Jacinda Ardern's face on loo set - Rotary apology

[Lilith7]

For anyone still believing that the poisonous tirade directed to the former PM "was all harmless." Not so much; there apparently some deeply evil, twisted bastards out there.




https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politic...g-one?rm=a

[king1]

"People hate Ardern and Ardern is a women, therefore people clearly hate Ardern because she is a women" is just a massive logical fallacy.  

No-one is saying that... as I see it the general feeling is that she received (and is still receiving) far more hate and vitriol than she would if she were a bloke doing the job, that's it - and that makes it misogyny in my book...  

Comparing her situation to that of the looney tunes, bat-shit crazy ex US Pres,  is just not even comparable, because he is looney tunes, bat-shit crazy ...

[dken31]

"The general feeling" is meaningless, aka facts don't care about your feelings. Just because people "reckon" she'd have treated more kindly if she was a man doesn't make it so. It is impossible to prove, but do you genuinely believe that people wouldn't have hated/despised Hipkins/Little/Robertson/Mallard as much as they did Ardern had any of them been prime minister over the same period and done/said all the same things she did?

And your dismissal of the Trump comparison just shows your bias. Essentially you're saying Ardern didn't deserve it, so the hatred directed at her must have been due to misogyny, whereas Trump did deserve it so the hatred directed at him was valid.

[king1]

"The general feeling" is meaningless, aka facts don't care about your feelings.  Just because people "reckon" she'd have treated more kindly if she was a man doesn't make it so.  It is impossible to prove, but do you genuinely believe that people wouldn't have hated/despised Hipkins/Little/Robertson/Mallard as much as they did Ardern had any of them been prime minister over the same period and done/said all the same things she did?

And your dismissal of the Trump comparison just shows your bias.  Essentially you're saying Ardern didn't deserve it, so the hatred directed at her must have been due to misogyny, whereas Trump did deserve it so the hatred directed at him was valid.

The general feeling "as I see it" is not meaningless.  It is my interpretation of what I see and hear.  Speaking of facts in this matter is probably more so meaningless because it is always a matter of one's own perceptions. Hence "as I see it"...

and no, not saying anything about whether Trump deserved the 'hatred' directed at him - only that he is bat shit crazy, Adern is not.  I did not speculate at all about whether he deserved what he got or not -  but I am having a quiet laugh at the Trump is a victim thing, so thanks for that...

[harm_less]

and no, not saying anything about whether Trump deserved the 'hatred' directed at him - only that he is bat shit crazy, Adern is not.  I did not speculate at all about whether he deserved what he got or not -  but I am having a quiet laugh at the Trump is a victim thing, so thanks for that...

Also a massive contrast in intellects between Trump and Ardern, exhibited on a daily basis when they were/are both in their respective public forums.

[king1]

this was an interesting read - not too long
https://www.scientificamerican.com/artic...loyalists/

This line seems apt

people who harbor delusional narratives tend to bulldoze over reality in their attempt to deny that their own narrative is false.

[Wainuiguy]

"People hate Ardern and Ardern is a women, therefore people clearly hate Ardern because she is a women" is just a massive logical fallacy.  

No-one is saying that... as I see it the general feeling is that she received (and is still receiving) far more hate and vitriol than she would if she were a bloke doing the job, that's it - and that makes it misogyny in my book...  

Comparing her situation to that of the looney tunes, bat-shit crazy ex US Pres,  is just not even comparable, because he is looney tunes, bat-shit crazy ...

Pretty sure that was Verity Johnsons general gist in the posted article.  

People didn't like Ardern because she stated the following things:

I have never lied as politician - this was itself a lie
Most open and transparent government ever - it was the opposite
Transformational goverment - it never was
Covid vaccinations will be totally voluntary and those chosing not to vaccinate will not be penalised - hmmmm - refer the first point
They are us - unless unvaccinated or protesters in which they are them
KFC worker went against the rules- actually followed advice - but no apology was ever offered

This is just a snapshot.  Generally many didn't like her because she wasn't genuine.  More were waking up to that fact and by January she realised that where once she was Labour's Unicorn she was now their millstone.

[Lilith7]

this was an interesting read - not too long
https://www.scientificamerican.com/artic...loyalists/

This line seems apt

people who harbor delusional narratives tend to bulldoze over reality in their attempt to deny that their own narrative is false.

"When the mind is hijacked for the benefit of the abuser, it becomes no longer a matter of presenting facts or appealing to logic. Removing Trump from power and influence will be healing in itself. But, I advise, first, not to confront [his supporters’] beliefs, for it will only rouse resistance. Second, persuasion should not be the goal but change of the circumstance that led to their faulty beliefs. "



If those pushing the 'Covid is a conspiracy' or  stirring up hatred against trans people could manage to change the circumstances which led to their faulty beliefs, that would be a good start.

[dken31]

I never suggested that Trump was unfairly victimised (it isn't relevant to my point to imply whether it was deserved or not), merely that he was the object of a lot of hate and vitriol (which is objective fact). My point is that no reasonable person would claim that the hatred directed at him was due to him being a man.

And is there really a "massive contrast in intellects" between the two? There is clearly a massive contrast in personalities but they both strike me as being slightly above average, and yet not astonishingly bright. My guess is that they'd both be in the 120s. Obviously that is hugely speculative but what exactly did Ardern do to suggest that she was exceptionally intelligent? Love him or hate him, Trump managed to get himself elected Potus. Love her or hate her, Ardern was able to become prime minister; neither achievement is to be poo-pooed, but also neither achievement has being a genius as a prerequisite.

[Lilith7]

I think there's a difference though - at least in America, Trump was adored by many, to the extent that he could do no wrong. I think he boasted at one point that he could murder someone in front of Trump tower & he'd still be admired by his followers & probably not arrested.

There was nothing like that here with regard to Ardern.

[dken31]

There was nothing like that here (NZ)? Really? There is certainly plenty of that evidenced in here (TMMB). You might think that your own adoration of Ardern is 100% objectively justified, however I'd suggest there is a bit of "mind hijacking" at play.

[Lilith7]

There was nothing like that here (NZ)? Really?  There is certainly plenty of that evidenced in here (TMMB).  You might think that your own adoration of Ardern is 100% objectively justified, however I'd suggest there is a bit of "mind hijacking" at play.

Oh dear - "adoration??"

End or any reasonable discussion. 

[king1]

There was nothing like that here (NZ)? Really?  There is certainly plenty of that evidenced in here (TMMB).  You might think that your own adoration of Ardern is 100% objectively justified, however I'd suggest there is a bit of "mind hijacking" at play.

or, unlike the anti-establishment, anti vaxxy, anti mandate, anti-everything folks, perhaps some (most) of NZ have no real reason to despise her - but she is still a politician so she does have that going against her...

[king1]

I think there's a difference though - at least in America, Trump was adored by many, to the extent that he could do no wrong. I think he boasted at one point that he could murder someone in  front of Trump tower & he'd still be admired by his followers & probably not arrested.

There was nothing like that here with regard to Ardern.

https://edition.cnn.com/2016/01/23/polit...index.html

[Wainuiguy]

There was nothing like that here (NZ)? Really?  There is certainly plenty of that evidenced in here (TMMB).  You might think that your own adoration of Ardern is 100% objectively justified, however I'd suggest there is a bit of "mind hijacking" at play.

Oh dear - "adoration??"

End or any reasonable discussion. 

To be fair there was quite a lot of adoration of Ardern especially internationally.   One example locally was a guy in Wainuiomata who after the 2020 election got a tattoo of Ardern on his arm with a number like 3352 under it - the amount Ginny Anderson won Hutt South by ( she won't this time).  Many still go on about how she "saved us" etc.

[Oh_hunnihunni]

Still no excuse for the totally inappropriate deliberate disrespect dished out by a bunch of middle aged white blokes in suits and wigs...

[harm_less]

And is there really a "massive contrast in intellects" between the two?  There is clearly a massive contrast in personalities but they both strike me as being slightly above average, and yet not astonishingly bright.  My guess is that they'd both be in the 120s.  Obviously that is hugely speculative but what exactly did Ardern do to suggest that she was exceptionally intelligent?  Love him or hate him, Trump managed to get himself elected Potus.  Love her or hate her, Ardern was able to become prime minister; neither achievement is to be poo-pooed, but also neither achievement has being a genius as a prerequisite.

Ardern could pull detailed information on the likes of budgets and items of legislation from front of mind, and absolutely mopped the floor with numerous opposition members, particularly Luxon, on many occasions.

Trump struggled to read tele-prompts successfully and has commented on the likes of Putin, Kim Jong Un and Xi Jinping favourably. In his basic behaviour he portrays himself as a BS artist.

[Wainuiguy]

And is there really a "massive contrast in intellects" between the two?  There is clearly a massive contrast in personalities but they both strike me as being slightly above average, and yet not astonishingly bright.  My guess is that they'd both be in the 120s.  Obviously that is hugely speculative but what exactly did Ardern do to suggest that she was exceptionally intelligent?  Love him or hate him, Trump managed to get himself elected Potus.  Love her or hate her, Ardern was able to become prime minister; neither achievement is to be poo-pooed, but also neither achievement has being a genius as a prerequisite.

Ardern could pull detailed information on the likes of budgets and items of legislation from front of mind, and absolutely mopped the floor with numerous opposition members, particularly Luxon, on many occasions.

Trump struggled to read tele-prompts successfully and has commented on the likes of Putin, Kim Jong Un and Xi Jinping favourably. In his basic behaviour he portrays himself as a BS artist.

Hmmm at times she could.  Other times she would blow it, like not knowing what GDP is or what the second Article of the Treaty is.  She would also often resort to her fallback "I reject the premise of that question. "  she also had a tendency to waffle inanly and when interviewers tried to get answers would often cut back that she hadn't finished.

[harm_less]

Ardern could pull detailed information on the likes of budgets and items of legislation from front of mind, and absolutely mopped the floor with numerous opposition members, particularly Luxon, on many occasions.

Trump struggled to read tele-prompts successfully and has commented on the likes of Putin, Kim Jong Un and Xi Jinping favourably. In his basic behaviour he portrays himself as a BS artist.

Hmmm at times she could.  Other times she would blow it, like not knowing what GDP is or what the second Article of the Treaty is.  She would also often resort to her fallback "I reject the premise of that question. "  she also had a tendency to waffle inanly and when interviewers tried to get answers would often cut back that she hadn't finished.

I assume you're referring to this incident. Personally I'm not surprised if anybody lost their train of thought (as appeared happened) being interviewed by that tosspot Hosking.

[Oh_hunnihunni]

This is a group of privileged middle aged white males deliberately and gleefully disrespecting a female ex Prime Minister.

I do not understand how any adult with an ounce of self awareness can see this as anything other than deplorable behaviour.