by Catherine Delahunty
What a great way to start the day! What if a woman woke up feeling pretty okay about herself and then accidentally watched “Breakfast” on Wednesday March 25?
Let it be a warning to all women who are too small, too large, too muscular, and too weak at the knees, too bald, too hairy, and too lined. All women with imperfect hair cuts, strange eyebrows, unusual moles, stretch marks, a personality, an opinion, or a tendency towards standing up for themselves better watch out.
After all the media gods who keep their jobs due to their physical and intellectual irresistibility must be heard. These gods have decreed that a woman is not okay unless she can squeeze inside their tiny, patronising, fearful definition of how she should look. She must never think that her work, her achievements, her wisdom and her analysis will be enough to be respected. Not unless she looks like Barbie.
After all it is 2009 and we are all post feminists. Only a “girl” with no sense of humour would object to a bit of candid ragging about how she looks on TV.
Or maybe the moronic populist sexism is a symptom of the scrotum shrivelling terror behind the abusive arrogant stance when a petty populist meets a whole person.
Who knows, but I suggest switching to Maori TV, a non existent breakfast programme on a channel which acts like a proper public broadcaster would be better than that other kind of morning sickness.
Published in Media by Catherine Delahunty on Fri, March 27th, 2009
Tags: david brent, greenpeace, moustache gate, Paul Henry
More posts by Catherine Delahunty | more about Catherine Delahunty
on the trolls and those who are unable to keep on topic
That’s why I DON’T ever watch Breakfast TV!
Formula:
Two Presenters:
Number One: “Smart” male (His physical appearance and age don’t seem to be relevant).
Number Two: Much younger female (Her physical appearance is crucial to her chance of getting the job).
Lots of repartee between “equals”. They basically agree on everything but there is constant “friendly banter” about trivia.
(Come to think of it the whole show is trivia.)
Personally I stick to RadioNZ for my morning’s information…
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I wonder what percent of Paul’s hate mail was sent by Alison Mau
Perhaps Paul has just never got over being beat in Wairarapa in 1999 by Georgina Beyer.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Hilarious! Thanks for the link. Gotta love Paul Henry
Being politically incorrect is naturally funny…..
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
>>meets a whole person
I met a half person once. No legs.
Buddah boom.
Well, it is Friday….
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Two questions floating around the lily pad..
1. how does Alison Mau not walk-out..she’s trapped in the iron cage!!
2. how the hell does this man have a job?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
She looked very embarrassed about the whole thing. Henry’s always annoyed me – he’s an arrogant prick to be honest.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
’cause he’s funny.
And incendiary.
That’s entertainment.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
Here’s a thought for those who don’t like Paul Henry. It requires no statist intervention, so probably won’t appeal to the crowd here….
1. Pick up remote
2. Switch off TV
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
too busy to watch breakfast TV. but man should respect a woman no matter how she looks. always remember that beauty is in the eye of beholder man.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
too busy to watch breakfast TV. but a man should respect a lady no matter what she looks like. everyone has their own way of living men. (www.kika.ca)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
To bad, BP, that it’s not really an entertainment format. Nah. Just plain rude. Henry is a tosser.
Oh, and yes, I have used the remote where henry is concerned, and after sunday’s new Q+A show, I’ve used the remote on that other gasbag, Paul Holmes.
Paul and Paul. Is there a pattern emerging?
I did Lol about Henry being arrested by Georgina Beyer. Good on her!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I never watch the show either because of him.
And in this case, he has clearly breached the good taste and decency standard of the Broadcast Code.
Nancy
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
>>To bad, BP, that it’s not really an entertainment format.
It is really…..
Funny how so many people so incensed by him claim never to watch him.
Methinks some people enjoy being outraged which is, of course, the reason he does what he does….
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I’m absolutely sickened by Paul Henry.
To all these creeps who find this funny, just imagine the reaction from farmers if Paul invited someone from federated farmers to speak on his show and then commenting on their man boobs or receding hairline .
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
How big are these man boobs, exactly?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Henry needs to have Kim Hill as a co host. TVNZ deliberately choose a partner who isn’t his equal verbally. A while back a new Labour MP got her dig in with “a right-wing commentator such as you”.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Yep, as I said recently somewhere else (haha, that’ll keep the trolls busy searching ….), TVNZ can’t do breakfast to save their lives, and it’s time Paul Henry moved on.
I never watch this programme, after a week in Hamilton on my Dad’s couch put me off for life.
Thanks, Cath, for being the filter that alerts me to evilness, so that I don’t have to go there myself. And for bravely going where many MP’s would fear to tread, a head-to-head with TVNZ staff services, and their head of programming.
‘Cos I expect they will.
Having quit being a hairy-legged feminist briefly over the summer, I’m reclaiming my hirsuitedness for the Welli winter, which seems to have arrived promptly with Autumn Equinox, and I challenge all hairy women to join me in wishing Paul Henry the torture of a blunted razorblade in some near point of the future.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“..Or maybe the moronic populist sexism is a symptom of the scrotum shrivelling terror behind the abusive arrogant stance when a petty populist meets a whole person..”
whoar..!
talk about ‘purple’..
..and..and..’moustache-gate’..?
really..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Speaking of hairy, anyone seen the Beaver ad?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Complaints should be submitted. I’ve just submitted one and everyone else should do the same.
bluepeter, do you also think its funny when women die of ovarian cancer? Is that the kind of stuff that gives you shits and giggles? Seriously, you are a sick disturbed individual.
The fact that he said it in the first place was bad enough, but hey, I could’ve dealt with that. But then making fun of a poor woman who clearly suffers from a condition that causes her to grow a moustache, and who was deeply affected by his comments is just disgusting. He’s a sad pathetic man, and I hope he gets what’s coming to him (a firing). Very tragic when people at TVNZ are losing their jobs and a worm like this can just hang on.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
b.t.w…catherine..
..i had a guffaw over that report on you and gordon hosting that whatever..
..and how you said you got them to ‘brainstorm’..
..waves of deja vu washed over me..
..as i remembered all those ‘brainstorming-sessions’ you used over many years..
..to both control and stifle any dissent/wavering from the party-line/iron-control of conference-formats..
..eh..?
break everyone up into small groups..to ‘brainstorm’..
..and then just studiously ignore anything they come up with..
..(and send them on their way..dissent sated..)
..brilliant in its’ simplicity..and effectiveness..eh..?
..especially as it gives the impression of you doing something..
..eh..?
..still sticking with what ‘works’ for you..
..eh..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Taht was a classic tv mment…it was un PC.funny and most all true! The Woman is sporting a damm hedge on that lip…..yuck!
Fire up the line trimmer……
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Paul Henry survives as he says the sorts of things that lots of people think.
Though this morning he came over all Jeremy Paxman…
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
and of course women are ‘free’ to have mo’s..
it’s just that on most men the mo’ looks decidedly ‘dicky’..
..as it does on most women..
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
i mean..we have to friggen shave..!
..and i know there is the standard we shave/you menstruate gender-trade-off..
..but here we clearly have over-lap..
..(or is that over-lip..?..)
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Then there was what he said the other day about climate change…
http://good.net.nz/blog/guests/an-open-letter-to-paul-henry
He is VERY David Brent in the mo clip, ain’t he!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
What’s Bimbo got to say?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Given the importance of climate change TVNZ should be picketed or maybe Crunchie should have to debate with a scientist.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I watched that interview, I could not take my eyes off the moustache!
So Henry read a few emails out on air, so what?, is Mills is going to put herself into the public domain then perhaps she should invest in a little wax or hair removal cream.
Paul Henry is the best thing that TVNZ have and unlike the plethora of left wing hosts/journalists he is prepared to ask the hard questions of ALL political leaders.
Not all of us suffer the disease of political correctness, Henry only pointed out what was commented on by others and then said he agreed with them.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Paul Henry is an idiot, but he only said what many women have been saying for years.
Greenpeace has a PR person, and people think “oooooohh – you really should do something about the moustashe” They don’t usually say anything, but they think it.
Whether it is right or wrong to judge, for a large number of people it is a massive distraction from what she is saying. And being a PR person, shurely the most important thing is the message.
It’s fine to be yourself, have a mowhawk, body pearcings or whatever, but if you are trying to convince the general public of a point you will be far LESS successful if you look a bit different.
Is that wrong? – probably. But in the imperfect real world many people judge on appearances, and if you want to get a message across, you’re probablty best to look “normal”.
There are plenty of people who thin that David Bain’s weird rainbow jersey helped convict him.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Since I have a face for Radio and Podcasting, I agree with this sentiment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Cactua kate ….a real feminist, tells ugly bearded lefty lezzies that if they really want to get their message across to hotten up and lose the face fuzz
http://asianinvasion2006.blogspot.com/
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Now there a facebook group too….! ;-0
http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=64260981610&topic=8057#/group.php?gid=64260981610
Someone wants to donate some veet to Mills…..LOL!…..I’ll donate a lawn mower!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I’m not usually a fan of Bridget Saunders , but I agree with everything she says here.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/sunday-star-times/entertainment/blog-about-town/2296667/Moustachegate
As for those who say ” we are thinking it so okay to say it” -what cr*p logic. Is it really okay to publicly comment on a guests weight /bear belly/ wrinkles ..whatever just because you think it?
I hope none here thinks that reading out aloud a comment in a classroom that mocked a student for their appearance have been acceptable ?
At schools this sort of treatment can lead to years of low self esteem and even suicide among our young. Is there much difference between that kind of harassment and what Paul did? As far as I’m concerned he has proved himself to be nothing but a A grade bully. I cant even begin to describe the revulsion I have for bullies like him.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“There are plenty of people who thin that David Bain’s weird rainbow jersey helped convict him.”
That and a mountain of evidence against the man.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
naturalhigh
No. Do you think it’s runny when men die in bizarre gardening accidents?
No. No it doesn’t.
And you should have paid attention when your primary school teacher were was teaching comprehension.
Fair enough. Others found him amusing, partly because they know it is wrong to say it. He’s a very naughty boy, and sometimes naughty boys are funny simply by virtue of being naughty.
Finally, I agree with a poster above. If you’re in a PR function, you DO have to consider image. Unfair? Sure. But life isn’t fair.
I look ridiculous with a mo’. Many men do. Women even more so.
That’s why we shave….
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Women find it amusing, too:
“Pant wetters attacked Paul Henry for being insensitive to women who have medical conditions that speed up the growth of thick facial hair. Fellow right wing female activist Busted Blonde has one such condition, I have lunched with her and didn’t even notice the facial hair. Which means Busted Blonde rightly chose to remove it all before leaving the house. Busted Blonde didn’t wet her pants about Paul Henry’s giggling, she found it amusing, outed herself by blog and laughed the whole thing off.
If Paul Henry grew a moustache columnists such as Bridget Saunders would be running column inches regarding the growth. It would be the talk of the town for weeks. Everyone would have an opinion on it.”
http://asianinvasion2006.blogspot.com/2009/03/houstache.html
Cactus Kate is the business….
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
PS:
As is your right, but isn’t that just typical. The left don’t like what someone says, so the natural reaction is to use state violence to shut that person down. The fact that person is speaking a truth is irrelevant.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Come on BP, do as they say and send a letter of complaint to TVNZ.
I have done so, I said that as far as I am concerned unless TVNZ make Stephanie Mills a permanent guest on the show I am not going to watch.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
From what I heard he was just reading viewers comments. I have not seen the interview so hard to comment. Surprisingly I agree with BluePeter, I watch breakfast becuse I disagree with paul so much.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
reddeath26, my problem isn’t so much with his initial reading of the comment, but of his then nasty comments about a woman who was affected by the initial comment. The “start a group” thing was just nasty. You wouldn’t say that to a kid suffering from cancer, and you wouldn’t say it to men with prostate cancer or any other diseases. The woman was clearly a sufferer and he made light and insulted her.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
naturalhigh,
But there is a difference between your examples and the facial hair in question.
To criticise a child with cancer or a man with prostate cancer because of the cancer would be criticising the disease itself, something they are unable to change, rather than the physical side effects of the disease.
What he is criticising is the physical side-effect of hormone complications, a side effect that is readily controlable (one that most men control once or twice a day) which pushes against social norms. One cannot justify criticising a child with cancer for being bald due to chemotherapy but one can justify criticising a child with cancer for not wearing a wig to cover-up said baldness if it violates cultural and social norms.
He didint criticise the hormones in her blood but the readily alterable result of said hormones.
On another note; I may actually be promted to watch the show once in a while now
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Facial hair isn’t a “moustache” or (beard for that matter). Would he also comment on a women with a thin hair or someone with a hair lip?
George Riesman is Paul Henry & Co’s Patron Saint.
A Free-Market Response to Global Warming
Even if global warming is a fact, the free citizens of an industrial civilization will have no great difficulty in coping with it—that is, of course, if their ability to use energy and to produce is not crippled by the environmental movement and by government controls otherwise inspired. The seeming difficulties of coping with global warming, or any other large-scale change, arise only when the problem is viewed from the perspective of government central planners.
It would be too great a problem for government bureaucrats to handle (as is the production even of an adequate supply of wheat or nails, as the experience of the whole socialist world has so eloquently shown). But it would certainly not be too great a problem for tens and hundreds of millions of free, thinking individuals living under capitalism to solve. It would be solved by means of each individual being free to decide how best to cope with the particular aspects of global warming that affected him.
Individuals would decide, on the basis of profit-and loss calculations, what changes they needed to make in their businesses and in their personal lives, in order best to adjust to the situation. They would decide where it was now relatively more desirable to own land, locate farms and businesses, and live and work, and where it was relatively less desirable, and what new comparative advantages each location had for the production of which goods. Factories, stores, and houses all need replacement sooner or later. In the face of a change in the relative desirability of different locations, the pattern of replacement would be different. Perhaps some replacements would have to be made sooner than otherwise. To be sure, some land values would fall and others would rise. Whatever happened individuals would respond in a way that minimized their losses and maximized their possible gains. The essential thing they would require is the freedom to serve their self-interests by buying land and moving their businesses to the areas rendered relatively more attractive, and the freedom to seek employment and buy or rent housing in those areas.
Given this freedom, the totality of the problem would be overcome. This is because, under capitalism, the actions of the individuals, and the thinking and planning behind those actions, are coordinated and harmonized by the price system (as many former central planners of Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union have come to learn). As a result, the problem would be solved in exactly the same way that tens and hundreds of millions of free individuals have solved greater problems than global warming, such as redesigning the economic system to deal with the replacement of the horse by the automobile, the settlement of the American West, and the release of the far greater part of the labor of the economic system from agriculture to industry. (pp. 88-89)
This article is copyright © 2007, by George Reisman.
http://www.solopassion.com/node/4292
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“Individuals would decide, on the basis of profit-and loss calculations, what changes they needed to make in their businesses and in their personal lives, in order best to adjust to the situation.”
eg cod fisheries collapse so the fishermen…………………………….?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
@jh- do you mean the same USA which was dependent on protectionism to grow their economy? Also do you mean state directed growth like that which led to amazing growth in Japan and South Korea? Actually, how many countries can you mention which were able to grow their economies with free markets and how many had the state play a role?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
reddeath,
email me.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
My point in placing the quote from George Riesman was that some people who think like Paul Henry use George Riesman as a reference and his message is that man can control the biosphere. In dealing with those types you need to know the weaknesses in their belief systems.
In the example above, henry treats it as a joke and a side issue. It’s his show and for him that is probably the main message he wants to get across for the day. That’s what he’ll gloat over to Don Brash’s ex? girl friend. There’ll be “haw, haw, haw” from the visitors with fat wallets on the top floor at TVNZ.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Riesman is bang on ….as usual.
eg cod fisheries collapse so the fishermen…………………………….?”
….Go do something else…as Whale oilers,wheel wrights and chimmey sweeps did….pretty obvious.
“@jh- do you mean the same USA which was dependent on protectionism to grow their economy?”
Wrong…the USA grew fastest at the time it had the LEAST trade restrictions…..before 1900.
“Also do you mean state directed growth like that which led to amazing growth in Japan and South Korea?”
Poor examples….both were picking themselves back up after wars….the only way was up…and Japan stuffed itself with big Government interventions and rescue packages that actually kept them in recesession LONGER…
“Actually, how many countries can you mention which were able to grow their economies with free markets and how many had the state play a role?”
The real question is….how many countries would have grown far faster if the state had stayed out of the way and not inhibited inovation and free trade…the answer is all of them. The countries with the least Government intervention in the market are the richest….the ones with the most are the poorest…..so obvious a child could see it but a socialist can’t.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
reddeath26, my problem isn’t so much with his initial reading of the comment, but of his then nasty comments about a woman who was affected by the initial comment. The “start a group” thing was just nasty. You wouldn’t say that to a kid suffering from cancer, and you wouldn’t say it to men with prostate cancer or any other diseases. The woman was clearly a sufferer and he made light and insulted her.”
Henrys “Start a group” comment was more about suggesting the writer needed to harden up a bit and get a life….that she was wailing on out of all proportion to the “offence” committed….that of stating what viewers were thinking…that Mills needs a shave and looks a freak with that tash….and that her message was lost in the meantime by distracting the viewers….
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
James,
Strange how the bedwetters are watching Paul Henry in the first place. They know what he is like – so I can only conclude they watch him *in order* to take offense. They have a choice, and they choose to watch Paul Henry.
Also, they should indeed start a group. Good advice, really. A support group would be much more productive than writing to an entertainment show.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Riesman is bang on ….as usual.
eg cod fisheries collapse so the fishermen…………………………….?”
….Go do something else…as Whale oilers,wheel wrights and chimmey sweeps did….pretty obvious.
……………………
but you can eat fish.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Have you considered that maybe Paul Henry is spot on? He wasn’t slagging women. He was “naming the elephant in the room” and probably giving her a good piece of PR advice.
Stephanie has a mo, and that’s distracting. My view on this is that she has every right to look/be how she wants but if she wants people to listen to her words then she needs to lose the mo. If she can’t lose it, or chooses not to, then she shouldn’t be appearing on TV as a spokesperson for Greenpeace.
Personally I was interested in what she had to say but was distracted by the elephant in the room. Surely it is a fact of life that “look a certain way and be judged”. If you choose to be representing an issue in public then it helps get your message across if you can remove any phsyical barrier between yourself and the person/s you want to communicate. Stephnie’s mo IS a barrier.
As for Catherine Delahunty’s original post, reactionary carping isn’t conducive to Parliamentary effectiveness.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“Or maybe the moronic populist sexism is a symptom of the scrotum shrivelling terror behind the abusive arrogant stance when a petty populist meets a whole person”. That is an incredibly offensive comment. I can’t believe that a Green MP would write something like that.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
>>Surely it is a fact of life that “look a certain way and be judged”.
Oh dear! So, it’s not what you say and how you support your point of view but rather how you appear. You must meet certain appearance norms that not only include dress sense but also appropriate cosmetics. Even oratory and debating skills pale into insignificance. Would you also restrict the obese, the anorexic, the deformed (eg the ‘elephant’ man) from appearing on a lightweight opinionated TV show for fear of distracting (upsetting?) the viewers? Perhaps radio is the superior medium here?
It is common practice for inadequate debaters to resort to ad hominem remarks about their superior opponents when they find that they are unable to counter an opponent’s arguments.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
kjuv
Depends on whether you want people to listen to you or focus on your deformity I suppose. Were the Elephant Man to become the spokesperson for Greenpeace, then I would recommend radio, yes. Either that, or be prepared to accept that people are going to focus on the Elephant Man, not Greenpeace. Sorry, but regardless of how adequate or even superior the Elephant Man’s debating skills the ‘Elephant’ IS in the room. Fact of life. Not something i necessarily like but it is a fact of life.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
i reckon delahunty will be going to top that ‘scrotum’-piece..
http://whoar.co.nz/2009/new-green-mp-loses-it-over-henrys-hairy-lip-comments/
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Skinman
Hmm.. but perhaps it is not that the spokesperson has unacceptable visual features, but rather that we find the appearance somewhat unusual. Instead of pandering to our initial queasiness, wouldn’t it be more humane (not to mention mature) for us to accept that our, admittedly involuntary, negative reaction to certain appearances tells us more about ourselves than about the object of our mild revulsion? Generally such insignificant but unnusual visual appearances will quickly become part of the background.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Paul Henry asked “How hard can it be to wax?”. He obviously thinks that waxing your lip regularly is easy. Here’s a challenge for Paul – WAX YOUR LIP. Really, do it Paul, I think once a week for 6 weeks should be enough for you. Then you will be an authority on how ‘easy’ it is.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
kazel
If waxing is so hard to do then perhaps she should shave.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
not many people would have the guts to appear on TV as they biologically are. How many photofacials and botox shots has Henry had?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
let’s face it we live in a spin doctored pr’d world (and perhaps there will be a need for some of that?)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
It’s been jokingly dubbed “moustache gate”, but questionable on-air comments by Breakfast host Paul Henry are being investigated by TVNZ.
Henry outraged some viewers last Wednesday when he giggled about the facial hair of one of his female guests anti-nuclear campaigner and Greenpeace worker Stephanie Mills.
“It was a moustache on a lady.”
Mills was on the show to discuss compensation given by the French government to victims of nuclear testing in the Pacific.
TVNZ confirmed it had received “a handful” of complaints from viewers and had started a formal complaints procedure as outlined by the Broadcasting Standards Act.
But Henry was yesterday unrepentant, saying he had nothing to be sorry about and viewers expected him to speak his mind.
“I certainly have no intention of apologising to people who have written in and complained. The key thing to me is what a fortunate life they must have that they can afford time and energy to complain about such an insignificant thing.”
The episode began during a feedback section of Breakfast, when Henry ignored “please don’t” pleas from his co-host Alison Mau and read out viewer comments including: “I had no idea what Stephanie Mills was thinking going on telly with that enormous moustache. Wax is cheap you know”, and “Are mos for female Greenpeace members standard issue?”
Later in the show Mau read out a letter from a viewer who said some female facial hair growth was caused by medical conditions and Henry’s comments had reduced her to tears.
Henry replied: “Start a group. Really.”
The episode has gone viral, attracting more than 20,000 views on popular video sharing site YouTube, where it has been dubbed “moustache gate”.
Stephanie Mills released a statement saying the story was about people in the Pacific affected by nuclear testing, not about her. Henry said Mills was an intelligent person who was interested in far more important things than comments about a moustache. He has no issues with women with facial hair.
“The thing that interested me wasn’t the fact that she had facial hair.
“It was the fact that everyone can be amazed by it, everyone can be thinking about it, everyone can see it as an interesting thing, but no one can say anything.”
Otago University Gender Studies head Annabel Cooper said Henry’s comments were discourteous.
“They should get grown-ups to host those shows.”
She said anything that appeared to blur the distinction between genders, including facial hair on a woman, caused a lot of social anxiety, explaining some of the responses.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/entertainment/tv/2299151/Henry-faces-up-to-moustache-gate
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
margaret (Tauranga) Even my little kids at school know that verbal put-downs/sling offs like that are a form of bullying and only a certain type of person likes a bully
Matt (Palmerston North) I switched very quickly to Sunrise and have NEVER looked back. Paul Henry srikes me to be the typical Ponsonby Dwelling, Suv driving, Latte Sipping “Metro” Aucklander, a persona that I personally can’t stand. I perfer Sunrise’s Oliver Driver who is much more honest, yet at the same time down to earth.
http://blogs.nzherald.co.nz/blog/your-views/2009/3/27/do-you-think-paul-henrys-moustache-comments-were-amusing-or-offensive/?c_id=339&objectid=10563887&commentpage=11
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
kjuv
i wish it were so and we were a more humane and mature species. We’ve obviously got some more evolving to do. It’s the same response that causes people to drive into a car in front because they’re so busy looking at an accident. Obviously the car in front needed greater attention than the accident. France’s response to their nuclear testing in the Pacific was the car in front. Stephanie’s mo was the accident.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Oliver Driver…honest???
Honest in his left wing political leanings I guess but that is about it.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Bottom line here people: unless you’re Tom Selleck, you look RIDICULOUS with a mo’, male, female or hybrid.
Fight nature. Grab that razor.
If you don’t, people will talk. They do so if you’re a male or female. Mo’s have that effect…..
As for “scrotum shrivelling”, I guess some Green MPs are on exactly the same level as Paul Henry. How curious
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I don’t watch TV and now I know why. It’s not what Paul said but the fact that he’s allowed to get away with it that is sickening me. Even the poor presenter next to him is not able to stop him.
If it was me I’d definitely try and sue him for defamation or something. That is 1A bullying behaviour and should be stopped by any means possible.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
oliver
I suppose that’s why we need hate speech legislation aye.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
ridiculing people for entertainment started with American Idol?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
>>Bottom line here people: unless you’re Tom Selleck, you look RIDICULOUS with a mo’, male, female or hybrid.
I don’t know about that. They seemed to have suited Einstein, Hiltler and the handlebar brigade such as George V
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Skinman
Which brings me back to your original support for Henry on this topic. Surely TV presenters and show hosts can display a little more maturity? From a PR point of view a quiet word in the lady’s ear would suffice. There was no need to blab to all and sundry.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
People comment on how people look on television all the time.
They comment on their haircuts, their clothes, their teeth, their tattoos, their piercings, their height or lack of it, and what colour tie they wore.
Think of Nixon and his five o clock shadow in the Kennedy debate.
His facial hair probably cost him the election,
I don’t see why a woman’s facial hair is different – and of course it distracts from the message – as Nixon learned to his cost. Most of us have learned from his misfortune.
I heard some saying it was a comment on a disability. What?
I have a moustache and do not regard it as a disability.
I would have thought any woman about to go on TV and not wanting to distract from the message would remove any obvious facial hair. If that goes against her personal ideals then she should hand over the role to someone else.
It’s simple professionalism. And people in public positions have a duty to their constituents to get their message across.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“I don’t see why a woman’s facial hair is different”
“Otago University Gender Studies head Annabel Cooper said …
…. anything that appeared to blur the distinction between genders, including facial hair on a woman, caused a lot of social anxiety, explaining some of the responses.”
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
…. anything that appeared to blur the distinction between genders, including facial hair on a woman, caused a lot of social anxiety, explaining some of the responses.”
What a lot of rubbish.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“..I have a moustache .. and do not regard it as a disability…”
yet another one of the many many things you have got ‘wrong’..
eh..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
because…..
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“They should get grown-ups to host those shows.”
TV3 has tried that and look how popular their breakfast show is…
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
BluePeter said: As for “scrotum shrivelling”, I guess some Green MPs are on exactly the same level as Paul Henry.
I thought it was a brilliant turn of phrase BP, and nothing like Paul Henry’s mocking women for their appearance.
And you fell right into Catherine’s trap. Consider your scrotum shrivelled!!!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
would you equally approve vagina-shrivelling..?
..as ‘a brilliant turn of phrase’..?
toad..?
phil(whoar.vo.nz
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
and..
“..And you fell right into Catherine’s trap..”
oh..1..really..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
would you equally approve uterus-shrivelling..?
..as ‘a brilliant turn of phrase’..?
toad..?
phil(whoar.vo.nz
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
No probs philu. But why two comments rather than one to try to get your point across? Stoned again, I guess – short-term memory lapse!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
hungry toad..?
want some baby lamb flesh..?
c’mon..!
..you know you do..!
(speaking of ‘addictions’..eh..?.)
..how is your flesh/fat one going..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
you toad..like many/any other greens like you..
..are that walking self-delusionist/oxymoron..
..a carnivore..
..pretending to be ‘green’..
what a feckin’ contradictory/sick joke your political beliefs are..
..you aren’t green..
..you are blood-red..
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
philu said (speaking of ‘addictions’..eh..?.) ..how is your flesh/fat one going..?
Just had a couple of organic free-range chicken legs for dinner Phil. Yum!
How dare you be so pretentious as to suggest I am not Green because I eat meat. I bet you have a few habits that are not 100% sustainable too. Use any amonium sulphate, potassium sulphate or ammonium nitrate to make the dak grow bigger and faster, or grow it under lights, by any chance?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
don’t/can’t grow…
“..Just had a couple of organic free-range chicken legs for dinner Phil. Yum!.”
q.e.d..eh..
and i presume you buy into the group delusion of your sort..
..that as long as it is ‘free-range/organic’..
that it is aok to prematurely kill/dismember/cook/eat the living/feeling creature that was that chicken..
..eh..?
by your own words toad..
..you have proven that you really ‘haven’t got a feckin’ clue’..
..and just ‘don’t get it’..
as i said..
q.e.d..
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Get a room guys..
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
in my eyes toad..
you are a cannibal..
nothing less..
and to claim to be ‘green’..
while engaging in these cruel/unnecessary practices..
(‘addicted’..?..are you..?..if not..why..?..)
is just some sort of ‘sick’ joke..
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
oh..here’sbig bro..
..the rightie who loves animals so much..
..he has to eat them..
..(for the ‘full’ experience..?)
your opinion on this subject..like toads’..
..isn’t worth a fleas’ fart..
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Phil, I’ve just done a post on g.blog – for you and your right wing mate BluePeter who seem to be so paranoid about your scrotums (or is it scrota – not sure of the derivation of the word).
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Hell Toad!
The sisterhood must be giving you a really rough time at the moment, are they still making you apologise each and every day for being born with a Penis?
Cos you know that all men are rapists don’t you?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
test
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
‘paranoid’..?
i think delahuntys’ purple ‘scrotum-shrivelling’ prose is bloody funny..
..and could well ‘mark’ her as an mp..
..(and will be quoted back to her..
..for years to come..)
..and no answers to the carnivorous elephant in yr room..eh..?
..understandable..
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
in fact..as we now have judith ‘crusher’ collins..
in that same vein..
how about catherine-’scrotum-shriveller’ delahunty..?
it does roll off the tongue..
..eh..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
>>seem to be so paranoid about your scrotums
I’m paranoid she’ll start singing again….
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
>>Get a room guys..
Dunno, Big Bro. Two greenies arguing who is more green is pretty funny.
Kinda like Mao and Stalin arguing who is more communist……
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
It’s always nice to hear what you think.
The mental image of that will give me nightmares for some time to come….
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
BluePeter said: Two greenies arguing who is more green is pretty funny.
I’m not arguing at all BP. I fully accept that a vegan lifestyle, which Phil espouses, is more sustainable than an omnivorous one.
He’s right in that regard. I’m the meat-eating heretic, as opposed to Phil’s fundamentalist commitment to Gaia!
I despise fundamentalist Christians and Muslims, and don’t think being a fundamentalist green is much better.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
>>>and don’t think being a fundamentalist green is much better.
I’m not so sure that ‘fundamentalist green’ is the appropriate term. It is very ‘off topic’ but… If you (or phil) mean that in order for this planet to sustain a large number of humans – like 3-4 billion – then veganism is the only way to go, then perhaps you have a point. However the counter may well be accepting that we are grossly overpopulated and need to our numbers down to about 1-2 bilion in order to maintain a carnivorous lifestyle.
If on the other hand the fundamentalism takes the view that all living creatures (or at least animals) should not be devoured by humans as they are also sentient creatures. In this case these creatures are included in at least some of our moral code.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
You can accuse Toad of being many things but a fundamentalist is not one of them.
He favours selling TVNZ, sticking the boot into PhoolU, and he has a love of cricket, given that, it cannot mean he is all bad.
Politically confused….yes, oppressed by the sisterhood…yes, bad…..nah, just confused.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
and don’t forget..toad is (rightwinger) david farrars’ ‘favourite green commentator’..
he likes the lite-green reactionary ideas pushed by toad..
..(sez it all..really…eh..?..)
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“..and don’t think being a fundamentalist green is much better..”
so..why don’t you migrate to yr natural home..?
..the ‘green wing’ of the national party..
farrar and big bro will welcome you with open arms..
(as a carnivorous ‘green’..you are a walking aberration..)
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“..and don’t think being a fundamentalist green is much better..”
so..toad..if choosing not to have any part in the abominable cruelties you engage in to feed yr addictions to eating the flesh/fat of sentient beings makes me a ‘fundamentalist green’..
..so be it..
..i’ll wear the label with pride..
..but..what does that make you..?
(i’m plumping for ‘reactionary lite-green’..
..eh..?..)
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
but to be honest..i’m unsure as to why i am still beating my head against a brick wall on this one..
(sixteen years of green party bbq’s..and counting..)
every feckin’ green mp is a carnivore..
..(and so..part of the ‘problem’..)
..and that just really compounds the ‘sick joke’..
..eh..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Toad is articulate and well-reasoned, would probably be a favoured commenter on any blog.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
The Redbaiter to the Greens’ Libertarianz eh?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
not really..
..cos’ redbaiter is baying for the past..
..i am about the future..
.. and this subject is just a no-go in the green party..
..those vegans there know to keep their heads down..and not to confront the carnivorous habits of the majority..
and as for toad being ‘articulate and well-reasoned’..?
read that as..’non-threatening/challenging..eh..?
sorta like a green ‘uncle tom’..
..doing his version of ‘yes massa..!’..
what’s not to like for the farrars..?..eh..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
and here is the other one..
where the green party ‘lite-green/reactionary/sshh!! ‘slip is showing..
(and guess where toad stands on that one..?..)
http://whoar.co.nz/2009/would-marijuana-light-up-the-economy/
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
‘yes massa’ my arse, if he wanted to do that he’d stay at frogblog and agree with frog all the time. Clearly that’s not what he’s doing at Kiwiblog.
ANYWAY.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
# phil u Says:
March 31st, 2009 at 11:53 am
> (sixteen years of green party bbq’s..and counting..)
I’ve been active in the Green party for 10 years, and I don’t think I’ve ever been invited to one of these barbecuse you talk of.
> every feckin’ green mp is a carnivore..
are you sure? I don’t think Kevin Hague is.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
my bbq battles were in auckland..
and if hague is a vegetarian..i stand corrected..
but really..
..one out of all of them..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I agree that it would be great if there were more vegetarian MPS. Currently Ruth Dyson is the only other vegetarian MP in the house. I understand that David Clendon (who is next on the Green Party list) is also vegetarian, so if any of the current Green MP’s stand down before the next election, David will be joining Kevin and Ruth as advocates for cruelty free food.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Phil,
Heh, well maybe you should lay off that and the wacky tabbacy for awhile; give your braincells alittle time to regenerate and such.
…might start to make sense to those not skilled at understanding the *impaired*…
…might increase readership of your blog…
…might even get a comment once in awhile…
….better yet; a supermarket might accept your job application…
…could do something other that write a tumble-weed blog…
… could earn your money even…
…even vegies taste better when you work for em…
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
nice layout..
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
sapient:..def:..adj..’attempting to appear wise’..
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
ive been keeping that in for too long, lol.
but on the serious side, vegetarians do have a point; not because of their naive and silly moral reasoning but because the earth can more readily support vegetarians than meat eaters, and more of them. prehaps we should all be vegetarians untill we have steralised enough people and waited a sufficent amount of time that the population is low enough to sustain meat eating. lol.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Sapient: adj; ‘possessing of wisdom and discernment’
Synonyms: Wise, Sagacious.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
q.e.d..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
ah..!..you’ve been reading the butt-kissing dictionary..
..i used a real dictionary..
i’ll stick with the ‘attempting to appear wise’..
cos’..in yr own words..?
eh..?
phil(whoar.co.nz
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
lol, its more of an ideal, something to aspire to… thus why its taken so long for me to stoop to making such remarks as above, though they are not used as ad hominem so its not so bad
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Ain’t no Post-Feminists round here. At least I don’t think so……better have a look!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Toad said
.
“I’m the meat-eating heretic, as opposed to Phil’s fundamentalist commitment to Gaia!”
Being a vegan, or vegetarian or piscetarian is not a commitment to Gaia, it’s an abominatin to Gaia. FillYou says that being a carnivor is to eat ‘sapient’ beings – then argues that Sapient means ‘attempting to appear wise’, well let’s face it, that’s typical of his type of oral sh1t. Gaia, in producing many forms of animal and vegetable, provides sustinence suitable for all. If it were wrong to eat Gaia’s animal provision it would be wrong to eat Gaia’s vegatable provision. If it were wrong to take a husbandary approach to Gaia’s animal provision, it would be wrong to husban Gaia’s vegatable provision too. Gaia provides a base of elements, combines them into many forms, and challenges them to interdependenty
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
co-exst.
Leave Gaia out of discussions of eating preferences, and eating preferences out of green politics.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
um..!..toad brought gaia up..talk to him about it..
..i don’t know enough about the concept to comment..
but i do know that ‘eating preferences’ have everything to do with ‘green politics’..
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
exactly
that’s why my comment was addressed to Toad
Having been a follower of the green movement for over four decades, I am at a loss to understand how eating preferences are part of that. However, anyone can claim to have ‘green politics’ and use the term to include anything they like, including cutting down trees to pollute the atmosphere by burning wood to power trains.
Personally, I would prefer it if eating preferences were left out of green politics, but if your personal green political stance includes them – go for it. As I am given to understand you are not a member of the New Zealand Green Party, your personal politics, of whatever colour, is clearly not binding on them.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Does GM food come into eating preferences?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“..Having been a follower of the green movement for over four decades, I am at a loss to understand how eating preferences are part of that..”
i really think you need to widen your reading/research..
maybe you could start with the respective environmental footprints of yr average vegan vs yr average carnivore..?
it will soon become clear to you..
..that ‘eating preferences’..as you so sanitisingly call them..
..are the very core of green politics..
..to be a (self-regarding) ‘green’..’for over four decades’..
..and to be a carnivore..
..is akin to being a labour supporter ..
..and running a sweatshop…
..or a national supporter..wanting fair wages for low-paid workers..
..or an actite…advocating more state control..
ie..sorta ‘laughable’..in the level of ‘denial’..
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I think we were discussing the inclusion and exclusion of particular families of food, indeed, the highest family level, i.e. animal and vegetable.
I would think the subsection below that – adherence to original Genetic form – might be an interesting topic for another blog posting if Frog would care to entertain the idea.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Oh Fill
you must be forgetting the tablets again. I didn’t say I was “a (self-regarding) ‘green’..’for over four decades’.”, I said I have been a “follower of the green movement for over four decades”. There is no organisation of any kind called “the green movement” and there are as many opinions on the animal vs vegetable as an appropriate food source as there are people on earth I would think.
I know many “greens” that won’t eat any meat that has been “factory farmed” and that is their choice. I even know one “green” that won’t eat any vegetable matter that hasn’t grown spontaneously and naturally in the wild.
Now. Go get the pills and take them, and stay off the cultivated grasses for a while!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
careful there strings..!
..you might just disappear up yrself..eh..?
and..a tad pedantic..?..are we..?
do friends/family complain..?
and ‘opinions’ are one thing..
but..easily-proven vegan/carnivore environmental footprints are quite another..
..but..hey..!
if you are quite happy to keep your head stuck up in that warm dark orifice not that far from the back of your knees..?
..that’s your call..
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Phil; are the widespread rumours on this site even close to the fact of your access to good Coro whiffy, if so, where do I sign up for the curcuit (assured bug free attendance from dawn til we all fall down)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Oh Fill, get up off the floor.
I have no desire at all to stick my head in your mouth
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
It’s interesting that the PR person would have a “mustache” though I was probably unprofessional for the host to point out. But this gave the organization the lady was promoting much more publicity than she could had ever received.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)