by Walking Far Woman © 2009-2010
March 2, 2010
March 30, 2010
March 12, 2010
Transparent Abbott
It is so obvious with Abbott that his new promise to women about Maternity Leave, made without the knowledge of his own party, is just a ploy to win women’s votes. Don’t be fooled. There is much more to lose, especially since he intends to tax big business to pay for the scheme.
I myself don’t think “ah, poor big business..”, after all, usually their yearly profits are humongous. But the fact is that they will filter down this extra tax they have to pay to the consumers.
So when Abbott says that there is not going to be a great big tax to cover women’s Maternity Leave, he is lying. He is always lying just to grab votes. It wasn’t that long ago, when he was the Health Minister in the Howard’s government, that he said about the same issue that ‘over my dead body’ he would pass such a legislation.Transparent Abbott. His insincerity is incredibly damming to him. Who knows what he would do in the future?
Rudd’s plan for Maternity Leave is 18 weeks, six weeks less than Abbott’s proposal, but it is fully costed and big business won’t pass down the cost to consumers. Yes it’s time women had Maternity Leave across the board, but not as such high cost to the community.
It is most disturbing to find this man throwing initiatives left, right and centre, without forethought. The fact that he didn’t consult his party is most telling: he is a ‘One Man Band’; he doesn’t follow any democratic process. It’s very reminiscent of the Howard’s years, when nothing much was put into infrastructures, the health system, education and certainly there was no raise for pensioners.
It’s important that we tend to our infrastructures, ailing health system and education, so that our children can remain competitive in the world.
Abbott the Obvious.
Squawking Fire Woman & Walks Far Woman
March 3, 2010
No radical feminist
There are no radical feminists here; men and women are as equally beautiful in their pure state of harmony and peace. They are as important and as precious as one another on this Earth.
Tony Abbott’s philosophy is offensive to woman. His particular psychology chooses to pigeon-hole a woman, in order to put her in her place. It has its roots in the dark ages. Tony Abbott is such a man! He endeavors as much as he can to hide his deep belief that woman has a particular place.
It is most disturbing; the feminine raises up and say NO to Tony Abbott as Prime Minister. We are here to put our view forward for this cause. Everyone has a right to their views. The Prime Minister of Australia has a certain power, a certain presence. In truth he or she must be above reproach. Not perfect, as none of us are, but he or she must hold values that pertain to all human beings, be they women or men.
It was most offensive to women to hear that Abbott counseled his daughters to remain virgins until marriage, to give the gift of their virginity to their husbands. This in itself is his opinion and he has the right to have it. What is offensive is the fact that he did not say to the sons of Australia that they should keep their virginity as a gift to their wives too. This is very telling, why omit this information? Ah, could it be that she was taken from the rib of man as his belonging? Shame on you, Abbott, for putting this one-sided view to the young women of our country, women who have fought hard for what equality they have.
To all the daughters of Australia: take up your iron and iron your way to freedom! This is where Abbott would have women be: in their kitchens, ironing, cooking for the man, greeting him at the door smiling, her gift of virginity always a remainder of her purity.
So, woman, stay home, iron, bake the cookies, keep your virginity; make Abbott happy! Tell your female children Abbott’s philosophy; tell them to tell their female children and we can march back through the past, to the Good Old Days.
What does this man Abbott stands for? He is either a smiling fool or just plain stupid, out of touch. Did he hold onto his virginity as a gift to his wife? Obviously not; he thought he might have a child out-of-wedlock, which proved to be not true. He must have done the act, gave up his virginity before marriage. What double standards does he preach? Yes a man of double standards; in my view a chauvinist!
by Squawking Fire Woman
Letssaynotoabbott's Blog 