Ethics

PM Turnbull enforces sex ban between ministers and staff

F16E1283-4E34-4FE0-A657-F361BA9EBFE4.jpeg

Talk about closing the gate after the horse has bolted. How out of touch can PM Turnbull be to think imposing a ban on consenting adults will achieve anything much less stop the rot in the polls? As CM wrote yesterday, the citizens of Australia would gladly trade off randy politicians if they applied the same energy they  do ‘on the job’ on the job! People want action on policy rather than the headmaster telling naughty schoolboys how to behave! What a farce. Voters are more angry at being taken for mugs by giving mistresses $200,000 taxpayer funded jobs rather than dismay at sexual antics inside parliament corridors.

Once again Turnbull shows complete error in judgment. Instead of showing a firm hand he only shows himself ever more impotent (no pun intended).

All or nothing

1D851C4F-A2F7-4D1E-B3F7-B45775DA3115

The 2018 Gold Coast Commonwealth Games kicks off on April 4th and surprise, surprise the volunteer guidebook is requesting gender neutral language so as not to offend anyone. They shouldn’t use “ladies & gentlemen” or “boys & girls” but “everyone” to make the games more inclusive. Yet more surrender to politically correct nonsense. Never a truer heart than a volunteer. Yet even their goodwill must be indoctrinated to the grievance culture of the left.

Sadly the very events run completely contrary to that ideology. Events are openly segregated by gender – male and female only. Will the Men’s 100m be called that? Will the Women’s 200m medley be called something else? So while spectators will be encouraged to suck in the political correct fanfare, the athletes will run, jump, swim and wrestle in the name of their gender.

Seriously if the games organizers are so wanting to have volunteers pretend to treat certain people who subjectively identify as something they’re biologically not, why not remove gender and have women and men and any others compete in the same events? Then if men clean up 90% of the events that will be promoting equality. It has been suggested before to give handicaps to certain athletes to even it out. So a female could technically run faster than Usain Bolt if given the right weightings. CM wrote about this stupidity  here.

Alternatively why not accommodate events for all 63 genders. That way an athlete competing in the Feminine Bisexual Hermaphromale 100m maybe by (sorry I don’t know the correct pronoun)-self, therefore guaranteed to get the world and commonwealth records and a gold medal. In fact if by (xie?)self xie (?) could smash all records held by the likes of Michael Phelps in a single games by being the sole athlete. That is the only fair way to hold games if true progressive ideology is to be forced upon us. Everyone competes in their own race.

Finally how could the Commonwealth Games even be held given all member states are former colonies of the British Empire? How about a smothering of white privilege layered on top to truly make the games “inclusive”. Yet more proof the left apparatchiks can’t even get the grievance manual right. Let’s hope they don’t read this because it will call for an emergency reprint requiring more trees to be cut down.

Gutter press or smutter press?

4126EE64-F3C8-4099-B570-AA0F691676A4.jpeg

Gutter press. No other word for it. One would expect better from The NY Times. Still why not make a baseless claim for the heck of it should it help paint a narrative? Indeed the Stormy Daniels $130,000 shut-up money story would have legs if she produced the ‘deposit slip’ and the contract which any media outlet would  pay “any price” to insure against any litigation for her breach of it.

Think of the $100s of millions media outlets have spent on tying to take the President down. Whether Russiagate which CNN’s own Van Jones called a “nothing burger” for ratings or MSNBC’’s Rachel Maddow who made that  embarrassing “we got his tax returns!” gaffe. Every celebrity event (Grammy’s, Oscars or Golden Globes) has become more about blasting Trump than blowing wind up the back sides of their own Hollywood hypocrites who blatantly turned a blind eye to all of the sexual misconduct that has gone on for decades in their own industry. Where is the outrage over that? Even career feminist Germaine Greer said that if one opened their legs for a movie role they “consented”.

Indeed if Trump frolicked with Stormy Daniels it appears it was consensual on the basis of the rumours. It is not condoning it but look at all the petty behaviour of Clinton post the election still crying to her elitist buddies in sympathy for losing to a man, who less than a week after the grab p*ssygate scandal, stared down the barrel of a camera to 100s of millions of viewers in the second debate to say “no one respects women more than I do” If indeed it was an election issue, voters overlooked it to boot the establishment. Case closed

Still the one-eyed NY Times has to make baseless read acrosses on Melania’s actions being about her acting in a huff over her husband’s supposed infidelity. Make no mistake had she cheated on her husband the mainstream media would celebrate it and chalk it down for a win for their side. They’d get panels of feminists talking about how his behaviour brought it on and how he deserved it for being a chauvinist pig.

However we shouldn’t point fingers at just the NYT.

Last week The Guardian wrote of Melania Trump: “Seldom seen and even more seldom heard, the former model may not be as popular as her predecessor Michelle Obama, but she is far more popular than her husband. Unfortunately for his Republican administration, she seems to have little interest in using that popularity to do anything of substance with the post.

Well had Tbe Guardian bothered to check, the left has made it clear of how they see her in the public eye. When she went to donate Dr Seuss books for children’s education, the recipient librarian at Cambridgeport School refused to accept the gift, criticizing the Trump administration’s education policies further writing that Seuss’s illustrations are “steeped in racist propaganda, caricatures, and harmful stereotypes,” Never did I know as a child that reading about the Cat in a Hat was some conspiracy by my parents to turn me into a hateful bigot. Now it’s all so clear!

The Daily Mail had to settle a $2.9mn lawsuit and issue a full public apology for libel against the First Lady for suggesting she gave more than “modeling services.” What awful slander! Could it be that the press is hardly lining up to champion anything she might host which is of social good? Is trying to be a good mother by not dislocating her son’s education in the early days a crime?

All the jokes from the left thanking immigrants for marrying Trump because Americans wouldn’t do it flies in the face of the very stereotypes they get so easily triggered over. Indeed the racist president married a Slav. Never mind the contradiction.

While the press can speculate over what FLOTUS might be thinking perhaps they should give her advice on the ways they wish her to behave. Should we anticipate Melania Trump’s hashtags on social media championing flaccid and impotent US foreign policy to terrorist groups like Michelle Obama? Mrs Obama is indeed a highly educated person but that doesn’t automatically exclude Mrs Trump from serving the office gracefully and proudly. The Trumps are a power couple

Yes, her husband leaves much to be desired in the manner in which he serves his country. However the scoreboard suggests many of the things he is doing are working. Such is the bias in the press about how world leaders hate him, CBS painfully admitted almost everyone of them lined up for a selfie with POTUS at Davos.

If we look at the last State of the Union address he blew the left out of the water. Even Van Jones admitted he’s going to do 8 years with talk like that. Now he has far more achievements to crow about. So yes, Melania will be there looking a million bucks and her face will speak of how she feels about Stormy Daniels. Storm in a teacup mode like it.

Stupidity is self regulating

BD90466B-6894-4D12-8A5B-B5D00E4F55A1.png

In HK over the past 7 days and it is fair to say that MiFID2 regulations are surplus to requirements. ‘Tis the season to highlight one’s own relevance. Nailed to the front door of most brokers are appeals to pester clients to vote in the Institutional Investor (II) survey.

Stupidity is self regulating. In a world which enforces  ‘know your client’ (KYC) rules, sell-side brokers use January to chase and destroy what little value added is left over. Sales people and research analysts pan handle them for II votes. Yes even the brokers ranked 13th plead  with clients to rate them as more useful than they really are.

So in reality, instead of trying to help clients make informed judgements to grow funds under management to increase the likelihood of trading liquidity, the broking  community wastes countless silver bullets trying to manipulate a survey that hopefully fools their upper management that the outlook is bright.

The ability to plunge new depths is growing. One analyst from Daiwa took a video of his dancing skills to put on YouTube as a way to gain attention to win votes. To his credit he came in 3rd ranked. Although one could argue his analytical acumen took a back seat to his moon walking.

However nothing beats my former sales colleague who entered the name of a mechanical monkey (named Monkey Marc) as M. Marc in an II type survey. Clients were only too happy to make him the #1 stock picker in Japan. It was only when they went to the award ceremony when the Survey host realized the joke was on them. It went a step further when it was discovered that M. Marc’s mechanical legs tapping on a numeric keyboard allowed him to actually be credited as the best stock picker.

While many in finance play themselves as the consummate professionals, perhaps it is now a given that the II survey now allows clients to consume entertainment without having to fill in lengthy compliance forms to justify it. As the title says – stupidity is self regulating!

An end to sex segregation in sports?

C8373E04-2C06-4D1F-ABA6-6AF9E94D91DC.jpeg

The ever impartial and balanced ABC posted an article talking about how it is time to eradicate sex segregation in sports by using formulas/classification systems to ‘even it out’. Were these social experiements warranted, how was it that Michele Mouton finished runner up in the 1982 World Rally Championship against an all male field with zero free kicks? She won four races in the season. Call it raw talent. She didn’t require complex formulas and spreadsheets to give her a handicap. She won on her own merits. No system required. Isn’t that the thrill of competition?

27F96D93-8F09-45FA-A712-DF8FF402DADF.jpeg

In the Moto 3 motorcycle championship, Maria Herrera competes against an all male field. She is not a championship contender but she isn’t always last. Still she has no handicap. If she wants to race with the men then accept all the same rules of competition. You won’t find Maria moaning about being hard done by.

F1D18494-EC2C-4861-9926-CE7444820389.jpeg

Ana Carrasco, a 20-year-old from Spain, became the first woman to win a world championship motorcycle race last year. No sex segregation but grit, hunger and determination. No handicaps.

4F74EE8E-84E4-4579-886C-E591EC0A8195

Still, the driving factor (no pun intended) behind these three women has been the machines which level the playing field but the importance was they won on their own skill.

Sadly, it is an inescapable fact that men and women are different physiologically. Especially in sports which rely solely on the physicality of the athlete. Should Merlene Ottey have been pitted against Usain Bolt in the 100m? Give her a size, weight and twitch fibre handicap? However shouldn’t whites or Asians be equally justified to complain that black athletes tend to dominate track and field. Perhaps they should be given race based handicaps? Perhaps a flyweight female boxer be given a 20 point start against a flyweight male boxer? Whatever it takes. So much for betting agencies setting fair prices (although what a way to match fix by a subtle tweak to a handicap formula).

Then we switch into the transgender athletes e.g. males who identify as females. So let’s say a former 125kg All Black wants to play for a women’s rugby team. Apart from the health and safety aspects of such a move, there is no logic or fairness. Or perhaps to avoid health risks give Serena Williams a two set head start against Roger Federer? Make him play with a racket head half the size.

Since the first Olympics in Athens in 1896 the world has had over 100 years of sex segregated sports. No one has really complained. Drug cheating is a bigger issue to be fair. Having said that people want to see athletes break records unhindered by spreadsheet based technicalities. Usain Bolt trained for 16 years to remain at the top of his game. Would FloJo be satisfied to say she ran an adjusted 9.57s to be the world’s fastest sprinter when she only managed 10.49 in real money? Or is it worth setting her starting blocks to run 92m so as to even it out. Talk about hollow victories.

Seriously though, what is wrong with athletes training their hearts out to win glory? What is it with the left that insists on trying to even out absolutely everything. Why not allow women hammer throwers to do the men’s 100m? Surely they can derive a formula for that? Or perhaps the Jamaican 4x100m men’s relay team should complete against the Japanese women’s group synchronized swimming in their respective sports? Why not give the weight of a Djibouti gold medal 10x that of the US or China?

This thirst for loony social experiments is really going too far. The outward push for diversity continues unabated. Yet once again the hypocrisy of the left calls for ‘differences’ to be eradicated so everyone can be a winner. Equality without a level playing field. Now that is straight out of the socialist playbook.

What is more egregious than receiving $800,000?

36D56DDF-05B1-4169-B60A-248441EF019D.jpeg

The $650,000 of that sum paid to the lawyers of a transgender student, Ms. (Mr) Ashton Whitaker, who claimed discrimination against the school which prevented her from using the male bathrooms and calling her the incorrect pronoun. She also added that she suffered from anxiety, depression, migraines and other health problems related to dehydration because she had tried to avoid restroom trips by drinking less water.

Whitaker said, “The idea of using the girls restroom was humiliating and there was no way I could do it…If I were to use the gender-neutral restrooms, I would also stand out from everyone else with a big label on me that said ‘transgender.”

Doesn’t that quote sort of say it all? Whitaker wants the school to accept her as a male yet the idea of using gender neutral restrooms would label her as transgender! Indeed if she is asking the school teachers to call her male pronouns and to be allowed to use the male toilets isn’t she labeling herself in front of her class? Wouldn’t male students who saw her use their bathrooms already know it was because she was transgender?

However this court victory only opens the floodgates to more victim based ambulance chasing. For lawyers it becomes a field day. The days of “have you been injured at work?” will be replaced by “have you had your feelings hurt?” At $650k a pop that is easy money for lawyers.

Should all schools be forced to change curriculums, indoctrinate other students, parents and teachers as well as go to considerable expense to accomodate people like Whitaker? Should parents who wish their kids to study in schools that aren’t caught up in this nonsense be free to send their kids to boys or girls only education without the state determining bathroom policy? Don’t they have just as much right to demand that as a transgender student from demanding the opposite? Yet the ruling is moving toward a scenario where parents who do not accept this be labeled bigots and persecuted for holding conservative views.

Let’s think about this. For girls who ‘identify’ as boys or vice versa why must we be dictated to by law to ‘pretend’ to accept them for what they subjectively (not biologically) feel themselves to be, assuming we know in the first place? California has laws that can jail one for using the wrong pronoun. This is the slippery slope.

Perhaps the solution – if the demand is high enough –  is transgender only schools where people like Whitaker can study, be called whatever pronoun that makes them happy and pee in the bathroom of their choice. They can have their own sanctuary. Why should the students (and parents) of the school that paid the $800,000 settlement suffer from a cutback in educational tools, teachers or other facilities because of a student’s hurt feelings? $800,000 would buy a lot of ‘useful’ equipment for furthering education.

To give a great example of how weak the liberal argument is for the slippery slope of caving in to transgender in schools and general life look at this interview of Tucker Carlson and DNC senior advisor Zac Petkanas. It is frighteningly naive.

Today’s ‘civil rights’ movement is all about removing them from the majority. No one is arguing that transgender people don’t deserve equal status (they have it). It is only because they demand special treatment which once again throws into the fore the problem with institutionalising policy which creates the very opposite to what ‘diversity’ crowd proclaim they promote. Honestly what has gender, race or sexual preference have to do with ‘performance’ in the schoolyard or workplace? Yet increasingly we are asked to provide it to prospective employers who fear being persecuted if they don’t get the ‘balance’ right.

It’s ok if Eddie Murphy does it

70E73163-85B6-4B4A-A92F-F2B9852CC86D.jpeg

Such is the double standards of the media these days. The amount of drivel that has been spewed over Japanese comedian Hamada’s skit which had him role play Axel Foley (Eddie Murphy) in Beverley Hills Cop. “Racist” is the most used word against Hamada but how many forget the accolades Eddie Murphy received playing multiple roles in the film Coming to America including that of a white Jewish man? Not a peep.

One can call Hamada’s humour as “insensitive” but get a grip. Japanese humour is what it is. Not many foreigners get it. Most of it is hitting soft hammers on the heads of celebrities and gags such as being shoved in a bag full of cockroaches to humiliate the star. I doubt that Hamada had the slightest intention to create a race based attempt at belittling blacks.

As for the Eddie Murphy skit it is unlikely that many Japanese would get the correlation of a Detroit Lions jacket and Axel Foley without the make up addition.

Still even Aussie kids can get vilified for dressing up as their favourite AFL stars like Nic Naitanui who just happen to be ‘coloured’. No bigger sign of praise to the player than to want to be as authentic as possible right down to skin colour. It isn’t shaming. It’s praising. Indeed skin colour is irrelevant to a player but a 9yo kid just sees an idol rather than identity politics. Yet the left think the bigger lesson is not to get kids to be dreamers and aspire to role models but smack them and their parents over the head for being bigots.

Poor comedy would be a bigger crime than poor taste in Hamada’s case.  I’m sure the Japanese won’t lose a wink over it as political correctness thankfully doesn’t exist there. Talk about cultural insensitivity- to understand Japan would be a first step before the social justice warriors went to war