Tasmanian Times

The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe. If you try it, you will be lonely often, and sometimes frightened. No price is too high for the privilege of owning yourself. ~ Friedrich Nietzsche

The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe. If you try it, you will be lonely often, and sometimes frightened. No price is too high for the privilege of owning yourself. ~ Friedrich Nietzsche


Kevin Andrews’ War on Love

*Pic: Kevin Andrews from his website …

Writing in the Mercury newspaper [04JUN18] on the subject of human relations Kevin Andrews begins with selectively quoting the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Among civil rights the provision of a stable loving home environment is very important in child development but so is a safe community where you can learn to develop relations with your age cohort as you grow into an adult.

Then there is transferring Andrew’s experience of the post World War Two nuclear family against families from across cultures around the world where more than the parents are involved in socializing children into those respective communities.

Quoting texts about social relations from over a century ago is misrepresenting what is happening now and takes the comments out of context. Women did not have the vote then. Men had legal control over their wives and children. Corporal punishment of children was allowed. Child labour deprived many children from poorer socio-economic groups of what we now know as childhood.

The original idea of free love was that love would exist without a dependency on the social and legal position and income of the husband. Quoting Stalin declaring something bourgeois is sign of desperation. This was a standard declaration for many who stood trial and either died at the hands of the NKVD or, if the survived, were released from the work prisons in Siberia. Fates determined by a paranoid megalomaniac dictator.

History shows Foucalt is correct, marriage and family are not fixed concepts. They exist within a social and economic realty and are peopled by humans of great variability whether Andrews approves or not.

Further, we now know that, for whatever reason, there are a range of gender variables and they don’t appear to be learned but instead are driven from inside each individual as the children growing into adults find when the constraints that used to hold the two extremes as exemplars fail the test of reality shown by the psychological harm , I have done when people are forced into stereotypes they are not happy to be.

Andrews would like to couch his supposed concerns about Safe Schools in a sexual orientation agenda when schools has to be safe for children with physical and intellectual disabilities, children with intellectual and artistic talents, children who are slower learners or are simply small in stature and children who come from poor or abusive households.

As Andrews states in his own introduction it is the duty of government to defend the rights in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. One cannot exclude the rights of children to safely develop into adults without being forced into stereotypes.

We all benefit from each person developing to their full potential. This is the strength of the human family.

phill Parsons was born a lefty hander and changed into a right hander by his father using a wooden spoon at the dinner table when I was learning to feed myself. Eric no doubt thought he was saving me from becoming something else such as a Catholic and or a homosexual or indeed just ensuring I fitted in. Now, we know your master side of the brain and your favoured hand are linked. I cannot apportion blame, it is what it is and when I learnt about it in my forties I was able to deal with turning taps the right way for off and on knowing why I was having trouble. Still have it if I am not concentrating. Who knows what else I missed out on.



  1. Lynne Newington

    June 5, 2018 at 11:38 am

    One cannot exclude the rights of children to safely develop into adults without being forced into stereotypes. What a joke he doesn’t allude to that. He would be well versed of the necessity with his links to Endeavour Forum. http://www.endeavourforum.org.au/


  2. TV Resident

    June 5, 2018 at 4:34 pm

    I don’t understand why these people who pander to ‘religion’ think they have a right to dictate to everyone else. If you are one of these believers..then Good Luck’ to you but don’t expect the rest of the world to fit in with your idealogy.

  3. john hayward

    June 5, 2018 at 9:02 pm

    If you want the formative experience to which Kevin refers, just check yourself into one of those orphanages run by one of the more conservative Catholic orders.

    John Hayward

  4. Christopher Nagle

    June 6, 2018 at 11:08 am

    This article is redolent of a long tradition of libertarian humanist narrative that has been systematically intensified since capitalism in affluent economies started to roll out deregulatory indulgence as le mécanisme de l’époque in the later 1960s, as a key driver of economic production, consumption, social administration and public consciousness.

    The deregulatory and privatization agenda of indulgence capitalism found its way into university humanities and economics departments. They started to pump out libertarian corporate side production and similarly libertarian social administrative consumption side laissez faire driven graduates, who collectively nobbled any state, economic, social and ideological restraints and borders that might inhibit free trade, free enterprise and slow down the spread of disinhibition trading as liberty and the life of opportunists without firm rules or boundaries.

    And the way the regime has obfuscated this process is for its joint regime pillars, the ‘churchy’ social libertarchs and secular power corporate libertarchs, to accuse each other of exactly the same regime crimes against the part of the commons infrastructure that the other side was and is in charge of destroying on behalf of indulgence capitalism.

    Thus the social libertarchs accuse the corporate ones of using a laissez-faire deregulatory and privatization agenda to destroy the environment, the nation state and the integrity of rules based economic administration, and of nobbling normal democratic responses to this through a totalitarian system of marketed public relations consciousness management throughout the architecture of social discourse that has taken over normal socialization and political debate.

    The corporate libertarchs (and their traditionalist hangers on who actually care about these things) accuse the social libertarchs of using exactly the same libertarian agenda to trash not just traditional social infrastructure, but to discourage/undermine any disciplined rules based socially enforceable order, and thwart any attempt to staunch the ensuing chaos by denying, reconstructing and delegitimizing such attempts throughout the architecture of social discourse, by pretending they are ‘authoritarian’, ‘repressive’, ‘judgemental’, ‘bigoted’, ‘phobic’ and ‘prejudiced’; i.e., the same sentiments as the corporates express apropos limits to transnational corporate power.

    Both sides are as deeply in denial as to their role in pulverizing their respective commons infrastructure and refusing to countenance any regulatory limits on sacred individualism or private interests. And the vehement mutual finger pointing is not just a form of self cancelling argumentative mystification, and creating the impression of democratic criticism, but it obfuscates how much they have in common as regime partners.

    The indulgence elephant in the room here is missed because it doesn’t operate particularly at the level of political and social actors playing parts and can only be recognized through system analysis.

    It is a system that by the late 1960s had to notch up from the marketed production warfare inherited from the world war accelerated production templates, from supplying needs and wants to refitting the whole industrial and social culture for fantasy/desire based production that was satiation proof; i.e., keep expanding exponentially and indefinitely through converting goods and services into iconic symbols more important than their real function (that would matter ever less with time) which could be churned on ever shorter cycles, for ever slighter reasons, by ever more helplessly malleable consumers who’ve had all their autonomous internal control software torn out, and who are now trained to buy any indulgence that is marketed and sold to them.

    Desire fantasies morphed and bloated seamlessly from being desirable to sacred indulgences/rights…for spoiled brats.

  5. Christopher Nagle

    June 6, 2018 at 11:08 am

    The results of the system are just as damaging and chaotic whether we are talking the boards of financial institutions and/or the welfare sector, because they haven’t been given even the most basic moral and social potty training as children. ‘Obsolescent enforced high expectation parenting has given way to indulgence and market forces. Screwing the future, whether it is the financial and tax systems and/or our children, is a product of indulgent latitude that destroys rules based behaviour, moral inhibition and boundaries, and leaves mass populations existentially naked and flying by the seat of the pants.

    The reproductive business of constructing adults is so badly mangled it has collapsed into permanent all rights no responsibilities adolescence that is all about me, without any of the inconvenient training, regulation, maintenance, auditing and enforcement of responsible agency that is supposed to go with them. Liberty gets trashed as just another consumer indulgence, because everything is about indulgence now; production, consumption and culture.


  6. Robin Charles Halton

    June 6, 2018 at 1:51 pm

    I have no problem with young air cadets. Better the young folk of broader Asiatic origin learn Australian values and discipline in an orderly manner, as their attendance at the War memorial strongly suggests.

    I must admit Hooby Dooby looks as if he had a parachuting accident showing off his skills as Minister during one of his failed educational orientation dramas!

    Australian values, mate!

  7. Lynne Newington

    June 7, 2018 at 12:51 pm

    Christopher Nagle on 07/06/18 at 07:08 AM

    I couldn’t let this pass by without a mention: http://www.wisconsingazette.com/news/report-brazil-bishop-says-kids-spontaneously-gay/article_2823125c-9fb9-56af-ab6a-0e9d0968be07.html

  8. Robin Charles Halton

    June 8, 2018 at 6:49 am

    In simple terms what is this all about? I left High school in 1963 after completing year 10.

    Today I would be aware there are probably more support staffing positions available for schools in general. More problems or solving problems that have always been around, but overlooked!

    There are school Chaplains, however I have reservations about their requirements for so called spiritual needs! School Nurses, Social Workers, School Psychologists, Special teacher’s assistants and Support teachers are included, OK!

    So who is responsible from these “Educational Specialists”, whether as on a roving basis or as permanent staff, to deal with what is believed to be a “Safe schools program”? Or is this just another layer of political correctness that has invaded school curriculum due to perceived, or otherwise, social changes that are occurring within our society, most noticeably where discipline is missing into today’s world among many younger folk!

  9. Lynne Newington

    June 8, 2018 at 12:07 pm

    I wonder what Mr Andrews and your Archbishop Porteous will have to say about the latest decision that will have a running effect: https://www.canberratimes.com.au/politics/act/reportable-conduct-scheme-extended-to-confessional-20180607-p4zk0j.html
    Another protest, no doubt.

  10. Christopher Eastman-Nagle

    June 9, 2018 at 4:14 am

    Lynne, #7 … What I think about that is too lengthy for here. My position has already been published in these pages in relations to children, sex and adult responsibility. It will come up under my name in the author’s list.

    As to #9, I have no idea how the social welfare system is going to cope with the additional reporting obligation it wants to bring on stream, because it is already drowning as the social system implodes around it.

    The South Australian Nyland royal commission into the child protection system concluded that “What we do know is that a staggering one in four children are the subject of a notification of abuse or neglect – and for Aboriginal children this figure rises to almost nine in 10.”

    If I were in the Catholic Church, I would tell the seculars to put their own bloody house in order.

    What has happened to the Church has been a symptom of the corrupt libertarian secular agenda run by indulgence capitalism that has deliberately blown away every semblance of social restraint and discipline that would put a stop to the wave of sexual malfeasance that we now face.

    Sexual ‘liberation’ has not been benign at a lot of levels.

    Just to be clear, Indulgence capitalism is a system of mass conflation of goods and services into iconic fantasising – particularly around sex – that systematically removes inhibition and disciplined social behaviour in ways designed to send production and consumption into overdrive beyond ordinary needs and wants, into a culture of indulgence that is collapsing the social system as fast as the natural environment.

    This totalitarian system has infected everybody. It is what needs to be reformed, because unless it can be taken down, the social system will just keep crumbling into chaos, no matter how many royal commissions and welfare report requirements we have.

    The sanctity of the confessional is as old as the church. That institution has gone through several decadent periods, and has, until now, eventually dealt with them as it did in the Counter Reformation. If it still has the will to survive it will do it again, as it follows the lead of religious fundamentalists and hard-liners elsewhere in the world who have already seen the writing on the wall and are saying to the seculars .. no pasaran!

  11. Lynne Newington

    June 9, 2018 at 9:52 am

    We aren’t just speaking about adult responsibility here when dealing the Catholic Church. These men, as of their ordination, are supposed to be ontologically changed, and for Catholics they have the power to forgive sins (what is bound on earth is bound in Heaven) and whatever else that goes with sacredness.

    Judaism has it right. It does not believe in original sin (a contradiction to church teaching although claiming we’re born in the image of God) and there’s no get-out-of-jail card claiming the “devil made me do it” with all being accountable for their own actions and expected to take responsibility for them.

    From what I can see they’re as good as their father bishops whose allegiance is not to God, not to the church, but to the Pope – and we can see the aftermath of that, past and present.

  12. Robin Charles Halton

    June 10, 2018 at 4:09 pm

    Nobody seems to know whose responsibility it is to direct a Safe Schools Program to identify with potential terrorist suspects among radicalised students, do they?

    We have created a society of nonconformists, so be careful folks. Unfortunately the powers that be who can’t agree with each other on these issues with SSP, especially with religious/ cultural radicalisation and the actions of cyber bullying and general damaging non conformist activity, needs to be addressed in such a way as to deter unconventional behaviour patterns from occurring with the aim of educational disruption.

    In my opinion discipline is the missing ingredient into today’s schooling practices. Society is too loose.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

To Top