Indigeneous Women Kept As Cash Cows

[icyfroth]

ABORIGINAL women are being “kept pregnant” as “cash cows” in order to make money from government hand outs, a former Labor MP has claimed.

Former politician Gary Johns made the controversial comment during an interview on Ten’s Bolt Report on Sunday morning during a discussion over the proposed constitutional recognition of indigenous Australians.

“A lot of poor women in this country, a large proportion of whom are Aboriginal, are used as cash cows,” he said.

“They are kept pregnant and producing children for the cash. Now that has to stop.”

Johns’ comments were in response to a report from Aboriginal Housing Victoria which today revealed Aboriginal women were 34 times more likely to suffer domestic violence than non-indigenous women, published by Fairfax.

He aimed his comments at Cape York community leader Noel Pearson and his approach to constitutional recognition.

“I’d like Noel and his team to start thinking about fundamental issues that affect his people and our people at the really lower end of this society,” he said.

“They should be trying to smash the welfare state, not a liberal democracy and its constitution.”

The former MP who served in the Keating government has gained attention on social media for his controversial comments, but he’s no stranger to backlash when it comes to his views on welfare.

Writing in The Australian last year, Johns suggested welfare should be linked to compulsory contraception, saying there should be “no taxpayer inducement to have children”.

“Potential parents of poor means, poor skills or bad character will choose to have children. So be it,” he wrote.

“But no one should enter parenthood while on a benefit.”

http://www.news.com.au/finance/money/former-labor-mp-gary-johns-says-indigenous-women-are-being-kept...

I disagree about welfare being linked to compulsory contraception.

[icyfroth]

No, it just proves that it is Mr John's opinion.

[the_great_she_elephant]

---

@icyfroth wrote:

No, it just proves that it is Mr John's opinion.

---

And no-one can be prevented from having or even, in his case, offering, an opinion. However If the article  in your OP has quoted him correctly then he was not offering an opinion. He said “A lot of poor women in this country, a large proportion of whom are Aboriginal, are used as cash cows,”  Nowhere did say "I believe, or "I suspect" or "it is my opinion that . . ." He stated it as a fact and as far as I can see he has no evidence whatsoever to back it up.

[icyfroth]

---

@the_great_she_elephant wrote:

---

@icyfroth wrote:

No, it just proves that it is Mr John's opinion.

---

And no-one can be prevented from having or even, in his case, offering, an opinion. However If the article  in your OP has quoted him correctly then he was not offering an opinion. He said “A lot of poor women in this country, a large proportion of whom are Aboriginal, are used as cash cows,”  Nowhere did say "I believe, or "I suspect" or "it is my opinion that . . ." He stated it as a fact and as far as I can see he has no evidence whatsoever to back it up.

---

As far as you can see...

That's not to say it's not happening.

[the_great_she_elephant]

---

@icyfroth wrote:

---

@the_great_she_elephant wrote:

---

@icyfroth wrote:

No, it just proves that it is Mr John's opinion.

---

And no-one can be prevented from having or even, in his case, offering, an opinion. However If the article  in your OP has quoted him correctly then he was not offering an opinion. He said “A lot of poor women in this country, a large proportion of whom are Aboriginal, are used as cash cows,”  Nowhere did say "I believe, or "I suspect" or "it is my opinion that . . ." He stated it as a fact and as far as I can see he has no evidence whatsoever to back it up.

---

As far as you can see...

That's not to say it's not happening.

---

That's right - and because I cannot prove that it is not happening, I have not claimed that it is not happening. Johns on the other hand has claimed that it is happening, but has produced no evidence to  back up that claim

[icyfroth]

---

@the_great_she_elephant wrote:

---

@icyfroth wrote:

---

@the_great_she_elephant wrote:

---

@icyfroth wrote:

No, it just proves that it is Mr John's opinion.

---

And no-one can be prevented from having or even, in his case, offering, an opinion. However If the article  in your OP has quoted him correctly then he was not offering an opinion. He said “A lot of poor women in this country, a large proportion of whom are Aboriginal, are used as cash cows,”  Nowhere did say "I believe, or "I suspect" or "it is my opinion that . . ." He stated it as a fact and as far as I can see he has no evidence whatsoever to back it up.

---

As far as you can see...

That's not to say it's not happening.

---

That's right - and because I cannot prove that it is not happening, I have not claimed that it is not happening. Johns on the other hand has claimed that it is happening, but has produced no evidence to  back up that claim

---

yeah ok She-el why don't you send him a withering email about it if it troubles you so much?

[i-need-a-martini]

---

@icyfroth wrote:

---

@morgana2408 wrote:

Sadly abuse, neglect and family violence are not restricted to one particular family background

---

True. But did you read this bit in the OP?

"Johns’ comments were in response to a report from Aboriginal Housing Victoria which today revealed Aboriginal women were 34 times more likely to suffer domestic violence than non-indigenous women, published by Fairfax."

Fairfax published it, so it must be true.

---

Yes but it is also true that women in the lower socio economic demographics are more likely to suffer domestic violence regardless of race. So it would be obvious that indigenous women, who are more likely to be in a lower socio economic demographic than other women in this country, would therefore be more likely to suffer higher levels of abuse.

It has little to do with their culture but more to do with their poorer than average standards of living.

The guy is an idiot anyway. He has a history of talking rubbish.

[i-need-a-martini]

---

@i-need-a-martini wrote:

---

@icyfroth wrote:

---

@morgana2408 wrote:

Sadly abuse, neglect and family violence are not restricted to one particular family background

---

True. But did you read this bit in the OP?

"Johns’ comments were in response to a report from Aboriginal Housing Victoria which today revealed Aboriginal women were 34 times more likely to suffer domestic violence than non-indigenous women, published by Fairfax."

Fairfax published it, so it must be true.

---

And by the way, what Fairfax was publishing was a quote. They were not suggesting there was any truth in his statement.

[icyfroth]

---

@i-need-a-martini wrote:

---

@icyfroth wrote:

---

@morgana2408 wrote:

Sadly abuse, neglect and family violence are not restricted to one particular family background

---

True. But did you read this bit in the OP?

"Johns’ comments were in response to a report from Aboriginal Housing Victoria which today revealed Aboriginal women were 34 times more likely to suffer domestic violence than non-indigenous women, published by Fairfax."

Fairfax published it, so it must be true.

---

Yes but it is also true that women in the lower socio economic demographics are more likely to suffer domestic violence regardless of race.

That would be quite right Martini, but seeing the study was done by Aboriginal Housing Victoria, it focuses on domestic violence perpetrated on Aboriginal women.

a report from Aboriginal Housing Victoria which today revealed Aboriginal women were 34 times more likely to suffer domestic violence than non-indigenous women, published by Fairfax.

I take that to mean that Aboriginal women are 34 times more likely to suffer abuse than non-aboriginal women of the same low socio-economic demographic

So it would be obvious that indigenous women, who are more likely to be in a lower socio economic demographic than other women in this country, would therefore be more likely to suffer higher levels of abuse.

It has little to do with their culture but more to do with their poorer than average standards of living.

Indeed it has little to do with their ancestral culture, rather to do with the new culture of welfare dependency. And that is not specific to the indigenous, as we know. 

In any case, the point Mr Johns was making is: 

“I’d like Noel [Pearson] and his team to start thinking about fundamental issues that affect his people and our people at the really lower end of this society,” he said.

“They should be trying to smash the welfare state, not a liberal democracy and its constitution.”

The guy is an idiot anyway.

That may well be so, but unless you can show a verified psychiatric evaluation of this man's intellectual capacity, you have no proof to back up your statement, and so it remains your opinion only.

He has a history of talking rubbish.

Again, unless you have a verified analysis of his historical utterances and written material, done by respected peers, it is your opinion only, and not fact.

---

[icyfroth]

---

@i-need-a-martini wrote:

---

@i-need-a-martini wrote:

---

@icyfroth wrote:

---

@morgana2408 wrote:

Sadly abuse, neglect and family violence are not restricted to one particular family background

---

True. But did you read this bit in the OP?

"Johns’ comments were in response to a report from Aboriginal Housing Victoria which today revealed Aboriginal women were 34 times more likely to suffer domestic violence than non-indigenous women, published by Fairfax."

Fairfax published it, so it must be true.

---

And by the way, what Fairfax was publishing was a quote. They were not suggesting there was any truth in his statement.

---

If you choose to look again, what Fairfax was actually publishing was a report by Aboriginal Housing Victoria. Which Mr Johns was responding to.

Thank you for gracing this thread with your exalted presence.

[punch*drunk]

It always surprises me that people want to stick their heads in the sand and act like this kind of thing doesnt happen. There are always people tryng to rip off the system and having lots of kids is a great way to get more money. My sisters ex seemed to make it his mission in life to keep her pregnant and popping out more kids, it was a great way to keep the money rolling in for him.

I'm quite sure his anger over her finally leaving him had a lot more to do with the loss of income than loss of his family.