of relevance to the violence against women being unacceptable) is one you predictably choose to ignore, viz: “Regarding injury, men were more likely to inflict injury than were women”. I rest my case.

        As for virtue signalling and white knighting – no, I don’t give a stuff how I’m perceived in these kinds of forums. In any case, I’m aware that white knighting is supposedly a turn-off to women so it wouldn’t serve any purpose if that were my intent. I’m not self-loathing either. But I did have a control-freak father with the trademark blinkered vision, fact twisting and inability to put himself in the shoes of others (mercifully he changed in old age so there might be hope even for you).

        Anyway, the effect of that conditioning was for me to call out and push back against bullies, rednecks, closet fascists, bigots and any other kind of a*hole I come across. Just see it a pastime I derive some fulfillment from – and white male victimhood is top of my hit-list. (I know from reading books about control freaks that they’ve created an alternative reality for themselves, so I don’t expect any major breakthrough, but trying is a challenge I still feel a compulsion to meet.)

        1. Seems you’re the one who has failed to understand the study. I’m not surprised. You’re not too bright, after all. Plus you only glanced at it, most likely because you’re incapable of digesting it in it’s entirety.

          There is no doubt, and it is frankly unsurprising, that men inflict more injury. That’s because of a scientifically proven biological and evolutionary phenomenon known as gender dimorphism. It is also likely due to the possibility that males are statistically more likely to know how to deliver a blow.

          Yet 50 percent of domestic violence is reciprocal (you understand the meaning of reciprocity, right?) and 70 percent is initiated by women without retaliation by men. The evidence is there, champ. You just choose to ignore it because you are ill equipped to deal with anything that contradicts your little victimhood narrative.

          Once again, do you care to address and acknowledge these facts, or are you afraid to admit you don’t actually know what you’re on about?

          See, if you’re going to “call out” all these people you label, at least first produce evidence to show they fit your little label. Secondly, and most importantly, make sure you actually know something about your topic. Otherwise you come across as an intellectual lightweight and a hypocrite.

      2. Hi Odie,

        It is not clear to me what you want people to see that you don’t seem to think they ‘get’?

        The paper you’ve linked is paywalled – so I’ve only read the abstract and I’m still unsure what you’re point is.

        As an aside, there is an as yet unresolved critique in peer review science in what constitutes ‘evidence’ in context-dependent issues such as sexual assault and domestic violence – not saying the paper you’ve references is untrue nor invalid. It is a report of an analysis of secondary data of young hetero couples. Nothing more nothing less. It is one small part of a picture.

        It’s possible you have some interesting points to offer but they are lost in your aggressive and personal tone.

        I’m convinced what you want for your children is what everyone wants – each child to feel proud of who they are, and to own their space in the world (I’d add too that each child develops to an adult that is kind and tolerant positive contributors – bc I know that’s probably what you meant to add).

        I am finding it difficult to understand the bow you’ve drawn from this article to ….domestic violence statistics. Well, that’s not totally true – I can see some dot-joining – but what is the issue you have with the article?

        Please don’t respond with language that implies I’m an idiot or can’t read bc our conversation will stop there and that would be a shame bc I genuinely want to understand what it is of this article that has riled you enough to comment so relentlessly.

  6. Well said, Nicole. What a horrible image that demonstrates the group mentality and acceptance of violence against women, given that not one of those men were prepared to stand up against Eddie and voice the hyposcrisy of his words in general, but especially in the spirit of the White Ribbon campaign.

  7. Exactly Nicole- this disgraceful “joke” reaffirms the privilege men have in this world and that at anytime we can be reminded of our unequal status in the world. It totally devalues the worth of any woman and shows disrespect to all sisters, mothers, daughters and grandmothers

    1. Somebody call the waaaahmbulance, a joke was made!

      Let me guess, you also believe the “gender pay gap” fairy tale, right?

      Was it The Patriarchy that put Eddie up to this? The next time I attend one of my Super Awesome Ultra-Secret Patriarchy meetings, I’ll be sure to ask all the assembled brothers if they wrote Eddie’s script for him. It sounds like the kind of thing we at the Super Awesome Ultra-Secret Patriarchy would do. When we’re not disseminating pamphlets in support of the “rape culture”, that is.

      As for privilege; Western women are the most coddled privileged group in history. It’s just that they’ve been fed the victimhood narrative for so long, some of them have started to believe it. Poor ignorant souls.

      Third wave intersectional feminism; the new cult for the feeble minded.

      1. You know nothing about me and you shouldn’t assume you do based on 50 words or whatever it is. Your “super patriarchy” is your everyday life. It’s in the very foundations of this country and you’ve benefited everyday of your life from it. You inherited from from across the waters from another land where it was birthed. It doesn’t even belong here. It schooled you and raised you and moulded you to the person you are now. My grandmother was made a domestic servant to a policeman at 14. How’s that for equality. What were other 14 year olds doing at that same time. I don’t have the time, patience or heart to tell you the countless other mistreatments or crimes against the women in my family or myself. It wouldn’t make a difference to you anyway. You’ll have a well researched, thought out response to put me in my place anyway won’t you. That’s all people do these days- they don’t listen.. Just respond. Best wishes to you Odie.

    1. These are comments made by two club presidents and former players? if the AFL is really serious about gender equity, they should be suspended immediately. But everyone knows who runs the AFL. Given that some of these people are Foxtel “commentators” how about those that at\re offended by their comments, cancel their subscriptions.

    1. As usual the blue haired lesbian feminists and their cuckolded male sympathisers chime in and scream “victim”.

      See, labelling works both ways.

        1. Andrew, my guess is he lives on his own in his man cave trawling the net 16 hours a day to feed his conspiritorial complex in an attempt to validate his empty existence.

  8. Agree with some of the sentiment expressed in your article – what was said was disgraceful for club leaders to say but to say it’s a violence against women issue is taking a bit far.
    Who identifies with Caroline Wilson? 1% of women 50+? She’s an awful person and doesn’t represent women. It wasn’t anything that you wouldn’t expect to hear ordinary footy fans, male and female, saying around the country all the time. They’re joking, of course – but club leaders should be much, much more professional.

    1. It may seem taking the issue too far, but it what this country has got a bad name for – casual racism, casual sexism and general intolerance. Pick up any Murdoch paper. These men are supposed leaders. Not nearly good enough.

    2. You do realise it is possible to dislike a person without talking publicly about violently assaulting them, right? It isn’t a joke. It is a threat with added laughter.

    3. ”It wasn’t anything that you wouldn’t expect to hear ordinary footy fans, male and female, saying around the country all the time.” … Do you not see how that’s the entire point of this article? Saying these sorts of things should not be socially acceptable.

  9. It is absolutely a gendered attack, and one that evokes horrifically violent imagery. It must be viewed in the context of the decades of bullying of Caroline Wilson on football panels, especially radio, by many of the AFL’s most prominent male identities. She is ALWAYS portrayed as an outsider. Her gender is ALWAYS a reason for her views on any important issue in the AFL, no matter how well informed and thoroughly researched, to be undermined and ultimately dismissed. The suggestion that these comments were only about her “personality” is as ludicrous as the idea that Julia Gillard was only called a “witch” and “Bob Brown’s bitch” because she lied about the Carbon Tax. Apparently Caroline Wilson is also a “witch” who deserves a dunking.

  10. WTF Eddie McGuire is sch an arsehole he should be taken off radio TV whatever he is a sexist pig and he is the biggest wank on television. he thinks he is a star but he is not. i feel for his wife to have married such a wanker and he is an embarrassment to football and Australia get rid of the dick head and i think he needs to apologize again as to the way he was rude to Caroline, at least she works her arse off in the football code to give us a good report. McGuire cant say shit . all these so called fat aged old football presenters want are this beautiful girls so they can all gawk at them. Eddie you need to retire you are a dick and treat women poorly you sexist prick

    1. Such a well researched and thoroughly unemotive position. Such dashing, intelligent and compelling discourse!

      I’m guessing by the style, tone and content of your little rant, irony isn’t something you understand too well.

  11. I’m a rusted on Collibgwood supporter and it pains me to say that Ed is becoming more and more idiotic with his comments every year.

    1. It’s not funny to talk about violently attacking and even drowning someone. That’s not a joke. That’s a threat with added laughter.

      1. Pam you have hit the nail on the head. This can not be held up as funny. It is possibly one of the most horrific comments i have ever heard. This is not just condoning violence especially to women it is promoting it.

        1. “…one of the most horrific comments I have ever heard.”

          Wow, you need to get out more. Ever been to a game and listened to comments about the umpires?

          Sandy’s comment is yet more evidence that Western feminists are the most coddled, protected, special little snowflakes on the planet. Perish the thought that you might one day have to put up with real hardship and adversity. Just don’t be anywhere near me when that day arrives, because I’m not into white knighting damsels in distress.

    2. Tongue in cheek is still not acceptable. This is how we see things like this being swept under the carpet. The people responsible should be relieved of their positions (of power) within a business they say others need to be seen as mentors to our young folk

    3. No Wayne.

      Drowning isn’t funny.

      McGuire ,dizzy with media power thought he would get away with vile racism and now this new attempt at ‘drown Caroline’.
      Wayne..do you really want to support racism,homophobia and violence against women?
      The facts are in..these are McGuire’s values and you think they’re acceptable. SHAME

  12. FFS, to draw the conclusion that the language used contributes to sexism is beyond me. And I’m a gentle soul never aligned with usual blokeyness. Violence occurs because of deep seated issues over time. This sort of stuff whilst not very smart cannot and should not be labelled as sexism or even added to the violence debate.

    It was simply banter that a microscope has blown up to be far more than what it really means. Heck, it’s precisely this depth of discussion that breeds tension when if we could just relax we’d see it as boyish banter with no connection with violence. Far out!!! All those cartoons with Coyote falling to his continual death create permission for violence in kids heads? We know the pool banter is simply for fun so to somehow link it with a violent theme is way beyond me.

    1. It isn’t banter, though. Wilson has been bullied and insulted throughout her career, and this was another example of that. But even worse because they were specific and violent threats to drown her.
      And if it’s really fun and jokes, then the person it’s about would be laughing. This is all at the expense of Wilson, not with her. It is laughing at the thought of her being hurt. Learn some empathy, think about how it would feel to have very prominent people in your field laughing about hurting you. It is not just a joke.

      1. Crikey, Pam. What do you think Wilson does in her articles? Do you seriously consider the tripe she spews forth is journalism?! She “plays the man” and knowingly and deliberately sets out to assassinate characters for a living. She and her band of supporters should harden up and take the bump. And believe me, I would be saying the same thing if she was a man. This issue has been transformed into a gender thing by a bunch of pinkos with nothing better to do with their time.

      2. Pam, I think you’ve missed out on probably the most important detail surrounding this whole case and is this: on a different radio station, Tony Shaw made the exact same joke, WORD FOR WORD, on air and with Caro in the studio. Her response? She laughed and took it the way it was intended. So if this isn’t just another one of her character assassinations against Eddie and co, and is rather about”violence against women” as she claims, and if she can be so hurt by such comments, where was her public outcry then?

    2. I teach adolescent boys – the men of this country’s future. And as mentioned in another comment, the comments of these men do impact so heavily on young, developing minds. So much more than all the awareness days. It’s like hearing racist comments being touted as a joke and saying they don’t impact. They do! And the young boys remember and then think it’s ok to replicate. They don’t have the maturity or wisdom to filter. But then again – neither do Eddie McGuire & co!

    3. Ah, at last, a voice of reasoning with some value, also noted is the absence of a reaction to Dane’s post because of the need for people to belt into each other as a “tit for tat” seeming to be more important than addressing the “REAL” issue.
      The “REAL” issue people, is that our kids are being raised on a constant diet of “violence and retribution” (largely against women) as a normal mindset on TV, both genders condone it by watching it while our kids absorb it towards their growing mindsets, we are “teaching” them violence by what is shown as normal on TV.
      I accept that my comment will be similarly viewed to Dane’s because it doesn’t utilise the (more usual) angry or expressive square off, but then that will always be the plight of a person using rational thought process rather than an angry quick response, I think Dane would agree.
      My beef (& I could get wound up about this) is still mainly about people watching (and allowing their kids to) violence on TV, it’s a pretty emphatic indoctrination into an unwanted mindset. Too big a job to tackle at the moment??
      Unfortunately we are far too entrenched in our angry ways to turn this baby around in the foreseeable future.

    4. Mate, don’t even bother trying to talk sense into these people.

      They cannot seem to function without feeling outraged by one thing or another.

      The irony of all of this is that Western women are the most coddled, protected group in all of society, yet some of them still buy this third wave intersectional BS that has them believing they’re victims. Pathetic.

    5. Dear gentle soul,

      Thanks for your comment. Just wondering if you can tell me what does FFS stand for?

      The conclusion that “the language used contributes to sexism” is drawn from the wider context of what was said.

      1) The conversational context:
      Eddie referred to Caroline as a “black widow spider” which is a term only ever applied to women; it basically means a manipulator what devours men.

      2) The broader football context:
      Caroline had previously been made fun of in a way that can only be construed as degrading to women when Sam Newman mocked her by putting her face onto a mannequin in lingerie on the Footy Show.

      In the context of AFL it is well known that Caroline has been mocked as a female and not just as a fellow journalist.

      3) The AFL & White Ribbon Context:
      Eddie is the president of one of Australia’s best known AFL clubs and high profile AFL personality. The AFL are running a White Ribbon campaign currently seeking to end violent attitudes in our society.

      As a woman I feel this is very important and absolutely must be “added to the violence debate”. As a woman, and I believe I don’t stand alone on this, we get a say in whether the comment was violent.

      4. Context of the tone:
      The tone of his voice when the comment was made. The tone of his “apology”. The tone of Sam Newman’s defence of Eddies comment. The tone of AFL media manager Patrick Kean’s public statement that didn’t ACTUALLY fully take responsibility.

      If we, as a society, continue in denial then we may be able to continue to “see it as boyish banter with no connection with violence” but unfortunately the facts, when taken as a whole speak for themselves.

      The “cartoons with Coyote falling to his continual death” are not directed at anyone in particular, especially not anyone who is already a target of actual violence in the community like women are.

      You mentioned twice “It’s beyond me”. Perhaps now you have some context it will no longer be so beyond you.

      Unfortunately you tell yourself that you are “never aligned with usual blokeyness” but your comment actually tells a different story and denies dignity to women all around the world and you can’t even see it.

  13. I lost my daughter Hannah to drowning in 2007. I am disappointed, disgusted but unsupervised by dumb and insensitive comments such as these. So many of the Foundations families are appalled by this. Not only about the drowning comments but by the condescending attitude towards women.

    1. When I was young I was pinned under the water for I don’t know how long.

      It was terrifying, fortunately I managed to get out of the water but I’m still too scared to put my head under water.

      Threatening to drown someone-even just passing it off as a joke-really isn’t funny. And just because you don’t like someone isn’t any reason to threaten violence towards them.

  14. Stephen is on the right track. As an AFL loving, full time working wife and mother, and I like to think I demonstrate reasonable intelligence…I attend games and watch and listen to most TV and radio AFL footy shows and podcasts. While I don’t necessarily agree with all that Caroline Wilson has to say, to me, it’s pretty obvious that she has her finger on the pulse and she is out there trying to get as much background info, interviews and quotes in order to make and write comments. I then listen and watch her, AND all the other blokes involved in the various shows and form my own opinion(s) on whatever, with the info at hand. I believe Eddie is angry with himself as she’s obviously good at her craft, and he’s been caught out. Caro Wilson cannot possibly be the only person to be put down the way she is constantly…whereas the others either say what their ‘mates’/panel members want to hear; she gets pilloried for not just her personal and professional opinions, but for the fact she does it well. We don’t have to agree with everything she says, but for goodness sake, give her credit for mostly doing a decent job in that bastion of the old fashioned male domain in football. Eddie, she has got you and you don’t like it…suck it up and stop being such a baby…as for JB et al, you would do well to not jump on someone else’s bandwagon and show some respect and backbone. My opinion…some old fashioned respect is badly needed and perhaps Eddie will apologise face to face and show decency and respect

  15. I love how Robbo in particular is taking offense at this, when the same thing was said about him (about people hoping Robbo wouldn’t come up from under the water) on his AFL 360 show by Neale Daniher (the person behind the whole Big Freeze) and he laughed about it. So because it’s said about a female, all of a sudden it’s sexism? Part of equality should be the ability to take a joke the same way, even if it’s a poor one. Or to ignore it seeing as clearly no one that listened was offended if it’s taken this long to get coverage, and is only being covered now by those who are professional outrage hunters to get clicks they never would otherwise.

    1. Like it or not, Nick, it IS different when it’s a bunch of men talking about holding a woman under water while one of them ‘bombs’ her – and all in an obviously non-friendly way. I just cannot believe 1) that they said what they did on a public radio show and 2) that there are some people who can’t see why it’s just SO wrong. As Joanne said above, first and foremost it’s about basic respect, but beyond that it’s behaving like proper adults, not like a bunch of badly raised adolescents. Can you imagine someone like Gerard Whateley carrying on like that? Of course not – he’s an adult, with standards. Those others are not.

        1. I didn’t hear the exchange you’re talking about, but I doubt it had the same nasty ‘edge’ – and it wasn’t about a bunch of blokes holding a woman under water and bombing her and making sure she doesn’t come up. Clear difference on many levels.

          1. https://youtu.be/7JvQRJkANqU?t=8m That should help you. The clear difference is one is male and one is female. #equalitylol

            Both are clear jokes about the personality and reputation of Robbo and Caro as “journalists” It’s not a male/female/domestic violence issue, only to the professional outrage vocal minority that have nothing better to do with their time.

          2. Oh please… if you can’t tell the difference in tone (contempt and disrespect for Wilson) and in broader context (men’s violence against women) then I’m wasting my time trying to convince you.

          3. Actually, Tony, it would appear that you are the one who is incapable of addressing evidence put directly to you.

            But what you just did is a typical tactic of all intellectually bereft social justice warrior types of your sort. When you’re beaten on the evidence you: (a) move the goalposts to make the argument about something it is not; and (b) use some type of dismissive comment designed to make it seem like you have the moral high ground and that therefore your opponent is beneath you.

            Nick has just proved that the same drowning comment was said earlier about a man by another man and made the point that the SJW machine didn’t go into hyper-outrage mode. You are simply too lazy to address the issue and to concede yet another example of open and clear hypocricy and double standards. I pity you.

            There’s a reason less and less women are identifying with modern feminism. This latest outbreak of confected outrage is another example of why.

          4. strange that it is women who are being murdered in huge numbers, but the men were pressured and forced to take this course of action in self defense. Man up you child

      1. “Like it or not, Nick, it IS different when it’s a bunch of men talking about holding a woman under water while one of them ‘bombs’”

        This is a good example of when feminism gets out of hand. The point of feminism is to achieve equality between both sexes – your comment suggests that women get special treatment because of their gender.
        If you truly want equality you recognise that things works both ways at all times, not just when it suits your outrage.

        1. Dirk – easy to say when you’re the stronger sex, race or whatever. Equality is supposed to mean equal respect and opportunity, not equal abuse.

    2. The difference here is that Neil said it to Robbo directly and Robbo shared in the joke. I’m sure Eddie would not have even considered saying it to Caroline’s face because he meant it to be nasty. You could tell that Robbo did not think Neil was being nasty.

  16. Eddie Is an F#$k wit and has been for a while.
    He has too much influence on week minded people and has lost the ability to think before he speaks. The Goodes comments straight after what happened at the mcg a couple of years ago shows that. By the way I don’t think that young girl was racist that time, just having a go at a player from a different team but Eddies King Kong comments were.
    As I said before he has become a self centered f#$k wit.

  17. Clearly McGuire can’t handle Caroline. Eddie has been a bully ever since he came to fame. I was listening live when he did this and those who may not be aware Wayne Carey stood his ground whilst Eddie used pear group pressure on the panel. Carey said he didn’t want to be a part of it clearly. Well done Wayne. Even as a Collingwood supporter I haven’t like him. The club can never more forward while he is President.

  18. Oh Christ. This is the same debate we had about Adam Goodes: “It wasn’t about him being indigenous, it’s about him being unliked” – “It’s not about Caroline being a woman, it’s because she has it coming”.

    The bullying directed at Adam Goodes is racist. The bullying directed at Caro Wilson *is* misogynist.

  19. If those blokes were saying those things about someone like Hutchy I’m pretty sure it wouldn’t be a big deal. Only because Caro is a woman that gender is an issue. More to do with personality, not gender.

  20. If you think Eddie McGuire wouldn’t say the same sorts of things about a male – you haven’t listened to much of Eddie over the last 15 years. On numerous occasions he’s made pathetic “jokes” such as getting Mick Gatto or Broady Boys to sort disputes with people out. Where were you all then? The guy is a bully, this time was about a woman so now it’s terrible, but it was acceptable behaviour before, I guess.

    1. So the fact he was not called on if before means he should never be called on it?

      If the response to his bullying was wrong before, doesn’t that make it more important that it is right now?

      1. No, it doesn’t make it any more important now, than it was before. It’s just as important he’s called out for being a bully. Why now are people calling for heads, but no one was outraged before? It’s not sexist or a gender issue if his behaviour is equally horrendous to members of both sexes he doesn’t like. The guy is a bully to anyone who opposes him, but no one cared before.

        1. Mate, nobody cared because Boofhead McGuire’s comments were directed at men.

          Victimhood has become both a commodity and an ideology. There are those who may be part of that ideological movement, and there are those who are excluded. Generally, exclusion is based on race and gender – can’t have a victim without an oppressor, right? The victimhood ideology has a number of facets, and has its proselytising groups; the most vocal of these groups being the social justice types and third wave intersectional feminists.

          The victimhood ideology is rather profitable. From feminists who take in hundreds of thousands of dollars to make amateurish youtube videos about “tropes in games”, to the various academics who specialise in gender studies, to the university campuses that have banned a gay man from speaking (Milo Yiannopoulos) because members of the campus are “triggered” by what he has to say, to the counsellors who make their money soothing the aforementioned triggered souls, to the specialists who profit from delivering anti-rape classes to first year male university students, to the assorted interest groups who will have you believe that there’s a “gender pay gap” or that domestic violence against women, although terrible, is at “epidemic” proportions.

          This is Marketing 101: create the need (victimhood), fill the need (outrage and/or membership of or acceptance by one of the proselytising groups who also profess to provide all the answers to the very victimhood narrative they are fabricating).

          There’s a lot of people making money out of this right now.

          1. Yep, absolutely spot on. It is big business using twisted ideological premises to make big money, usually from tax payers. You forgot to mention the myriad hangers on in the Family Law industry.

          2. Most of the victimhood I see on social media comes from whinging white blokes. Why, they even complain they are victims of racism!!!Total failures full of loathing and self-pity.

          3. Come on, Tony.

            I’ve already provided you with the link to the Harvard study detailing the actual perpetrators of most non-reciprocal domestic violence. Care to respond, or are you truly as vacuous and lazy as you appear in your comments?

            If you’re going to start criticising others, perhaps you need to first ensure you have the intellectual wherewithal to engage in intelligent debate, instead of posting empty nothings on a topic about which you so obviously know nothing.

            From your post I also assume you ascribe to the belief that blacks cannot be racist no matter what racist thing they say? Presumably, you base your opinion on “power structures” or other such tosh?

            Oh, and here’s a tip; you come across as a bit of a self hating male, yourself. Is there something in your past that makes you feel inferior to other men? Or perhaps you’re incapable of meeting men on intellectual grounds and so you feel the need to ingratiate yourself with other groups in the hope they’ll accept you.

            You should probably also research a thing called virtue signalling. You seem to have a natural gift for it.

          4. “From your post I also assume you ascribe to the belief that blacks cannot be racist no matter what racist thing they say? Presumably, you base your opinion on “power structures” or other such tosh?”

            An elephant steps on a mouse and says: “Well, you’re always stepping on me – why the double standards?” Women are smaller and lighter than men. The power balance between black and white has historically overwhelmingly favoured whites. There is such a thing as context. The old-white-victim demographic seem to be blind to it.

          5. Odie you are an expert on victimhood, I hope one day you can step out and be a person with empathy and compassion. While you remain angered and embittered for whatever reason. We all need a reason to overcome our troubles. We all have some! Instead of an excuse to remain imprisoned by our own shit.

  21. Eddie needs to be sacked.
    His language and attitude toward Caro is appalling. He not only threatens to drown her but he calls her a black widow who sucks you in and brings you down.
    What the hell is that???? It’s not even mildly funny. How is it funny unless you’re a myalgic ist??
    It’s highly arrogant and deeply offensive. He’s the head of an atrocious Melbourne’s Boys Club that should go now!

  22. I don’t think the issue of Wilson’s gender came into McGuire’s mind when he made those comments. He obviously has a problem with her as a journalist, and as a person, and the fact that she’s female is irrelevant. But that’s not the issue here.

    The issue is that McGuire used his position in the media to lead an attack on someone who wasn’t there to defend themselves, and because he and all the people joining in on his “joke” were men and their target was a woman makes it misogynistic, whether that was McGuire’s intention or not. For a bunch of privileged men to joke about committing violence against a woman is deplorable, and happening on the same weekend two teams played a game to raise awareness of violence against women shows how close-minded McGuire, Brayshaw and Frawley really are.

    1. Misogyny is misogyny even if the person is blindly unaware they are. People are violent if they threaten and laugh about violence if if they ignorantly think that violence is ok of funny. Not knowing you are wrong and an idiot still makes you wrong and an idiot. Eddie MacGuire should be sacked.

        1. I dont watch him enough to know if he is overtly violent to everyone. This is a violent arrogant idiotic man.

          1. And yet you claimed misogyny in your earlier post.

            “Violent”? Did he hit someone?

            Here we go again, the social justice type gets caught out making unsupported comments and tries to back out by shifting the goal posts. Now he’s a “violent” man. Oooooh. Does he live in a swamp, too?

            Oh, and you “don’t watch him enough”, but you’ll still claim misogyny. Perhaps, by leaping to the conclusion that he was exhibiting misogyny, while not in fact knowing very much about the bloke (by the way, he’s an equal opportunity boofhead who directs his comments and men and women alike), perhaps that says more about your own misandry than anything else.

    1. No, they were talking about holding someone under water.

      They were implying they would like to drown someone and laugh about it.

      Minimisation and trivialisation of harm is common in relation to domestic violence.

  23. Sorry Paul time for you to take responsibility as a grown up and realise that the joke was to drown her by pushing her under the water keep bombing her so she couldnt get up and have a black widow spider suck her blood out. A little different to sending someone down a water slide. How would young girls feel if they heard that “joke”? What message does it send to young boys? Isn’t the world violent enough without promoting it in the huge money machine of football? Figures are appalling for domestic violence 33 women killed so far this year at the hands of men who should be their ally. Let’s all try to change the culture by addressing it at this very pervasive training ground for life.

    1. Why the hell should Paul take responsibility? He didn’t say it, McGuire did.

      Or is it your position that all men should be held accountable for the actions of others? Or even, is it that any man who doesn’t stop misogyny when he becomes aware of it is guilty of it?

      If we take this rationale to heart, then surely you’d also be comfortable in holding all Muslims accountable for the actions of a few?

      1. To answer your question: Paul doesn’t need to take responsibility for threatening as a joke to drown someone. Eddie is responsible for this. Nor is Paul responsible for glassing someone. Wayne Carey is. What Paul is responsible for and needs to be aware of .. is to stay on track with the events .. a journalist was the butt of a joke that laughed about drowning her and holding her under so she couldn’t get up .. it was not, as he tried to minimise and gloss over it , that it was about having a joyful ride on a slide.
        Too many people have glossed over violence to women to the point that we have almost become immune as a society. Thank goodness for Rosie Battye and all the men and women who support her.

  24. Paul, they were not just talking about sending a person down a waterslide. They were talking about holding a woman under water until she could no longer come up and also bombing her.

    I listened to the Eddies comments and was so sad that a man of Eddie McGuires influence could be encouraging violence against any woman. Instead of being a role model for young men and boys he showed by his comments he really does not understand his role in society as a well known sporting identity.

    Eddie has a media role which could be used to further influence young males into respecting women and to show them violence towards women is unacceptable. He does not use this. Why? I am sure he does not realise how he could use his position for real change in AFL and its followers. He would gain a lot of personal respect if he did so. Further, the men who laughed at his comments were simply displaying the contempt many men really feel towards women but tend to hide.

    I have neither read nor heard the woman Eddie was speaking about but when I heard the comments about her I felt extreme disappointment that these influential sporting celebrities failed a decency test. Not one of them stood up to Eddie and said anything to indicate they did not think his comments appropriate. Really, Eddie’s comments were contemptible and low. He needs to be taught a lesson. He has failed the test of common decency. How many times does he have to do this before some action is taken to stop this poor behaviour? He does not seem to understand that racist and mysoginist comments demeans him more that the person he aims them at.

    Perhaps he should be compelled to undertake work at a women’s refuge or at an agency dealing with racist issues to gain insight into how this sort of behaviour affects others. Not impressed Mr McGuire I expect better of a man who has the power for change in his hands, but who seems incapable of understanding this.

  25. Many people are saying this isn’t about violence against women. It is. How can it not be?

    Let’s break it down.

    It’s a man. Threatening to kill a woman. He is joking about holding her under the water. He is joking about drowning her. He is joking about it in public. He is encouraging other people to laugh about it. And there are other men, laughing, hypothetically not only watching but joining in to hold her down.

    Any way you look at this, it is quite literally group of men threatening violence against women, threatening to kill a woman and encouraging this by example, inviting others to watch.

    If you can’t see that this is violence against women, then you are trying very, very hard to delude yourself. And I don’t understand why.

    What’s the problem?

    Well, least of all, he’s a role model who is famous and looked up to. He is also someone who wears a White Ribbon. He claims to stand against violence against women, but he’s literally, by his own words, advocating for it. So not only is he making violent threats against a woman, he’s doing it publicly, as a role model many young boys look up to, he’s calling it good fun- a joke, with Brayshaw and Frawley jumping in to make it group violence. He’s inviting others to join in. He’s literally encouraging others to make jokes like this, and some will interpret it as encouragement to actually commit the violent threats. How do I know this? Because 2 women die every week in Australia and the perpetrators are overwhelmingly men.

    How do you think victims of domestic violence feel, listening to this? It’s not funny. There’s nothing funny about it. It’s ‘funny’ in the same way stabbing a puppy’s eyes out would be. There is something wrong, something very, very wrong, with finding it funny.

    So why do we link his words to these deaths? The most consistent predictor for support of violence by men is their agreement with sexist attitudes. The Australian police commissioners agreed that a culture of hostility to women (such as say, threatening to drown a woman and laughing about it) leads to domestic violence and violence against women.

    When we have a culture that women are worth less, or worthless, then it’s okay to hurt or kill them. When we make jokes about something, it seems more common, more normal. So the more people hear “jokes” like this on the radio, the more common and normal domestic violence seems. The more normal it is to hit a woman, because Eddie joked about it on the radio. And if he joked about dragging her under the water and drowning her, what’s to stop a man from dragging a different woman he’s angry at under the water?

    Men, if you are reading this, please pause. Please think. I’m not out to get you. I’m not blaming you personally. I don’t hate you because you’re a man. And I want to support you in your causes too, because they are also important to me.

    But I don’t want to die.

    I don’t want someone to joke about holding me under the water and drowning me, because that’s somehow okay. I don’t want to think about the fact that you are probably stronger than me, and you could do it- I probably couldn’t fight back. I would die.

    I don’t want to have to worry that if I say something simple, non-violent, non-discriminatory, just my opinion- like “I’m a Power supporter”- that someone disagrees with on whatever basis, that I will be punished with public death threats. That if I do my job and someone doesn’t want me to… what, exist? … then I’ll get death threats. (Don’t say it’s ridiculous- if I politely turn down a request on a dating app, I may well get back “Whatever you stupid b!tch, I’ll f!cking rape you c!nt” as a reply- because people hear this violent language and they think its okay to use in everyday life. People hear Eddie and think if he can threaten to kill someone on national television, their threats to me are just a joke.)

    And please don’t undermine this cause by saying “But … is worse…” or “Well what about the issue of…”. It’s probably important- and it deserves its own campaign. Please campaign separately. Do not undermine one issue with another- let’s work on both of them. They’re both important.

    If we say Eddie’s words are okay here, then we are saying violence is okay. We are saying threats are okay.

    Whether it is to a man or a woman, violent threats in response to a non-threatening comment are not okay. There is nothing funny about threatening to kill someone, regardless of gender.

    But at the end of the day, it is 2 women per week being killed. If you’re a man reading this, it’s unlikely to be you. But it might be me.

    1. No one is saying they’re okay. What we’re doing is pointing out hypocrisy.

      Unfortunately, the hypocrites on this blog claiming it’s all about gender can’t handle having their hypocrisy pointed out to them.

    2. By the way, I’ll just correct your final comment. Men are far more likely to be the victim of homicide than women. It is statistically supported and has always been thus.

      That doesn’t excuse violence against women, but a little less hyperbole would be nice.

      1. “No one is saying they’re okay. What we’re doing is pointing out hypocrisy.
        Unfortunately, the hypocrites on this blog claiming it’s all about gender can’t handle having their hypocrisy pointed out to them.”

        If you’re saying it’s a joke, or it’s free speech (and I don’t know if you are), then yeah, you are implicitly condoning it by undermining efforts to combat it.

        If you think people are being hypocritical about violent attitudes towards men, please, call it out. I’ll support you. But this is specifically about a woman. I wouldn’t go into your argument about Eddie threatening to call the mafia on some guy (or so I heard a rumour about- this may not be true so let’s call it a hypothetical) and say “But once he threatened to drown a woman because that’s worse!” or “Well he’s also drowning women so it doesn’t matter!” I’d say ‘That’s really unacceptable. Let’s make change.’

        “By the way, I’ll just correct your final comment. Men are far more likely to be the victim of homicide than women. It is statistically supported and has always been thus. That doesn’t excuse violence against women, but a little less hyperbole would be nice.”

        I thought it was strongly implied that I meant “killed by domestic violence” but sometimes I forget not everyone is adapt at reading these implied messages. Let me be clear. I meant “But at the end of the day, it is 2 women per week being killed due to domestic violence.”

        There is a distinct difference between domestic violence and homicide, though a similarity is that men are the majority of perpetrators. They are both important issues. If you are concerned about men’s deaths due to homicide, campaign about it. I have no doubt it’s an issue, and it concerns me too. But don’t side track the genuine debate on violence against women to do so. It’s disrespectful to both issues, which should have proper attention.

  26. I heard Eddie’s “apology” this morning and until someone prompted him by asking if he was sorry for making these comments he was going all over the place justifying his actions even when he did “apologise” it came not saying that what he had said was wrong but that it is wrong to say anything that would condone violence so in fact it seems Eddie hasn’t understood that there is no way that these comments can be justified.

    He fails to take responsibility for the fact that he has a high profile media role and due to the roles he holds some people see him as a leader so that when he “jokes” it comes with an extra clout – pun fully intended.

    I grew up in a violent household though it was my mother that was violent but I know that there were many “jokes” made about her behaviour as a way of trying to get it not seen for what it was or to down play it, any joke that talks about inciting violence only has one purpose to make it seem that there are grounds that would make it acceptable.

    Back this up with the comments that Eddie made about “boning” Jessica Rowe and it seems that the really Eddie occassionally does get seen by the public whilst being hidden by the media.

    If he truly got in what bad taste it was for a man to make such a comment then to solicit the support of his buddies in it (who should also hang their heads in shame) he would never have made it.

    Real men take responsibility and real men don’t put down a woman and don’t ever think violence towards them is joke material – the situation it was said in does not make it okay.

  27. This is not about violence towards women. It’s about Caroline V Eddie. It came to light this afternoon that EXACTLY the same joke was made about her on a 3AW panel show, with Caroline PRESENT as a member of the panel.

    Her reaction? Nothing….. Nada.. Zip.

    Yet when Eddie makes the same joke, all hell breaks loose.

    Don’t make this something it isn’t. It’s just an example of colossal hypocrisy writ large.

      1. You are correct. And gender had nothing to do with it.

        McGuire is annoyed because this journo has niggled him and pointed out his stupidity over time. The humour was questionable at best, but to claim his motives were based in misogyny seems pretty far fetched, particularly when his comments about other journalists are considered.

        The ones screaming sexism the loudest are the ones who are making a living from trying to find examples of sexism (always male against female, but never whenever it is female against male) and squawking about it. The ones joining in simply don’t understand the tidy little industry that’s being built up around this issue.

  28. Social media going nuts … bullying, violence against women, footy bogans again … The Rat pack’s brand is on the nose. No one believes the apologies are sincere for a heart beat, just the Brand managers in extreme damage control.
    JB & Macca could buy this kind of attention, and we all know they’re short of coin.

    Right or wrong, my money is on MMM & the AFL doing jack about this, they’ll keep their jobs no worries. Bet the house on it.

  29. Wow look at all the boys club condoning violence against woman and even enjoying these 3 wankers putting a dollar value on it. Doesn’t sound funny to me nor does it seem like feminism going crazy.
    McGuire is a discrace and the scum that enjoy his non stop shit babbling are complete scum also. What man condons this type of reference to a female. Those who do want to wake up to themselves.
    Would be funny if it was your mother/wife/daughter being referenced in manner would if now…..

  30. OK. Apologies issued. Enter the jocks to comfort “Ed, JB, Duck and Spud” who are “also victims here.”

  31. Jane Needham QC: “Every single case of gender-based bullying or workplace harassment I’ve been involved in has used the “banter” defence”.

    1. It’s softcock blokes like you who have allowed the women’s libbers to take control.
      I bet you mop the floor and wash the dishes , all after a hard days work, whilst the missus enjoys a royal lifestyle. Dry the dishes and you might even get lucky tonight.

  32. Eddie said the wrong thing again, oldhabits are difficult to change. People in positions of power and influence need to be more mindful and aware of the ramifications of the words they use. Eddies apology was disingenuous. We all make mistakes, but when this is pointed out, excuses are not acceptable, restitution is needed, and only a genuine apology will do. Women have fought for an equal partnership with men in society, for a better society, Eddies personal attacks on a female journalist that he disagrees with, supported by his 2 mates is just not on. Do it to her face, without your mates, so she can respond you coward.

  33. Congratulations Odie.
    At last someone who can see through all this Women PC crap.
    Indeed it is a big industry.
    No-one ever questions the bitchiness of today’s ‘modern woman’.
    Violence against women always is terrible- but in some cases , understandable .

  34. I think donations to a relevant charity are in order, obviously inappropriate behaviour.

    Now here’s where I get lost with this article:

    The ‘normalising’ argument. What makes you think that people are so malleable that the few minutes of this show would somehow convince them that violence is acceptable?

    Is there any evidence at all that joking about hypothetical violence leads to someone actually perpetuating violence?

    How is domestic violence ‘culturally’ reinforced when it is a jailable offence in our culture and we ostracize such people?

    Does hatred of one woman = hatred of all women?

    How have you evaluated your claim that the harm from these statements outweighs the benefit of the AFL’s events?

    I agree with you that “jock humour” is often obnoxious and problematic, but outside of that this article’s arguments are very vague. Would like to hear from anyone w some insight on my questions

    1. “The ‘normalising’ argument. What makes you think that people are so malleable that the few minutes of this show would somehow convince them that violence is acceptable?”

      Because when something becomes so common it’s normal, it’s no longer a problem. You’ve probably done it yourself- if you’re waiting for the traffic light to turn green at a crossing and everyone else ignores it and crosses, you feel less anxiety at crossing on your own because now it is ‘normal’ or common, and also responsibility for your actions because everyone else is doing it too. This normalisation and diffusion of responsibility has been studied at length.

      “…using sexist humor, offensive and prejudicial humor, jokes promoting destruction to victims of DV, and language in connection with DV allow society to view this type of violence as more acceptable.” (DV = Domestic Violence). http://austinpublishinggroup.com/psychiatry-behavioral-sciences/fulltext/ajpbs-v1-id1018.php

      One of the best predictors of domestic violence in men is how they respond to sexist humour. (Aka those who enjoy, support and perpetuate sexist humour have a higher likelihood of being domestic violence perpetrators.) And it’s not so surprising… in order to make sexist jokes, you have to ignore the fact that the victim of these jokes is a person with real feelings who will be hurt. In the same way, you can then ignore their pain if you physically, financially, sexually or mentally hurt them.

      “Is there any evidence at all that joking about hypothetical violence leads to someone actually perpetuating violence?”

      Australia’s Police Commissioners agree, and if anyone has seen the evidence firsthand, its them. (Also, see above re: predictors for violence)
      https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2014/nov/03/culture-of-hostility-to-women-leads-to-domestic-violence-say-police-chiefs

      “How is domestic violence ‘culturally’ reinforced when it is a jailable offence in our culture and we ostracize such people?”

      First of all, re: Ostracise, well, we don’t do we?
      Because how many men are commenting about how:
      “It’s just a joke!”
      “Get a sense of humour! Jeez can’t say anything these days…”
      “F!cking PC brigade…”

      Hardly “ostracising” them- rather, actively supporting them, and contributing to this culture of violence.

      And that’s not including the men who are distracting from the issue, whether deliberately or not deliberately:
      “So it’s okay for Eddie to be violent against men but suddenly it’s a woman and WOAH!”
      “Women can be violent to women too!”
      “Men have the highest rates of homicide”

      Sure, you might have a point. But please don’t undermine what is a real, actual serious issue getting people KILLED for a petty remark. Please bring your issue up separately and properly in its own forum, where it can be given the attention it deserves.

      Re: Jailable offence
      Ah… what a nice dream that would be.
      Look up Kelly Thompson (http://www.smh.com.au/good-weekend/i-fear-he-may-kill-me-how-the-system-failed-domestic-violence-victim-kelly-thompson-20151117-gl18gy.html) or Sargun Ravi (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-10-30/sargun-ragi-death-highlights-failures-of-police-coroner-finds/6898726).

      Ashlee Savins is still alive but her story highlights the difference between a jailable offence in theory and the reality. (http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/nsw-police-accused-of-failing-19yearold-alleged-domestic-violence-victim-20151214-glngc9.html). Police need more money, more time, more training, more support in order to be able to support victims effectively.

      And the media is often poised to attack the victim, rather than the perpetrator, as in the case of Mayang Prasetyo (https://www.getup.org.au/campaigns/womens-rights/violence-misreported/violence-against-women-tell-the-right-story).

      These stories are EVERYWHERE. Just take the time to look. If you spent 2 seconds googling, you’d have your answer. It’s so overwhelmingly prevalent as to be depressing. It’s terrifying to see this happening again, and again, when all the signs are there.

      “Does hatred of one woman = hatred of all women?”

      No. But a role model publicly saying (by way of joking casually about it) that it’s okay to murder a woman does constitute violence against women, because it does normalise it, it does create this sense of normality and it ‘not being so bad’ and it does lead to women dying. We know this, because already 33 women have been murdered in acts of domestic violence this year alone.

      “How have you evaluated your claim that the harm from these statements outweighs the benefit of the AFL’s events?”

      I actually do not give a f!ck about the benefits of the AFL’s events if it means someone might be murdered as a result. No charity should benefit from assault and murder, and I think these charities would agree.

      “I agree with you that “jock humour” is often obnoxious and problematic, but…”
      Depends what ‘jock’ humour is. If it’s code for other types of ‘humour’, such as sexual harassment/ racial harassment / religious discrimination masquerading as humour, then yeah, it’s super problematic (https://www.deakin.edu.au/news/latest-media-releases/2016-media-releases-archives/counting-the-billion-dollar-cost-of-racism-in-australia). If it’s fart jokes, well, maybe I find it distasteful, but that’s no reason to ban it.

      As a general add on comment, the worst thing I find, when people brandish the words “too politically correct”, is that 9 times out of 10 they’re going to go on just to make a sexist/racist/discriminatory remark. And that’s not being some sort of ‘hero’ crusading against the PC brigade, it’s just being a sexist/racist/discriminatory AND delusional assho!e.

      1. Appreciate the response Carly.

        In your diffused responsibility argument you’re failing to distinguish between joking about violent acts and actual violent acts, of which there is no evidence of a causal link. The studies you posted suggested an association, but not that one causes the other.

        If McGuire etc had assaulted a woman on television rather than made these comments, surely you would expect the overwhelming response to be negative? That would be the accurate parrallel for your diffused responsibility argument and it would be indefensible. Speech does not equal action.

        Regardless of what’s in the media I know that abuse is wrong, as does practically everyone I’ve ever spoken to on the issue. Surely you don’t suggest that we are in the minority here?

        “Re: Ostracize, well, we don’t do we?”. I absolutely ostracize abusers. It would appear you do too, so this comment is confusing. The cases of failed convictions tragically reflect failure by the police and justice system ( the same people whose opinion you take as fact), rather than public sentiment. There are also the cases of the victim feeling pressured to stay with her abuser because of manipulation or fear. Again, this is the fault of the abuser, or perhaps religious obligation. In certain devout religious communities I would agree that there is an abusive culture, elsewhere not so much.

        Domestic violence is not ‘normal’ to normal people. If someone is so unhinged that this broadcast triggers them to kill, I would suggest this would then be an issue of mental health rather than sexist culture.

        1. “Regardless of what’s in the media I know that abuse is wrong, as does practically everyone I’ve ever spoken to on the issue.”

          You make an interesting point. I guess I would say that everyone can parrot “Abuse is wrong” but the definition of what abuse is, that is the tricky part. Look at the comments on this site. I would say that publicly making threatening ‘jokes’ about drowning someone is a type of abuse. Clearly, many people do not.

          What about financial abuse? Verbal abuse? Many of these things are difficult because people disagree on where to draw the line. So I would say it’s not that people don’t know abuse is wrong, it’s that they don’t identify certain things as abuse, while others would identify these things as abuse. “Stop being so PC”, “It’s just a joke! God, get a sense of humour!”, “Free speech is dead”… all of these things are where I would point out- you can say abuse is wrong, but that doesn’t mean you’d stand up to abuse when it happens- or that you’re not part of the problem.

          “Re: Ostracize, well, we don’t do we?”. I absolutely ostracize abusers. It would appear you do too, so this comment is confusing.

          2 people. This is kind of like the “not all men” argument? Some people ostracize abusers. Some don’t. Some don’t recognise abuse for what it is. My point would be the majority should recognise and take action to reform abusers. Ostracizing alone does no good- we need to actually change the culture and behaviour. And I don’t think we have the majority on all these points yet.

          1. You make a good point about abuse in a broader sense. Especially online it seems that people have different definitions of what is deemed abusive. As this discussion was centered on the topic of domestic violence that was what I was referring to when I said the majority would know it’s wrong regardless of the media. Online abuse is still clearly an issue, though generally one with less extreme and immediate consequences ( it also appears to be perpetuated more evenly by males and females) .

            http://www.demos.co.uk/press-release/staggering-scale-of-social-media-misogyny-mapped-in-new-demos-study/

            http://www.pewinternet.org/2014/10/22/online-harassment/

            There are already Violent Offenders reformation programs within our society. Whether or not they receive adequate funding or are effective enough is another question that again involves institutional responsibility moreso than the general public or culture. Crime prevention and rehabilitation is a specialized field, so to put the burden squarely on the whole culture when it is ineffective seems unreasonable. I am of the belief that the non-expert community does have an influence in prevention of domestic violence, just a less powerful one than this article suggests. The primary responsibilities still lie with the individual who commits the physical harm, and then on the specialized institutions put in place to ensure that individual doesn’t commit violent acts again.

          2. “Crime prevention and rehabilitation is a specialized field, so to put the burden squarely on the whole culture when it is ineffective seems unreasonable. I am of the belief that the non-expert community does have an influence in prevention of domestic violence, just a less powerful one than this article suggests. The primary responsibilities still lie with the individual who commits the physical harm, and then on the specialized institutions put in place to ensure that individual doesn’t commit violent acts again.”

            It’s a little difficult to reply to this effectively, because on the one hand you say the non-expert community has an influence, on the other hand, you say putting the burden of crime prevention on the community isn’t reasonable. I’m not arguing with you, just stating my view.

            To this I would reply, the “burden” of not murdering someone rests on the community. I would reply, it’s simple. Tell people it’s unacceptable. The majority of citizens abhorr murder and would never do it. I think you’re not giving the community enough credit.

            When changing community perceptions, for example, with cigarettes, it must be done slowly, based on evidence, and through significant community education. Community leaders need to be onboard- and everyone (or at least the majority) need to get on board.

            I think to say we’re not even going to try (not that I think that’s what you were saying) would be a terrible message that devalues the intelligence of the individual community members, devalues society and relationships, devalues the deep and beautiful relationships men and women can have with men and women, and devalues the life and wellbeing of every person, but especially (based on the numbers) every woman and girl in the community.

  35. Get over it… not many people like her, grow up move on. Let’s be honest 90% of people hope she leaves media and never have to hear or see her again. If you can’t take it don’t dish it then cry poor me

  36. Well she got her 5 seconds of fame it is not gender bullying I don’t know what this country is coming to we will all end up with zippers on our mouths not aloud to say a thing about the opposite sexes (male-female ).as for Holden pulling there sponsorship how can they afford to sponsor when they are begging the Gov, for help ( money)all blown out by the media as all ways

  37. Erin, I know your heart is in the right place but this is typical of Caroline Wilson. Don’t you both realise that by taking the stance on this issue that you have, and creating something that was never there in the first place, you are indirectly contributing to the view that women are an inferior species, not capable of handling themselves in the public arena?
    Caroline Wilson, through her behaviour and attitudes over the years, not her gender, has created a lot of dislike towards her. Somebody else who has also created dislike towards himself, whether justified or not, is Sam Newman. If this exact same joke was made towards Sam, nobody would have batted an eyelid. In fact, everybody would have taken it the way out was intended; as light humour. Even Sam himself would have seen the funny side, which is more than can be said for Caro, who has her own agendas. If the joke was made about Sam, there would have been no manufactured drama created around this issue.

    It seems that the only mistake Eddie McGuire and co made, was treating Caroline Wilson like an equal.

    1. (It seems that the only mistake Eddie McGuire and co made, was treating Caroline Wilson like an equal.) This sounds like as long as you behave like us then your fine, that is how the world is so get use to it. That isn’t equality mate. That’s how you would like it to be in your world. Don’t disrupt the power, stop questioning.

      Can I also say it is part of our culture to belittle people. We are such a insecure and uneducated lot that having a joke on someone else’s expense makes us look great. All because it challenges our conscience we get all defensive and dribble out the same arguments that are really only statements.

      Picking on people because of what they stand for. Who are you to question what upsets Caroline or women in general.

      Oh and Sam gets paid to be a clown or an idiot, he doesn’t get paid to be a reporter or someone who has values and he is not an opinion piece writer. He speak utter nonsense and threatens and belittles people who disagree with him.

    2. The other point is that the comments about Caro definitely had an edge of malice – hatred, almost – whereas had they made them about Sam it would have been all jolly japes and lads in it together for the laugh, not because Sam is a better sport but because they don’t dislike Sam the way they dislike Caro (even though at his worst he’s a far more objectionable person than Caro ever is at her worst!)

    1. Yes I think Malcolm Turnbull really had to make a swift response especially in the light of the heartless suck it up princesses nonsense Julis Bishop came out with. Get on with important issues? I believe this is central to equality in Australia. There is a lot to address in gender inequity which even extends to the way the Family Law courts often fail men and causes a lot of division and suffering. That is out of the scope of this blog but needs to be addressed in the wider forum.
      Interesting to see that in the football world denigration of umpires is dealt with swiftly harshly and with huge financial penalties even when it was in error, immediately rescinded and apologised for unreservedly. $80,000 50,000 from club and 30,000 from player. Not like denigration of women which was accepted as trivial by Govt Julie Bishop and an apology had to dragged out of eddie suppisedly at the threat of losing soonsorship. Big money. Good on Holden for looking at the matter and the footy club(?) mentioned on the news supporting good attitudes to women.

  38. Enjoy your 15 minutes Erin (and the website hits) as that’s what you’re really about. It’s a disgrace that you have manipulated a bit of banter into something of a world news event, just so you and your women’s pc industry can profit.
    Why don’t you genuinely help those suffering from dv, rather than pretending you care.Typical of you and your hash tag mates. As for Caro, she is lapping it all up. At least Mel Mclauchlan reacted like a lady in the aftermath of the Chris G comments, and didn’t perpetuate the drama herself. Contrast Caro.

    1. Being submissive and prepared to take any crap that men throw at them (which seems to be how you prefer your ‘ladies’) still wasn’t enough to prevent Mel from copping it on social media. Gayle himself said in a recent interview that she came out of it worse than he did. How does that work?

    2. Oh yeah Billy Blogs, this is exactly what Caroline Wilson wanted. Don’t be ridiculous. This is the last thing she wanted. She wasn’t the one that made this issue public. But once it did, what was she supposed to do? She’s a media personality, she can’t just ignore an issue that she’s at the centre of.
      Do you disagree with Malcolm Turnbull when he says, “Let me say this to you: disrespecting women does not always result in violence against
      women. But all violence against women begins with disrespecting women.”?
      Do you also see him as a part of the ‘women’s pc industry’ that you think is such a problem?

  39. If it was a man, it would be funny. Eddie should push a sexual discrimination complaint to the AFL. This is clearly sexist bigotism at its best.

  40. What a circus.

    If they had of said “let’s hold careys, purples…etc” head down it would of been good ol’ banter, but no. Women can’t cop the same treatment, whether they deserve it or not, they’re sacrosanct, untouchable and no matter how hard and often they twist and turn, no matter how much some people might like to give them a verbal jab for it, nope, not allowed. This flame-off isn’t for women, its for the media for beating up such a story. Well done, women’s equality is now that bit further off and I bet those that see the disparity in this thank the media for creating desperate headlines.

    Media = Irresponsible idiots.

    1. “If they had of said “let’s hold careys, purples…etc” head down it would of been good ol’ banter, but no.”
      I disagree. It’s not funny, and it’s not okay, to make jokes about killing women or men.

      “Women can’t cop the same treatment, whether they deserve it or not, they’re sacrosanct, untouchable and no matter how hard and often they twist and turn, no matter how much some people might like to give them a verbal jab for it, nope, not allowed.”

      Well, thanks for judging every single woman on the basis of the reactions to this. That’s called sexist stereotyping. There are many men I disagree with, but I can think of them all as individual people with different personalities and treat them accordingly. The fact that you seemingly can’t, is disturbing.

      “Well done, women’s equality is now that bit further off …”
      And thank you for (as a man) deciding to postpone women’s equality because you don’t agree with this opinion.

      Your words show you have a problem with women. I hope you can change that.

      1. Thanks for the laugh.
        Carly you have taken so much out of context, but that’s ok because you have an agenda, I don’t.

        I guess when an individual repeatedly betrays trust or slanders you publicly on more than one occasion some people are above letting a sense of anger, annoyance, etc towards that person. I’m not above that. Many people annoy me, but its usually a one-off so i move on, don’t worry about it, but, should an individual do it repeatedly and often I myself would not be above saying something (not doing something) nasty or very un-PC about them….simply because I’m tired of their crap.

        It’s great that you love everyone Carly (except me :)….) but I guess you’ve evolved above petty emotion or remonstration (oop, scratch that last word).

        Thanks for the insult Carly, please go hug a tree.

        1. “I guess when an individual repeatedly betrays trust or slanders you publicly… (etc) ”

          Fair point, Brad. In fact Eddie could have done a lot to diffuse the backlash if he’d straight out admitted that he went too far but that he lost it on account of so many media drubbings by Caro. Instead he tried to pass it off as a harmless bit of larking around, when clearly it was a lot more to do with anger than humour. His ego wouldn’t allow him to admit that Caro had got to him.

  41. Hi Erin,
    I’m interested to understand why you neglected to mention the comments made by Dwayne Russell and Tony Shaw in Caroline Wilson’s presence on 3AW on the same day as these comments were made?

    Were you not aware of these comments, or do you consider both incidents vastly different such that what Tony Shaw said was not ‘normalising attitudes of violence and disrespect towards women’, despite the theme of those comments if not identical at least of a very similar theme?

    1. Hi,

      At the time I wrote the piece, I wasn’t aware of the comments. I’ve since heard them and while I agree that they are also totally unacceptable, I do think there is some difference having the person in the room with you: it gives them a voice in the conversation that Wilson did not have when she was spoken about in absentia. That power difference matters.

      1. Ah just find any point of difference and we’ll go with that.
        What about when that poor excuse who answers to the name Clementine tweets ‘kill all men’? I guess that’s different too.

        1. Nope.

          ‘Kill all men’ or any variation is completely unacceptable also. It’s not a funny joke.
          If I saw it, I would call it out.

          1. Funny how you only see what you want to see. Never heard of that demon of the sisterhood who answers to the name of Clementine? You probably read her blogs every day.

          2. Billy Blogs says:

            “Funny how you only see what you want to see. Never heard of that demon of the sisterhood who answers to the name of Clementine? You probably read her blogs every day.”

            I think “you only see what you want to see” could be a case made about many people from both genders.

            “You probably read her blogs every day.”

            How would you feel if I made a blanket statement about your character without knowing anything about you?

            I’m not a regular reader of hers, though I have read an occasional article. If she did make that genuine assertion (feel free to link me) than I’d be disappointed. Furthermore, I’d feel that statement undermined further things she had to say because I don’t believe in extremism.

    1. Those murders were, of course, horrific. Nobody would suggest otherwise.

      But it’s also worth noting that nobody here has said men perpetrate all Domestic Violence, just the vast majority of it. That is backed up by substantial data.

      In the US, where this incident occurred, most mass-shootings (which occur on a near-daily basis) are committed by family members and the overwhelming majority of these are committed by men.

      Of course women also sometimes commit these acts. The women who do so are criminals who deserve the punishment they get. Restricting access to firearms is also an important part of this conversation.

      But to suggest the comparatively-unusual incidents in which women are perpetrators somehow undermines the evidence that the overwhelming majority of these acts are committed by men is just incorrect.

      1. I think what is really missing from these discussions about men committing acts of violence, which is always mentioned when women do it, is the underlying factor: Mental Illness. I agree, it is universally accepted that men do commit more acts of violence than women, the issue will never be resolved or changed until the root cause is identified and treated. I would suggest that anybody, man or woman, who commits extreme acts of violence against another human being, man or woman, suffers from some form of mental illness. Nobody of a sound mind would inflict that kind of harm on another person, let alone a loved one. It is never going to be helpful or effective by turning these issues into a gender issue. “Violence against women” as a campaign, or topic of discussion, will never get anywhere because it is labelled in a way that does not attack the heart of the issue, and creates more division than unity. Perhaps we should be discussing “Violence and Mental Illness” which does not discriminate based on gender and tackles this issue with men and women united together, instead of creating an Us vs Them mentality.

        1. Perhaps you should ask yourself why you won’t take the accurate description of “violence against women” seriously? Why is not being seen to be divisive more important to you than actually addressing a real problem?

          Also, the mental health argument is deeply flawed. First, people with mental health problems are far more likely to be victims of violence than perpetrators, and the vast majority of people with mental illnesses manage not to murder people. While good mental health treatment is absolutely essential to treating the problem, cultural attitudes are part of it too.

          1. Well. There you go. Your agenda comes out louder than the actual words you speak. I suggest a realistic measure and it goes in one ear and out the other because it doesn’t resonate with your agenda. You have a very narrow view of what “mental illness” actually is. No man who commits violence against women is of sound mind. Period. Violence against women is a symptom of a deeper problem. The only way to solve this problem is to treat the cause. Not the symptoms. Unfortunately, this may involve compassionately treating the perpetrators like actual human beings with an illness instead of the demonic bastards that your agenda desperately paints them out to be.

          2. You didn’t suggest a solution, you blamed mental health, which while absolutely an element of the discussion, is not the whole of it: otherwise, why aren’t mentally ill women killing in similar numbers?

            It’s because a culture of toxic masculinity influences people with underlying mental health problems. It’s not an either/or: it’s an and.

          3. The solution that I offered was to focus on the real problem rather than create a problem where there is none in order to make sense of the behaviour of some individuals. Yeah, I’ll accept that this culture of “toxic masculinity”, as you call it is not ideal. Although I don’t think the term suits what you are talking about as well as it could. Perhaps “Macho Bravado Bullshit” is better suited as this is what you’re actually referring to. Masculinity on its own is certainly not toxic. What we really need to do is redefine the understanding of the term “masculinity” and what it means to be masculine. And the “macho bravado bullshit” element is certainly not a part of it. I’ll also add that the macho bravado element causes as much suffering to males, if not more, as it does to females; the female suffering being a direct flow on effect of that (ref. The New Manhood – Steve Biddulph). Once again this points back to mental illness on the part of the individual. Blaming everything on a cultural problem actually takes responsibility away from the individual: “It’s not my fault, its society’s fault… That’s what my social worker said” is used too often these days to avoid taking personal responsibility. The individuals responsible need to be held accountable instead of hiding behind excuses such as what you’re putting forth. Blaming a culture of “toxic masculinity” for an individual’s misdemeanors is classic enablement 101.

          4. Are you seriously going to do this? Side step the issue and instead focus on the perception that my choice of wording was perhaps not strong enough. I honestly gave you more credit than that.

          5. So there’s this hormone called testosterone. Then there’s the imperative for men to be ‘alpha’ males – in response to the expectations of women no less than men. And then there’s the stuff that can happen in life to mess you up in addition to any genetic or physiological or psychological imbalances and imperfections, and it’s not hard to see how you can end up with what crime writer James Ellroy (whose mother was murdered when he was ten) refers to “male energy displaced”. I strongly recommend his autobiographical work ‘My Dark Places’, the most compelling study I’ve read on this all too common affliction with a multitude of different manifestations.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *