Prime Minister of Australia and misogynist

[Katzchen24]

It's been pointed out that the logo for the Women's Network in the Australian Prime Minister's Office looks like a massive set of male genitalia. Judge for yourself.

 

 

Scomo likes women. He wants to  see women do better, "but we don't want to see women rise only on the basis of others doing worse." (Taken from his International Women's Day speech in 2019). Seems like the dick and balls is just to remind us girlies that the men always come first.

[Ozlsn]

Replying to this as it seems like a good place to vent about the defamation trial at which ScoMo was a witness. The trial was brought by a Senator from the former Liberal government (Linda Reynolds) against a former staffer of hers (Brittany Higgins) over tweets.

The whole thing has been a total WTAF from the start - the case was essentially triggered by Higgins being raped by another staffer in Reynold's office, and the tweets referred to the lack of support and a perceived cover up from the government and Reynolds about that. The "evidence" of defamation presented has been ludicrous, and frankly has done more to destroy Reynold's public reputation than the tweets could have.

Quick dot point of WTAF moments in spoiler.

Spoiler

*after the allegations were made Reynolds interviewed Higgins in the same office where it took place. Nothing quite says supporting a staff member like being oblivious to how that might affect them.

*the office and the couch were steam cleaned on Reynolds instructions before police had been contacted.

*Reynolds shared documents marked as privileged and confidential with a journalist who went on to write a series of articles critical of Higgins. Neither Reynolds or the journalist apparently thought that was an issue, both should have been aware of what the terms mean.

*Reynolds texted the defense lawyer in the original rape trial and kept up correspondence during the trial. Her husband was also present at the trial, no one is entirely sure why. Allegedly Reynolds and her husband did not talk about the trial.

*Reynolds was upset that Higgins took a jacket from the donation pile to wear out of the office after she was found there unconscious and naked. She referred to the jacket a lot.

*Reynolds called Higgins a "lying cow" in front of other staff while watching a media interview with her.

*Reynold's lawyer summed up the defamation case with "Ms Higgins arrogantly, from the sanctity of France, claims the status of the person most seriously affected by this matter and trivialises the hurt to others". The rape victim. Was not the person most seriously affected - obviously the person whose feeling were hurt by tweets is. This was in a closing statement in a court of law.

The graphic in the post above also came about as a direct result of the original rape case (mistrial due to juror accessing media reports and bringing them into the jury, second trial didn't proceed due to concerns for the mental health of Higgins), and nothing that has happened in that case, a subsequent defamation case brought against media organisations by the rapist (he lost and continues to deny everything despite the judge in that case basically finding it happened), a case against the lead prosecutor, a defamation case now being launched by the lead prosecutor, or this current case has led me to believe that Higgins was originally well supported or that the Morrison government's later response wasn't rooted in fairly deep misogyny. 

As to ScoMo testifying that "they were worried they might lose her" as a result of the stress about Reynolds - he demoted her from her position (which is when she was allegedly hospitalised) and he couldn't stand her. Most hypocritical testimony I have ever seen.

[Katzchen24]

I must admit to being totally baffled by Reynolds’ actions. The perpetrator (I refuse to name him) managed to make himself look even worse than he already did by going to court, so how does she think this is going to look good. 
 

It’s enraging that Reynolds is ok with punching down like this. She was a minister FFS, she was a woman in a position of power and chose to use that power in the worst possible way. She could have done so much good by showing that she cared about the safety of her employees and demonstrated by example that SA was not tolerated. Reynolds is a massive piece of shit and I hope she loses what little reputation she has left. 

[Ozlsn]

3 minutes ago, Katzchen24 said:

Reynolds is a massive piece of shit and I hope she loses what little reputation she has left. 

Oh I think she's well on the way to that. Her most recent comments she comes across as being after the money, which fits given her focus on the compensation. It's always projection with that mob.

5 minutes ago, Katzchen24 said:

The perpetrator (I refuse to name him) managed to make himself look even worse than he already did

Although it happily allowed us to stop using the word alleged as a result of the defamation case.

[Mrs Ms]

I read this shortly after you first posted it and have spent the last 2 hours trying to get her actions to make sense.
I haven’t followed the news past the initial rape allegation. Who thinks these actions could possibly come across as anything else then horrendous? Who is this callous about a fellow human being? (especially a fellow female in a rape case) 

I want to rage, cry, smack my forehead and roll my eyes all at once.

ScoMo made my skin crawl whenever he and Jacinda Ardern were pictured together, but now that we have Chris Luxon being a buffoon while representing us abroad, Anthony Albanese seems so nice in comparison…  

[Katzchen24]

1 hour ago, Ozlsn said:

Although it happily allowed us to stop using the word alleged as a result of the defamation case.

So good! 

And I am enraged again. I went to that bastion of scholarly reporting, Wikipedia, and her entry states that "She was also appointed to represent Australia on the Interparliamentary Taskforce on Human Trafficking and subsequently became leader of the taskforce's Working Group on Orphanage Trafficking. In August 2024, following reporting around misconduct in historical adoption of South Korean children, she stated that the Australian government should suspend all intercountry adoptions pending a parliamentary inquiry into the "need and ethics" of the practice" (bold is mine).

Ethics?? A woman who behaved so badly about SA in her office assigned to a taskforce on human trafficking?  Then to be concerned about the ethics of another practice which exploits women? What an absolute disgrace. Of course, earlier in her bio it states that she is governed by her Christian faith so the hypocrisy is not unexpected.

[Lavenderdilly]

Apologies posted on wrong thread

Edited September 7 by Lavenderdilly

[WannabeHistorian]

5 hours ago, Katzchen24 said:

So good! 

And I am enraged again. I went to that bastion of scholarly reporting, Wikipedia, and her entry states that "She was also appointed to represent Australia on the Interparliamentary Taskforce on Human Trafficking and subsequently became leader of the taskforce's Working Group on Orphanage Trafficking. In August 2024, following reporting around misconduct in historical adoption of South Korean children, she stated that the Australian government should suspend all intercountry adoptions pending a parliamentary inquiry into the "need and ethics" of the practice" (bold is mine).

Ethics?? A woman who behaved so badly about SA in her office assigned to a taskforce on human trafficking?  Then to be concerned about the ethics of another practice which exploits women? What an absolute disgrace. Of course, earlier in her bio it states that she is governed by her Christian faith so the hypocrisy is not unexpected.

Oh no, you misunderstand. She doesn't give a s*** about those kids. She just doesn't want black and brown kids living in her country. But she can't say that of course, so she uses "ethics" as a cover.

Edited September 7 by WannabeHistorian

[Katzchen24]

So more Linda Reynolds WTAF moments. According to an article in the Guardian, she has been given approval to claim legal assistance from the Cwlth in a case she brought to the National Anti-Corruption Commission regarding the settlement with Higgins. Reynolds made the referral to the NACC on the grounds that the agreement signed with Higgins did not allow her (Reynolds) to defend herself in the matter and was therefore somehow corrupt?

Seriously, I just want this woman to fvck off and never be heard of again. 

 

 

[Ozlsn]

23 hours ago, Katzchen24 said:

Reynolds made the referral to the NACC on the grounds that the agreement signed with Higgins did not allow her (Reynolds) to defend herself in the matter and was therefore somehow corrupt?

Why would she even need to defend herself in a compensation hearing?  Is this an admission that she did in fact screw it up at best, engage in a conspiracy at worst? Why would this even be taken up by the NACC? I swear Reynolds is developing paranoia, she is convinced everyone is out to get her while not appreciating that her own actions have caused a lot of her problems.

And why the hell are we even paying for this? If they decline to hear it can costs be paid by her?

Edited September 14 by Ozlsn

[Womble]

It’s clear that Linda Reynolds took the compensation payment to Brittany Higgins as a personal slight on her capability as a manager.

 It’s interesting, because I never thought that. There were well publicised culture problems at Parliament House, and I never thought too much about Reynolds at the time. Note I am though and she is not looking good. Whining about a borrowed jacket and saying she suffered more than a young rape victim.

she’s not doing her public image any good. but maybe she doesn’t care, as long as she gets the money.

 

[Ozlsn]

1 hour ago, Womble said:

she’s not doing her public image any good. but maybe she doesn’t care, as long as she gets the money.

I feel like she's fixated on the compensation and Higgins as having somehow wronged her by 1. Having the temerity to be raped in her office; 2. Having the temerity to first not want to involve the police, then to change her mind and then to go public; 3. To have the temerity to express her opinion and feelings about how things were handled by Reynolds and to do so publicly; and 4. To get a compensation payment as a result of how certain things were handled, that Reynolds absolutely believes was a vendetta against her personally by Higgins and the ALP.

There is online speculation that Reynolds and the rapist had had an affair - personally I doubt that, I think him using Reynold's office was a giant "fuck you" to his boss, who he disliked and who was also a woman (based on some of the later revelations out of that particular workplace he wouldn't have been the only one with that particular issue.)

I don't think it's about the money at this point, it's about Reynolds wanting to punish Higgins as much as she can and the payout is a target because Reynolds feels it was "undeserved".

Between that and the most recent revelations about the cosy relationship between Newscorp and certain legal figures I wonder a lot about what else is going to come out here. It's not a "perception of bias" when there's evidence to support that it is in fact biased conduct.