Support NeoGAF

[mjontrix]

I just dont know how you can place any blame on toys of any sort for domestic violence, people who do stuff like that are fucked in the head, toys have nothing at all to do with it. People are too quick to blame something else for their issues.

Why dampen the fun of toys for 99% of kids who enjoy them as designed- to play with.

Agreed. Stretching toys to be the cause of DV is pretty extreme. The greens aren't doing any good going for it. It just alienates them more with mainstream views.

I'd prefer if they spent their time going after gambling and alcohol instead - a far, far, faaaaaaar greater cause of it.

 

[Jintor]

It is bad politics, I agree to that. And pokies and alcohol are definitely a bigger problem than kid's toys.

 

[Box of Bunnies]

Why dampen the fun of toys for 99% of kids who enjoy them as designed- to play with.

That this is what you're getting out of the idea speaks (Tonka) truckloads.

 

[Jintor]

By the by, today's shennanigans in Question Time are pretty bloody amusing

 

[Fredescu]

I'd prefer if they spent their time going after gambling and alcohol instead - a far, far, faaaaaaar greater cause of it.

I mean, I think you're right, but "going after alcohol" isn't exactly going to make the mainstream fall in love with them either.

 

[wonzo]

I'd prefer if they spent their time going after gambling and alcohol instead - a far, far, faaaaaaar greater cause of it.

it's almost as if people can do multiple things at the same time

 

[mjontrix]

I mean, I think you're right, but "going after alcohol" isn't exactly going to make the mainstream fall in love with them either.

Frame it as DV, push towards women. Easy, very strong.

it's almost as if people can do multiple things at the same time

Focusing no a few key issues is more effective then a scattershot which hits many but barely punches a hole.

Let's be realistic - most Australians are going to find the Greens approach on toys and gender to be far-fetched - an image that the Greens should be trying to remove. Otherwise they won't get enough mainstream support which is what we need if we want to try to beat the two-party system.

 

[jgminto]

I just dont know how you can place any blame on toys of any sort for domestic violence, people who do stuff like that are fucked in the head, toys have nothing at all to do with it. People are too quick to blame something else for their issues.

Why dampen the fun of toys for 99% of kids who enjoy them as designed- to play with.

Kids aren't going to have less fun with toys that aren't marketed to a specific gender. The kids who will have less fun are kids that enjoy toys marketed at another gender that get picked on and ridiculed because of it.

 

[wonzo]

Let's be realistic - most Australians are going to find the Greens approach on toys and gender to be far-fetched - an image that the Greens should be trying to remove. Otherwise they won't get enough mainstream support which is what we need if we want to try to beat the two-party system.

Given that they're already stigmatised by the "average am radio listening strayan" for beeing refugee lovin tree huggin poofters i really don't think this is gonna hurt them at all in the long run

not every party needs to cripple itself with realpolitik obsessed pissweakitis

 

[Fredescu]

not every party needs to cripple itself with realpolitik obsessed pissweakitis

Exactly, if they're content with 10% of the vote election after election, they should just keep doing what they're doing.

 

[Dryk]

By the by, today's shennanigans in Question Time are pretty bloody amusing

I wonder once his PMship is behind him whether he'll still think that his style of Opposition was a good idea

 

[wonzo]

Exactly, if they're content with 10% of the vote election after election, they should just keep doing what they're doing.

as the conservative baby boomers die off and australia continues to shifts to the left it'll be a hell of a lot larger than ~10% as time goes on

 

[mjontrix]

We have a minister for education who is doing more texting than Shane Warne.

/dead

EDIT: Pyne is desperate for these education reforms to pass - clearly the Lib donators want their money's worth.

 

[Fredescu]

australia continues to shifts to the left

Do you believe this? Say something to make me believe it too because I'd love to.

 

[hidys]

Do you believe this? Say something to make me believe it too because I'd love to.

I frankly don't believe this.

Australians just don't like it when you cut their social services, which is good but it doesn't necessarily indicate that the population is shifting left.

EDIT: actually if we are talking about the future than yeah, maybe.

 

[wonzo]

Do you believe this? Say something to make me believe it too because I'd love to.

the anu has a trends in australians politics series they update after every election and it's shown an overall shift to the left over the past few decades despite some bumps along the way.

it's also shown an increasing dislike of every single political party in australia other than the nationals. lol

 

[SmartBase]

as the conservative baby boomers die off and australia continues to shifts to the left it'll be a hell of a lot larger than ~10% as time goes on

Those same baby boomers pass down their outdated ideology to their spawn, you won't be seeing any significant shift in this country.

 

[D.Lo]

as the conservative baby boomers die off and australia continues to shifts to the left it'll be a hell of a lot larger than ~10% as time goes on

Lol us lefty pinkos have been waiting for the 'right wing oldies' to die off for 200 years (since Marx).

The public has been mildly leaning left socially for a while (e.g. women, gays etc), but economically and culturally (e.g. multiculturalism, class issues, privatisation etc) are very happy to veer right.

 

[Fredescu]

EDIT: actually if we are talking about the future than yeah, maybe.

Maaaaybe I could be convinced that some of that Gen X cynicism will prevent at least some of their (our) natural shift to the right as we get older... but it is the truth that the more invested you get in a "system" the more defensive you get of it. I don't think the general march to the right is boomer specific. But! Maybe increasing inequality could do that. That will take decades though.

the anu has a trends in australians politics series they update after every election and it's shown an overall shift to the left over the past few decades despite some bumps along the way.

Thanks I'll have a read. Will report back if I breathe in the hopium.

 

[Elaugaufein]

This is the Green's press release

Tah, that's about what I thought. Well intentioned, reasonable and harmless but politically unwise, given how easy it is to twist it.

 

[Rizzi]

Tone has waded in. As he does.



http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/...irls-pm-dismisses-gender-neutral-toy-campaign

My head hurts.

 

[wonzo]

Those same baby boomers pass down their outdated ideology to their spawn, you won't be seeing any significant shift in this country.

i can't quite dig up the demographics right now (rip pollytics) but a small example of the age demographic shifts would be this study which found lowering the voting age would benefit the greens a little bit at the expense of the coalition. it's not a big change but it's definitely there

The public has been mildly leaning left socially for a while (e.g. women, gays etc), but economically and culturally (e.g. multiculturalism, class issues, privatisation etc) are very happy to veer right.

see the anu paper above as it's really not as simple as that

i mean, unions have taken a beating but so has the view on business and there's been a shift to the left on issues such as taxing the rich (even though it's not quite over the line yet!) and immigration is seen in a more positive light overall in spite of fear mongering over A BIG STRAYA by peeps all over the political spectrum (and yes that includes all the malthusian stans at the greens, those fuckers)

 

[Myansie]

I just dont know how you can place any blame on toys of any sort for domestic violence, people who do stuff like that are fucked in the head, toys have nothing at all to do with it. People are too quick to blame something else for their issues.

Why dampen the fun of toys for 99% of kids who enjoy them as designed- to play with.

Have a look at what Lego have done over the past few years. Their sets are far more gender neutral now. Women in the police sets and even in space! The designs haven't suffered at all and sales are a booming.

This debate requires far more nuance than our media is capable of. The Greens should have realised that. I agree with there point, but the media are far to black and white to communicate the overlap between genders.

 

[Fredescu]

which found lowering the voting age would benefit the greens a little bit at the expense of the coalition.

Haven't read the paper yet, but younger people being left and older people being conservative isn't new or different. I heard a saying years ago that if you're not a communist at 18 you don't have a heart, and if you're not a capitalist by 40 you haven't got a brain. For the record I was a capitalist at 18 and will be a socialist at 40, so I'm pretty much heartless and brainless. A study that wants to tell us something would have to compare same ages in different times, not different ages at the same time.

 

[Elaugaufein]

Haven't read the paper yet, but younger people being left and older people being conservative isn't new or different. I heard a saying years ago that if you're not a communist at 18 you don't have a heart, and if you're not a capitalist by 40 you haven't got a brain. For the record I was a capitalist at 18 and will be a socialist at 40, so I'm pretty much heartless and brainless. A study that wants to tell us something would have to compare same ages in different times, not different ages at the same time.

I have seen some studies that suggest that its not that people just become conservative as they age per se but that the status quo changes to a state they can live with (as an example many of the same people who where extremely active in the civil rights movements of the 60s were obviously on the opposite side of the SSM debate in the 80s (the numbers don't add up otherwise) but they still supported racial equality. So their increased conservatism is subjective rather than objective.

 

[Myansie]

Haven't read the paper yet, but younger people being left and older people being conservative isn't new or different. I heard a saying years ago that if you're not a communist at 18 you don't have a heart, and if you're not a capitalist by 40 you haven't got a brain. For the record I was a capitalist at 18 and will be a socialist at 40, so I'm pretty much heartless and brainless. A study that wants to tell us something would have to compare same ages in different times, not different ages at the same time.

That's a famous Winston Churchill quote. A conservative. It's also been attached to Rupert Murdoch, but I think that was him quoting Churchill.

 

[wonzo]

Haven't read the paper yet, but younger people being left and older people being conservative isn't new or different. I heard a saying years ago that if you're not a communist at 18 you don't have a heart, and if you're not a capitalist by 40 you haven't got a brain. For the record I was a capitalist at 18 and will be a socialist at 40, so I'm pretty much heartless and brainless. A study that wants to tell us something would have to compare same ages in different times, not different ages at the same time.

Yeah true, as for the Churchill quote Elaugaufein's post p. much covered it. Dem shifting social goalposts.

fwiw i've also gone from being a neoliberalist right winger in my teens to a somewhat bemused & apathetic anarchocommie in the span of about a decade. lol

 

[JesseEwiak]

I have seen some studies that suggest that its not that people just become conservative as they age per se but that the status quo changes to a state they can live with (as an example many of the same people who where extremely active in the civil rights movements of the 60s were obviously on the opposite side of the SSM debate in the 80s (the numbers don't add up otherwise) but they still supported racial equality. So their increased conservatism is subjective rather than objective.

This may not be true in Austraila, but in America, your voting patterns isn't age-based, but based on who you first voted for. Basically, if you vote for a party three or four times in a row, you're locked into that party for life, unless something rocks you. Thus, old Democrat's still voting for Gore and Kerry, but finally breaking with Obama for _obvious_ reasons.

But, for instance, in America, as an example, in 1970, support for interracial marriage among 30-39 year olds was around 30%. By 1990, it was 60% for 50-59 year olds and 75% in 2010 among 70-79 year olds. Same people, but they slowly got over their prejudices.

 

[Elaugaufein]

This may not be true in Austraila, but in America, your voting patterns isn't age-based, but based on who you first voted for. Basically, if you vote for a party three or four times in a row, you're locked into that party for life, unless something rocks you. Thus, old Democrat's still voting for Gore and Kerry, but finally breaking with Obama for _obvious_ reasons.

But, for instance, in America, as an example, in 1970, support for interracial marriage among 30-39 year olds was around 30%. By 1990, it was 60% for 50-59 year olds and 75% in 2010 among 70-79 year olds. Same people, but they slowly got over their prejudices.

That's interesting, and could well explain some of the above because of things like the Southern Strategy 'realigning' peoples political leanings and thus changing support for some related things.

 

[JesseEwiak]

That's interesting, and could well explain some of the above because of things like the Southern Strategy 'realigning' peoples political leanings and thus changing support for some related things.

Here's a good visual representation from Pew and their entire study on this from '11 is interesting.

http://www.people-press.org/2011/11/03/the-generation-gap-and-the-2012-election-3/

On the Southern Strategy though, it's also important to remember that even though things shifted on a Presidential level quickly, it slowly filtered down the levels of government so that it took until the end of the Bush Presidency for Rockefeller Republican's to finally go extinct in the Northeast in their various state legislatures and the Obama Presidency for Republican's to win state legislatures like Alabama and Arkansas.

 

[Arksy]

Fuck that noise. If people want to give their kids the kinds of toys that have been loved by kids of multiple generations then that's up to them and the state should fuck off. Trying to link them to domestic violence is a pretty good way of discrediting your entire argument.

This is completely different to the argument that the lines should be blurred, and that girls should have access to the same sorts of toys that boys do, like construction kits and stuff..and I read a story about a lady who's made a killing selling little engineering kits to young girls. Good on her...and good on the grassroots lego campaign to bring more gender-neutral lego people into kits...but that's a completely different argument than "FUCK IT LET'S BAN KIDS HAVING FUN!!!"

 

[markot]

Fuck that noise. If people want to give their kids the kinds of toys that have been loved by kids of multiple generations then that's up to them and the state should fuck off. Trying to link them to domestic violence is a pretty good way of discrediting your entire argument.

This is completely different to the argument that the lines should be blurred, and that girls should have access to the same sorts of toys that boys do, like construction kits and stuff..and I read a story about a lady who's made a killing selling little engineering kits to young girls. Good on her...and good on the grassroots lego campaign to bring more gender-neutral lego people into kits...but that's a completely different argument than "FUCK IT LET'S BAN KIDS HAVING FUN!!!"

Projecting an argument onto your opponents is great because then you win easy.

 

[Arksy]

Projecting an argument onto your opponents is great because then you win easy.

*Crosses arms and looks the other way* They did it first.

 

[Fredescu]

Frankly I'm dead against the Greens plan to kill all humans. It's simply not the role of the state to kill all humans and it would be terribly inconvenient.

 

[viciouskillersquirrel]

My son loves anything pink. It's bright and unusual and if there's a pink bottle and a blue bottle side by side, he'll drink out of the pink one every time.

He's also obsessed with trucks and makes little broom broom noises with his mouth.

*shrug*

 

[D.Lo]

Projecting an argument onto your opponents is great because then you win easy.

"The starkly separate aisles of pink and blue, catalogues categorising toys as for girls or boys, and advertising showing just girls or boys playing with particular toys, can seem harmless.
"However, setting such strong gender stereotypes at early ages can have long-term impacts, including influencing self-perception and career aspirations.
"Out-dated stereotypes about girls and boys and men and women, perpetuate gender inequality, which feeds into very serious problems such as domestic violence and the gender pay gap.

That's from their own fucking press release. They literally make the link themselves.

On an unrelated note, the grammar in the press release is utterly appalling.

 

[Fredescu]

They literally make the link themselves.

I think he's talking about the idea of gendered toys being banned by the state, not the link to DV.

 

[markot]

That's from their own fucking press release. They literally make the link themselves.

On an unrelated note, the grammar in the press release is utterly appalling.

Fuck that noise. If people want to give their kids the kinds of toys that have been loved by kids of multiple generations then that's up to them and the state should fuck off. Trying to link them to domestic violence is a pretty good way of discrediting your entire argument.

This is completely different to the argument that the lines should be blurred, and that girls should have access to the same sorts of toys that boys do, like construction kits and stuff..and I read a story about a lady who's made a killing selling little engineering kits to young girls. Good on her...and good on the grassroots lego campaign to bring more gender-neutral lego people into kits...but that's a completely different argument than "FUCK IT LET'S BAN KIDS HAVING FUN!!!"

.

 

[D.Lo]

I think he's talking about the idea of gendered toys being banned by the state, not the link to DV.

Alright fair enough but I didn't read Arksy making that argument, it was just a dramatic flourish. It's still a press release from an elected official so some level of 'state' suggesting this, if not legislating.

Their jump is frankly far more ludicrous. Kids toys leading to domestic violence? Really? Heck if that was true in any provable way surely you would want to legislate about it.

PS: Thank you Australian Greens for proving my exact point last page about how you muddy your name with the mainstream with stupid crap like this

 

[Fredescu]

It's still a press release from an elected official so some level of 'state' suggesting this, if not legislating.

"Raising awareness" and outright banning is such a massive difference, especially when you're ideologically inclined in Arksy's direction. If no one raises awareness of the idea that toys shouldn't be gendered, then you might feel strongly about it and give a niece or friends daughter a truck or something only to have the parents be terribly offended because "she's a girl" or whatever.

There's definitely an argument to be made that gender stereotypes are responsible for a lot of domestic violence. It's obviously not as simple as Barbie therefore violence. It's way too complex to be treated in the manner that they did in that PR.

 

[wonzo]

 

[Fredescu]

I think it turned out he was right, right? Mandarin doesn't have that sound or something.

 

[Arksy]

Oop.

 

[Jintor]

Their jump is frankly far more ludicrous. Kids toys leading to domestic violence? Really? Heck if that was true in any provable way surely you would want to legislate about it.

PS: Thank you Australian Greens for proving my exact point last page about how you muddy your name with the mainstream with stupid crap like this

The only reason it muddies their message is because people run with immediate headlines and jump-to-conclusions ideas about what their message actually is instead of reading what they said

"The starkly separate aisles of pink and blue, catalogues categorising toys as for girls or boys, and advertising showing just girls or boys playing with particular toys, can seem harmless.

"However, setting such strong gender stereotypes at early ages can have long-term impacts, including influencing self-perception and career aspirations.

"Out-dated stereotypes about girls and boys and men and women, perpetuate gender inequality, which feeds into very serious problems such as domestic violence and the gender pay gap.

Or to put it another way: Gendered Marketing FEEDS INTO Stereotyping of Roles FEEDS INTO Long term societal impact WHICH FEEDS INTO gender inequality WHICH FEEDS INTO domestic violence and gender pay gap.

Notice that it's not a strict causal relationship but rather one of many issues

but no the attention grabbing headline is GREENS SAY TOYS MAKE MEN KILL WOMEN.

Now since we're into playing politics, yes, if the message isn't working because your audience is not receptive to it perhaps try a different tack. But it's frankly not the Green's fault that people jump to conclusions

I think it turned out he was right, right? Mandarin doesn't have that sound or something.

that sounds wong

PS i'm playing the race card for this joke. I've still got 5 asian jokes to use up before it resets on the new year

 

[markot]

 

[wonzo]

I think it turned out he was right, right? Mandarin doesn't have that sound or something.

Yeah I'm pretty sure Wong is the way Dio prefers it to be pronounced. It's the "spectrum" thing that makes it tho

"Some people say Churchill said it in 1940, some in 1942, it depends where you are on the spectrum"

 

[hidys]

I don't think The Greens should have made the link to domestic violence but I see no issue with the No Gender December campaign.

 

[Arksy]

Epistemological example of deductive reasoning. If A => B and B => C then A => C. By that token, their argument is that toys for boys = domestic violence.

To which I say, citation needed.

 

[hidys]

Epistemological example of deductive reasoning. If A = B and B = C then A = C. Their argument is that toy's for boys = domestic violence.

That is not the only rationale behind the campaign.

 

[Jintor]

Epistemological example of deductive reasoning. If A => B and B => C then A => C. By that token, their argument is that toy's for boys = domestic violence.

To which I say, citation needed.

But A doesn't ==> B or indeed A ==> C - it's one of a network of factors which have an influence on C, which is indeed what the bloody press release actually says. To simplify it to A ==> C is easy, but wrong.

It's like someone says "Poverty is one of a number of socio-economic conditions that may lead to localised increases in the crime rate" and then everyone else goes around saying "POOR PEOPLE ARE CRIMINALS"