Friday, July 9, 2010

Mallard Thinks Hand Wringers Are Mainstream

The squawks, screams and shrieks of self inflated outrage can be heard from the roof tops as the politically correct panty wringers move into top gear turbocharged hyperbole. Andy Haden is up their noses again with another simple little home truth. They don't like it when you stick them home truths up 'em. Charlotte Dawson agrees with Haden so what will John Key say now? Will it be Charlotte or Andy?

The farce continues.

The most bizarre comment of the lot comes from Trevor - every lady's friend when he's in the mood - Mallard who now conflates left wing socialist feminazi thought with 'mainstream.'

"....[Haden].......he's not diplomatic and he says what he thinks and sometimes, when you are representing New Zealand as an ambassador, you just can't do that you've got to bite your tongue."

Even more so when your views were not mainstream, Mr Mallard said.

Mallard wouldn't know mainstream if he was drowning in the Rakaia River during the late spring thaw.


gravedodger said...

Now theres a thought, an oft remembered solution of a mate of mine whose sister in law was having a bit of grief dumping a leftover suggested he took him duckshooting now if somebody could take the "mus" salmon fishing at the Rakaia Mouth with a big surf.

Anonymous said...


Looks like your bosom buddy Andy is going to be given the chop from World Cup employment.

Oh dear how sad never mind.......

Anonymous said...

if chicks go wearing short skirts and looking to fuck all blacks don't come crying to me when they get a little bit more than they hoped for...silly sluts shouldn't be so....slutty

Andrei said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Andrei said...

"Mallard Thinks Hand Wringers Are Mainstream"

So does Murray McCully apparently

kehua said...

It`s a sad old Country where a bloke says the truth about the `groupie slappers` and gets castigated and then the lying fucken IPCC conmen get believed to the extent that it will cost us millions.????????

DenMT said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

Coward McCully.

Adolf Fiinkensein said...

In case DenMT is wondering, he broke a few rules. Gratuitous insults of one's blog host, punctuated with obscenities does not a comment make.

Anonymous said...

'When you views were not mainstream'

What a piece of politcally correct excrement Mallard is.

Mrs Danvers

Psycho Milt said...

Mallard's perfectly correct. Blaming rape victims for the crime isn't mainstream and hasn't been for a while now. Anon at 5.03 offers an excellent summing up of Haden's comments - someone like this isn't an ambassador for anything in NZ, other than that there are still some extremely fucked-up living here.

Andrei said...

Slinging the R word around Milt is an insult to those who truly have been raped.

If a woman gets drunk and goes upstairs with a sportsman and then later - sometimes much later claims rape she is perhaps in some ways author of her own misfortune.

Its all well and good to think we should treat women with respect and dignity and I think we should but women too should behave like ladies.

Chivalry is a two way street - I'm all for it but to tear men apart for bad behaviour and while sanctioning that of women stinks.

Psycho Milt said...

Andrei: Haden says this: "...some of these girls are targeting rugby players and targeting sportsmen and they do so at their peril..."

I don't see any reasonable interpretation of that other than that if they end up getting raped it's their own fault. Do you have some other meaning you attach to it?

Brian Long said...

@Milt. I think the "targeting" that Haden is referring to could be interpreted as the ex-post-facto allegation of rape (for whatever reason) when consent, or a reasonable belief therein, existed at the time of the act.

I still think Haden would have been better to keep his mouth shut. It's true that Hitler murdered Jews, the KKK lynched blacks, and acting promiscuously makes a person more likely to be a victim of rape. But those aren't things that you would bring up in conversation. Especially if you're a national representative.

Andrei said...

On planet earth when a nubile young girl, who has been drinking, goes off to a virile young man's (who has also been drinking) room what do expect will happen?

How often do you suppose that the evening will end with a game of mah jong?

How may young women of the 20th or 21st centuries would be so naive that they might not realize what was in the young mans's mind?

Give me a break - I don't approve you understand but this is something that happens every weekend all over this land.

Now one or both parties may have regrets after woulds but I put it to you that if a young womean is opposed to sex with a man should should avoid being in a compromising situation in the first place ie not go to his room alone with him.

Aint rocket science

MikeG said...

Haden was comparing Brooke's alleged activity with Hugh Grant's encounter with a prostitute - somewhat different I think, and for me that is why Haden should be sacked.

ZenTiger said...

For me there are two areas: consequences and blame. The consequences of this girl's actions fall heavily on her own shoulders, as Andrei outlines. She was in a position to avoid this outcome earlier, but unfortunately, she did not.

The *blame* however, falls 100% on the rugby player if her story is true (we should probably give the man a right to a trial first). If she is literally comatose from drink, she cannot consent and therefore any sort of sexual contact is rape. If she can't consent, it is hands off. End of story.

I note that if I point out this distinction on feminist sites or the left wing liberals who wonder why their ideal promiscuous world has gone wrong, they get very upset at trying to entertain the above distinction. "Does a man who gets raped judged by what he might be wearing?" they thunder, and then it all goes off the rails....

There was a story in my local paper a while ago.

A 10 year old boy was mugged and beaten walking home alone at 11pm at night. I wondered to myself why he was out so late, and why an adult wasn't accompanying him.

Am I blaming him for the attack? No. 100% blame falls on the attackers? The consequences though are largely falling on him.

Therefore, given it is natural to wonder if there are aspects of that situation, no matter how unfair, I as a parent could have controlled to get a better outcome I would have to conclude that I could have made sure he was escorted home or driven home or home earlier etc. Some situation are not reasonably avoidable, and some are. That one was. Blame to the attacker, consequences to the victim, what could the victim done differently to avoid this, if anything given we can't get to the attackers (actually, chances are they have offended before, on other matters and they get off too lightly so they keep going, and that also may have prevented this situation - I consistently argue on that basis too, so no hypocrisy there). Pretty straight forward.

In the current case - Blame, 100% the rapist. Was this a situation that could have been avoided though? Yes, and I wonder if people can see the difference without getting stuck on the "you are blaming the women/child/victim mentality"?

As for Haden, I suspect his intent was to talk more about consequences than blame. However, he's managed to imply that he believes the female to be a liar and he's trivialized rape in doing so. It's no surprise he has to step down.

Psycho Milt said...

I agree. Feminists generally don't, with bells on. It's one of those areas like "Does my bum look big in this?" in which simply stating the truth can bring bitter recriminations down on your head. To my mind, it's a no-brainer that putting yourself in the situation these girls did is depressingly likely to result in waking up to find some creep using you like a tissue - doesn't matter that you should be able to get drunk without people taking advantage, that you should be able to walk the streets at night without being mugged, yadda yadda, the fact is there's a risk in doing so because criminals exist. This seems to be a no-go area on feminist blogs, however.