Germaine Greer

[siggie-reported-by-alarmists]

Germaine Greer has spoken out about the Duchess of Cambridge's second pregnancy, saying the duchess " has a b…..d of a job" and

is under too much pressure to produce more children.Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/life/germaine-greer-the-duchess-

of-cambridge-is-too-thin-20140929-10ndf1.html#ixzz3ErtyNgg0

[azureline**]

I think it's shameful to sit in judgement on a woman, citing that she has never had a child, knowing that she spent years trying to conceive.

If someone didn't know that, then perhaps they should check first.

She was raped at the age of 19 and also treated appallingly by her husband.

[kilroy_is_here]

Just because I'm in a good mood and feel like humouring you.
http://finallyfeminism101.wordpress.com/2007/08/25/faq-what-is-post-feminism/

[kilroy_is_here]

And I those things I fully believe that she could speak rings around lots of people

[kilroy_is_here]

Shamefull because :
A). I'm a man and questioning her relevance
B). Because she is above reproach
C). Because you don't like me

[4c4sale]

There's much we could all learn about each other before we judge, but we'll still judge.

Kate's CHOICES can be respected, AND Greer could make her larger points sans such rude judgments.

But she was always controversial, and that hasn't changed.

She sought to offend, upset and provoke, and she's at it again here.

Her respected position as a (the?) leading Second Waver is based on challenging assumptions so fundamantal that they're almost never discussed, even decades after her work helped shake the global foundation of male hegemony.

She would find Kate appalling on many levels, and the idea that she didn't know how much attention she'd get for these rude remarks is laughable given her career-long methods and views.

Her crass comments about Kate may not be a good choice for someone who wishes to be perceived as relevant in 2014, but perhaps she doesn't care to be seen this way.

Maybe she's still bunkered in the considerable accomplishments of a bygone era, and is happy to relive those days with these occasional jolts of notoriety.

Or maybe she still believes that revolutionary change of the kind she imagined then is possible now.

But body-shaming and choice-shaming Kate specifically is unacceptable to me, and I have extreme reservations about the ongoing presence of the Royals in Commonwealth life.

Some of Greer's ideas may be highly relevant, but this commentary will likely cost her and her cause more than it will earn.

[kilroy_is_here]

Can you explain to me just what knowledge she has of the dutcheses life that makes her above reproach or how it is that she is above reproach for he Gillard comments now I'm not a fan of Gillard by a long shot but I see absolutely no link between the size of rear end and her ability or lack of ability to do her job

[karliandjacko]

---

@kilroy_is_here wrote:
Just because I'm in a good mood and feel like humouring you.
http://finallyfeminism101.wordpress.com/2007/08/25/faq-what-is-post-feminism/

---

Post-feminism has been positioned as everything from a reclaiming of traditional gender roles, an overt attempt to use the language of oppression to subvert feminism, to a way of depoliticizing feminism in order to bring it to the home (see Hawkensworth’s section on “Evolutionary extinction” for more detail).

No matter what form it may take, however, it is clear that the movement arose out of a backlash against feminism. This backlash is often ascribed to the specialization and splintering of feminism, which is seen by many post-feminists as one of the root causes for feminism’s decline. Regardless of which frame is put on it, though, this backlash carries one primary notion: post-feminism’s rise signals a world “in which feminism has been transcended, occluded, overcome” (Hawkensworth).

Thanks for that.   That sort of confirms how wrong you are about feminism.

Feminism is not a thing of the past. Nor is it to be feared and derided.   

[azureline**]

---

@kilroy_is_here wrote:
Shamefull because :
A). I'm a man and questioning her relevance
B). Because she is above reproach
C). Because you don't like me

---

A.. Your gender has no relevance here, it's a chat board. Her relevance is subjective......... some will think so, others will not, would be rare for a man to think so, perhaps?

B.. No one is above reproach, just common courtesy when commenting on a person who is well known, or not.

C.. I don't know you, rarely do I check who has written a post before I read it.

I post to the post, in reply, not to the poster, as such.

[kilroy_is_here]

Who said I agreed with the content you asked for it the post feminist era was that is the excepted time period weather th content is accurate well who knows but I again you judge me based on no knowledge of me

[karliandjacko]

---

@kilroy_is_here wrote:
Can you explain to me just what knowledge she has of the dutcheses life that makes her above reproach or how it is that she is above reproach for he Gillard comments now I'm not a fan of Gillard by a long shot but I see absolutely no link between the size of rear end and her ability or lack of ability to do her job

---

Well duh, that's exactly the point Greer was making.