The Daily Wire: "Ofensive" "birth mothers" - The Daily Wire

Jump to content

  • 3 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3

"Ofensive" "birth mothers" I mean, truly!

#21 User is offline   HDMC 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1616
  • Joined: 14-January 11
  • LocationNQ

Posted 25 March 2013 - 04:03 PM

View Posticey, on 24 March 2013 - 09:07 PM, said:

The separate and undiluted issue (which I'd presume to be regarding forced adoptions and their effect on "stake holders") is not being watered down by anybody to my awareness. Certainly not on this forum here.




So can I assume (!) that you're OK with the term "birth mother" this being to mean the "mother who gave birth"? Or are you now re-educated, just like some recent speakers on the topic?

And are you now outraged by Fairfax's "insults" referred to in my prior post? Or by the ABC's insults also quoted earlier?

Come on man (and I'm also talking to HDMC and others of like mind), be consistent!


It's not a matter of whether we're "OK" with the term. A good number of the people who were described as such clearly were not.

Abbott recognized that and sought to make amends, so you really don't need to keep on defending him, do you?

Unless you think it's some sort of badge of honour to be seen as even more insensitive than him?
Register so you can post replies with ease and remove this message.
Already registered? Please login now to make this message go away.
Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter

0

#22 User is offline   icey 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3501
  • Joined: 13-January 11
  • LocationBrisbane

Posted 25 March 2013 - 06:20 PM

View PostHDMC, on 25 March 2013 - 04:03 PM, said:

It's not a matter of whether we're "OK" with the term. A good number of the people who were described as such clearly were not.

Abbott recognized that and sought to make amends, so you really don't need to keep on defending him, do you?

Unless you think it's some sort of badge of honour to be seen as even more insensitive than him?


I couldn't pick what the number was other than probably more than the one on camera.

Stuff defending Tony Abbott. He dealt with it diplomatically as he saw fit.

I'm just saying that some people will be offended about anything. Spoke with a girl today who said her single mum was sedated in the early sixties to have her child taken from her, but she could not imagine her mum being offended by being called a "birth mother".

The bipartisan apology ceremony was certainly a strange time to have a hissy over semantics.

And not a word was heard from a soul about the multiple cited instances of "birth mother" in the left wing press. Says a lot.
Register so you can post replies with ease and remove this message.
Already registered? Please login now to make this message go away.
Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter

0

#23 User is offline   scotto 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • View blog
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 4300
  • Joined: 14-January 11
  • LocationNewcastle, NSW

Posted 26 March 2013 - 12:16 PM

View Posticey, on 25 March 2013 - 01:26 PM, said:

Well I guess the answer will have to remain your little secret.

.... except for I gave you the answer to your question, and you quoted it....
Register so you can post replies with ease and remove this message.
Already registered? Please login now to make this message go away.
Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter

0

#24 User is offline   HDMC 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1616
  • Joined: 14-January 11
  • LocationNQ

Posted 26 March 2013 - 12:30 PM

View Posticey, on 25 March 2013 - 06:20 PM, said:



And not a word was heard from a soul about the multiple cited instances of "birth mother" in the left wing press. Says a lot.


Says a lot of what? Just because you found other instances it doesn't follow that Abbott didn't offend the audience.
Register so you can post replies with ease and remove this message.
Already registered? Please login now to make this message go away.
Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter

0

#25 User is offline   icey 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3501
  • Joined: 13-January 11
  • LocationBrisbane

Posted 26 March 2013 - 12:42 PM

Quote

No. don't assume I'm okay with that terminology


"Maybe I am. Maybe I'm not".

Yep. Got that. Shhh!
Register so you can post replies with ease and remove this message.
Already registered? Please login now to make this message go away.
Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter

0

#26 User is offline   icey 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3501
  • Joined: 13-January 11
  • LocationBrisbane

Posted 26 March 2013 - 12:47 PM

View PostHDMC, on 26 March 2013 - 12:30 PM, said:

Says a lot of what? Just because you found other instances it doesn't follow that Abbott didn't offend the audience.



Most would have no trouble in understanding that this provides a compelling argument for reasonable usage without the expectation of offence.
Register so you can post replies with ease and remove this message.
Already registered? Please login now to make this message go away.
Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter

0

#27 User is offline   scotto 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • View blog
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 4300
  • Joined: 14-January 11
  • LocationNewcastle, NSW

Posted 26 March 2013 - 01:35 PM

View Posticey, on 26 March 2013 - 12:42 PM, said:

"Maybe I am. Maybe I'm not".

Yep. Got that. Shhh!

So, you're commenting on what you said? Go for it.

Still seems like you're trying to distract from Abbott's original misstep.
Register so you can post replies with ease and remove this message.
Already registered? Please login now to make this message go away.
Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter

0

#28 User is offline   HDMC 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1616
  • Joined: 14-January 11
  • LocationNQ

Posted 26 March 2013 - 03:53 PM

View Posticey, on 26 March 2013 - 12:47 PM, said:

Most would have no trouble in understanding that this provides a compelling argument for reasonable usage without the expectation of offence.


"Most" can please themselves what they expect, in this case offence was clearly taken. I never said Abbott expected to offend either - just the opposite, in fact.

Quote

To be fair to Abbott, I don't think he was being deliberately offensive, but offence was taken nonetheless and it's good that he sort of half apologised.


Now can you put down the whip and leave that poor dead horse in peace?
Register so you can post replies with ease and remove this message.
Already registered? Please login now to make this message go away.
Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter

0

#29 User is offline   icey 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3501
  • Joined: 13-January 11
  • LocationBrisbane

Posted 26 March 2013 - 04:06 PM

View PostHDMC, on 26 March 2013 - 03:53 PM, said:

Quote

To be fair to Abbott, I don't think he was being deliberately offensive, but offence was taken nonetheless and it's good that he sort of half apologised.


Now can you put down the whip and leave that poor dead horse in peace?


Poor old scotto bashes on about "Abbott's original misstep" which wasn't, and you speak of a "sort of half apology". Give me a break.
Register so you can post replies with ease and remove this message.
Already registered? Please login now to make this message go away.
Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter

0

#30 User is offline   HDMC 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1616
  • Joined: 14-January 11
  • LocationNQ

Posted 26 March 2013 - 04:54 PM

View Posticey, on 26 March 2013 - 04:06 PM, said:

Poor old scotto bashes on about "Abbott's original misstep" which wasn't, and you speak of a "sort of half apology". Give me a break.


Quote

"As the Senate inquiry made clear, there is a lot of contention over terminology. It is difficult to make the distinctions that sometimes we are trying to make without upsetting people. We all learn from our experiences and obviously I will learn from today."


So Scotto is right with his misstep evaluation, and I've not yet heard the word "sorry".

Good enough break?
Register so you can post replies with ease and remove this message.
Already registered? Please login now to make this message go away.
Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter

0

#31 User is offline   scotto 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • View blog
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 4300
  • Joined: 14-January 11
  • LocationNewcastle, NSW

Posted 26 March 2013 - 08:08 PM

View Posticey, on 26 March 2013 - 04:06 PM, said:

Poor old scotto bashes on about "Abbott's original misstep" which wasn't, and you speak of a "sort of half apology". Give me a break.

Poor old Icey - confused over your own echoes of Gerard Henderson, embarrassing as it is. Making a big noise to distract from that.

And by the way, Abbott openly acknowledged his misstep and did well. No one has said any different to this.
Register so you can post replies with ease and remove this message.
Already registered? Please login now to make this message go away.
Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter

0

#32 User is offline   icey 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3501
  • Joined: 13-January 11
  • LocationBrisbane

Posted 26 March 2013 - 08:37 PM

View Postscotto, on 26 March 2013 - 08:08 PM, said:

Poor old Icey - confused over your own echoes of Gerard Henderson, embarrassing as it is. Making a big noise to distract from that.

And by the way, Abbott openly acknowledged his misstep and did well. No one has said any different to this.


You and HDMC ought to compare notes and get your stories straight cos you are at odds with one another. Not that you can't be.

Now who's on my team?
Register so you can post replies with ease and remove this message.
Already registered? Please login now to make this message go away.
Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter

0

#33 User is offline   HDMC 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1616
  • Joined: 14-January 11
  • LocationNQ

Posted 27 March 2013 - 06:58 AM

View Posticey, on 26 March 2013 - 08:37 PM, said:

You and HDMC ought to compare notes and get your stories straight cos you are at odds with one another. Not that you can't be.


Not sure what you mean. The first sentence seems to imply we shouldn't have different viewpoints, and the second that it's ok if we do.

You can't have it both ways.

Quote

Now who's on my team?


Dunno. Not Tony Abbott.
Register so you can post replies with ease and remove this message.
Already registered? Please login now to make this message go away.
Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter

0

#34 User is offline   Bam 

  • Advanced Member
  • View blog
  • Group: Moderators
  • Posts: 3205
  • Joined: 13-January 11
  • LocationMelbourne

Posted 27 March 2013 - 08:18 AM

IMO, the term "birth mother" is only appropriate for children who were given up for adoption willingly or for children adopted because the mother has died during the infancy of the child. For children who were forcibly abducted, the term "mother" is better. The term "birth mother" seems to imply that the adoption was done with proper consent which in the case of forced adoptions is not the case. Consent is the key here.

Why do I say this? Consider this hypothetical scenario. Due to lax security, a woman walks into the maternity ward of a hospital, steals a baby and then raises it as their own. Is that woman the "mother"? Is the real mother a "birth mother"?

Or consider this scenario. Most children are raised by their "birth mothers". If so, why have the unadorned term "mother" at all?

To understand this better, it helps to see this from the point of view of the mother whose baby was abducted. How would she feel about this?
Register so you can post replies with ease and remove this message.
Already registered? Please login now to make this message go away.
Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter

0

#35 User is offline   icey 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3501
  • Joined: 13-January 11
  • LocationBrisbane

Posted 27 March 2013 - 10:39 AM

View PostBam, on 27 March 2013 - 08:18 AM, said:

IMO, the term "birth mother" is only appropriate for children who were given up for adoption willingly or for children adopted because the mother has died during the infancy of the child. For children who were forcibly abducted, the term "mother" is better. The term "birth mother" seems to imply that the adoption was done with proper consent which in the case of forced adoptions is not the case. Consent is the key here.


The term "birth mother" doesn't imply, rather by definition it denotes that this is the mother who gave birth.

Hands up here who has heard of "birth mother" as an offensive term before this month.

View PostBam, on 27 March 2013 - 08:18 AM, said:

Why do I say this? Consider this hypothetical scenario. Due to lax security, a woman walks into the maternity ward of a hospital, steals a baby and then raises it as their own. Is that woman the "mother"? Is the real mother a "birth mother"?


Despite English's occasional complexity, the answers to your questions are dead simple. Yes on both counts though the former mother (and I'm assuming she raised the child as her own) would of course be despicable.

View PostBam, on 27 March 2013 - 08:18 AM, said:

Or consider this scenario. Most children are raised by their "birth mothers". If so, why have the unadorned term "mother" at all?

To understand this better, it helps to see this from the point of view of the mother whose baby was abducted. How would she feel about this?


How would she feel? Well after the recent kerfuffle, she'd better damn well be offended or wonder what sort of victim she really is.

For crying out aloud, let's go for government funding for a study on "Global warming and the nomenclature pertaining to single parents in the period 1950-1960". Initial discussions to be held at Aubergine's in Canberra (Penny Wong can come for the ride), and thereafter once a month for the rest of the year.
Register so you can post replies with ease and remove this message.
Already registered? Please login now to make this message go away.
Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter

0

#36 User is offline   Bam 

  • Advanced Member
  • View blog
  • Group: Moderators
  • Posts: 3205
  • Joined: 13-January 11
  • LocationMelbourne

Posted 27 March 2013 - 11:44 AM

View Posticey, on 27 March 2013 - 10:39 AM, said:

The term "birth mother" doesn't imply, rather by definition it denotes that this is the mother who gave birth.

A simple question for you: do you label your own mother as "birth mother"?

You should also read some stories about the treatment that these women received. Here's one: Jo Fraser - Mother (ABC Online).

Now, in fairness, not all mothers who have suffered in this way reject the label. Some even call themselves "birth mothers" willingly. But we should be mindful that people are different, and some mothers do take offence. Remember why they take offence - they had a child abducted from them against their will.

Also, we should remember that Abbott did apologise for causing offence.
Register so you can post replies with ease and remove this message.
Already registered? Please login now to make this message go away.
Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter

0

#37 User is offline   icey 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3501
  • Joined: 13-January 11
  • LocationBrisbane

Posted 27 March 2013 - 01:33 PM

View PostBam, on 27 March 2013 - 11:44 AM, said:

But we should be mindful that people are different, and some mothers do take offence.


And some may be sensitive to "blue" skies and laments of feeling "a bit blue" because they had a blue baby that died at birth. Wouldn't think they should take offence though.


View PostBam, on 27 March 2013 - 11:44 AM, said:

A simple question for you: do you label your own mother as "birth mother"?


yes .... next question
Register so you can post replies with ease and remove this message.
Already registered? Please login now to make this message go away.
Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter

0

#38 User is offline   scotto 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • View blog
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 4300
  • Joined: 14-January 11
  • LocationNewcastle, NSW

Posted 27 March 2013 - 06:04 PM

View Posticey, on 26 March 2013 - 08:37 PM, said:

You and HDMC ought to compare notes and get your stories straight cos you are at odds with one another. Not that you can't be.

Now who's on my team?

Why?

I'm not even sure you're on your team.
Register so you can post replies with ease and remove this message.
Already registered? Please login now to make this message go away.
Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter

0

#39 User is offline   Bam 

  • Advanced Member
  • View blog
  • Group: Moderators
  • Posts: 3205
  • Joined: 13-January 11
  • LocationMelbourne

Posted 28 March 2013 - 08:17 PM

View Posticey, on 27 March 2013 - 01:33 PM, said:

And some may be sensitive to "blue" skies and laments of feeling "a bit blue" because they had a blue baby that died at birth. Wouldn't think they should take offence though.

I doubt it - you're just making it up. I really cannot understand why you're being so unreasonable on this. Are you trolling?
Register so you can post replies with ease and remove this message.
Already registered? Please login now to make this message go away.
Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter

0

#40 User is offline   icey 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3501
  • Joined: 13-January 11
  • LocationBrisbane

Posted 29 March 2013 - 02:54 AM

View PostBam, on 28 March 2013 - 08:17 PM, said:

I doubt it - you're just making it up. I really cannot understand why you're being so unreasonable on this. Are you trolling?


My reference to "blue" skies was hypothetical but within the realms of reason.

You think I'm trolling because I have a firm belief that some are unduly sensitive about semantics? Or because I am amused at the faux outrage at Abbott's supposed mistake?
Register so you can post replies with ease and remove this message.
Already registered? Please login now to make this message go away.
Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter

0

Share this topic:


  • 3 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3


Fast Reply