#misandry

Presumably…

…misandristic slogans will be OK in the People’s Democratic Republic of Victoria.

The bigger question is who will be the arbiter of what is deemed inappropriate or not? We can absolutely bet the farm that the people selected to enforce this being the least qualified in being able to administer it fairly.

No one should have an issue with holding appropriate standards for slogans on vehicles (e.g. no profanity/nudity) but is there a pressing need to have apparatchiks pushing agendas on what they deem appropriate for the rest of us? How many vehicles fall foul of these crimes?

One can be certain that if a car is adorned with slogans that crudely vilify white heterosexual Christian males it won’t be deregistered. Perhaps Victoria should change its number plate slogan to “Victoria – the re-education state.

Perhaps Victorian Premier Dan Andrews should spend more time reflecting on his injecting room policy where the CEO of the centre has been stood down after some staffers were caught dealing drugs to the addicts that use the facilities. Who’d a thunk?

Presumably misandry is ok?

Good to see perpetual virtue signaling Victorian Premier Dan Andrews stay true to form. All about identity politics. Indeed crude slogans are unnecessary but who will be judge and jury over what is deemed “offensive” or not? We know is misogyny is out. What about misandry?

For those living in Wodonga, just move to Albury and register your car in NSW.

UN endorsement speaks volumes

If a politician ever wanted to hunt for the worst possible endorsement, look no further than a reference from the UN. Christina Figueres, former UNFCCC climate chief and world government proponent has been meddling in our Aussie election.

Dr Kerryn Phelps proudly said on Sky News that she attended a meeting with climate scientists and Figueres. Figueres gave Phelps, Zali Steggall, Julia Banks and Rebekha Sharkie her seal of approval because of their stance on climate change (and because of their gender).

Figueres is a piece of work. She warned that climate change is so critical that  gender inequality should be tackled at the same time and she openly defended discrimination against males when it came to hiring in her department. Misandry?

The U.N. is home to many unsavory characters.

Who could forget when the World Health Organization (WHO) proposed Robert Mugabe to be an ambassador? What smell test could he possibly pass?

What about the UN AIDS Executive Director, Michel Sidibé,  who was responsible for creating a toxic environment that promoted “favoritism, preferment and ethical blindness.

Of the 670 staff members at the UN agency interviewed by independent investigators, 18 admitted they had experienced some form of sexual harassment in the previous year and a further 201 said they were on the wrong end of workplace abuse.

One staff member went on the record saying, “U.N.AIDS is like a predators’ prey ground…You have access to all sorts of people, especially the vulnerable: You can use promises of jobs, contracts and all sorts of opportunities and abuse your power to get whatever you want, especially in terms of sexual favors. I have seen senior colleagues dating local young interns or using U.N.AIDS resources to access sex workers.

UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres, who made it clear he had a zero tolerance policy with regards to sexual harassment when he took office,  refused to fire him. Despite his term ending in January 2020, Sidibé has offered to quit in June 2019 in order to ensure a stable transition period! In what world does a person outed for turning a blind eye to such a poisonous culture get to leave on his own terms? Sacred cows.

So these incidents prove without doubt the U.N. holds the moral high ground on so many fronts. We shouldn’t be surprised that Phelps thinks Figueres is a credible source. Phelps showed her disdain for the white male patriarchy on International Women’s Day.

Identity politics is poison. The irony within the fight for ‘identity representation’ in climate science was debunked by an internal UNIPCC survey a decade ago. The outcome was simple – it noted diversity (gender and ethnicity) were prioritized over ability. Several delegates, without any scientific credentials, gave the feedback they were way out of their depth and could not contribute any value to the process yet were asked to do so anyway. So much for the benefits of equality over ability?

While these four independent women may say they are conservative at heart, they are of the left. The U.N. endorsement from a hard socialist proves it.