Is Rosie Batty Using Her Child’s Death For Her Own Fame And Fortune?

Rosie Batty was given the Australian of the Year award yesterday. In February 2014, Rosie Batty’s ex-boyfriend murdered their son at cricket practice and then committed suicide. Batty was left unharmed.

The next day she gave a 24-minute interview, and from there she has become a national hero and celebrity. She has traveled the country speaking out against domestic violence. This seems like cookie-cutter leftist victim pandering worthy of ignoring. However, there are some interesting features in this story.

1. The Father Committed Suicide

If a person murders his or her child, there is clearly a deep-seated mental illness present. If that person then commits suicide, then even more so was the person disturbed. So this is not society being callous towards women, so much as just the actions of an individual lunatic, especially since the both people who died were male.

Leftists usually adore the mentally ill. Next to blacks and gays, the mentally ill are the left’s favorite pet. This is mainly because so many liberals have mental illness, and so it gives them a kind of victimhood, especially when insurance doesn’t cover the dubious treatment.

So why is the left labeling this as the evil bogeyman of the patriarchy instead of a man crying for meaning in a cold world? Because ultimately modern liberalism is about maintaining a narrative, and nothing gets people to sympathize with them like a crying woman. However, I’m not sure we could say that Batty is crying…

2. She Switches Between Emotional Neutrality And Joy

If you watch the video, notice how she almost tears up at the beginning and then suddenly goes back to her dead expression. You may think that if a woman cries, there must be an authentic meaning behind it, but watch You’ve Got Mail sometime with your mother and see how easy it is to trigger the waterworks. Even the media have observed Batty’s emotional neutrality, although they claim it is a virtue.

Batty has even said she thought she was supposed to enjoy the attention.

“I feel very uncomfortable that I have become this very well-known figure through the death of my son. How can you embrace it and enjoy it when you are in the most difficult time of your life?” […]

“I almost think, why would I want to live to 100 like my grandmother, because that would mean that I don’t see Luke for all that time. You could say I don’t even fear death anymore, because whatever is in the next world, that’s where I’ll get to see him again.”

She says this calmly, her eyes dry.

In addition to emotional deadness, she also finds ways to bask in the attention. The Sydney Morning Herald writes,

Rosie Batty is the antithesis of the grieving mother, bright where you expect darkness, open and lively where she might have been downcast and restrained. She chats and laughs readily, wears vibrant colours and continues to seek good from a personal tragedy. […]

As another day peaks without her son, she stares at his picture, brimming with sunshine and possibility.

There is some shadowing of this as Batty tells the story of her mother’s death. She felt alone and unable to express grief. By her own admission, this has tainted all future relationships.

“I have not really formed permanent relations with anybody; I have never been married and neither have my two other brothers. I think it really traumatises you from having key relationships because of that fear that they are going to leave you.” […]

But when she moved back to Victoria in 2000, she felt isolated: she was now single, and many of her mates had become parents. “I was told by a friend of mine … ‘Maybe you should be a bit less strong to be more attractive to men.’ I was like, ‘How can you be something different to what you are?’ ” 

You’d think having your child brutally murdered in front of your eyes would cause such PTSD that you would never be able to speak of him again without breaking down into fits, but apparently Batty is a stronger person than I am.

Her emotions are as off-set as this photograph.

Her emotions are as off-set as this photograph.

3. She Chose To Involve Herself And The Child With A Dangerous Man

The child Luke was born to her after she had already broken up with the father Greg Anderson. He appears to have already shown strong signs of mental disturbance to the point of threatening to murder her when the baby was two years old. But prior to the birth, she had dated him for two years before breaking up for eight years. Surely some time during those first two years and the later reconnection she saw strong signs of abusive behavior. Nevertheless, she made a decision to restore contact with him and to have unprotected sex.

4. She Has Greatly Benefited From All Of This

The Australian people have rallied to pamper her, and she has gladly accepted all of it. I don’t use the word “pamper” as an exaggeration. The Sydney Morning Herald writes,

The prime minister phoned with his condolences. Journalists choked at interviews, even as she remained comparatively composed. Strangers deluged her with flowers and gifts. Police officers pooled funds to send her to a day spa. […]

In September, she addressed a Senate inquiry. She has signed a book deal and someone wants to paint her for the Archibald Prize. She has lunched with the Packers, and has been introduced to countless celebrities she hasn’t always heard of.

An artist named Jacqui Clark even made a painting of Luke and sent it to her.

But the biggest tell-tale sign of a professional victim is,

Luke’s school deposited a sizeable insurance payout into her bank account. After all those years of taking mediocre jobs through motherhood, suddenly, she did not have to worry about earning an income for a while.

If you need even more of a reason to look down on the Australian people, the article continues,

Since then, there have been many unexpected acts of kindness. She still receives gifts and flowers, and initially was given so much food that she did not have to cook for six months. One morning, a packet of lavender with a hand-written note arrived in the mail, in an envelope simply marked “Rosie Batty, Tyabb, Victoria”. A 70-year-old woman has written to her admiringly: “Your words are gold.” At lunch, a stranger walks over to her table, gently holds her upper arm and tells her, “I just want to say good luck with everything. I admire your courage.”

Conclusions

Notice this clamor about domestic violence didn’t happen when a mother recently murdered her eight children in December. In general, it seems like most acts of filicide in the media are committed by the mother and not the father. In fact, a murdered child is statistically [page four] more likely to have been murdered by the mother instead of the father. Of course, when it is the mother who commits the crime, the media write it off as the mother being deeply mentally ill and doing it out of what she thinks is the best interest of the child.

Another conclusion is that we aren’t sure what really happened with the father Anderson. Small details she has said implicitly make it seem like she had been trying to exclude or vilify Anderson towards his son as much as she could. Of course, she explicitly claimed the opposite in interviews, but why wouldn’t she? She looks like more of a saint if she’s forgiving.

One also wonders if a more active role in his son’s life could have alleviated Anderson’s anguish, or whether he was so dangerous that it would have been best to exclude him entirely. I would like to hear his side of the story, but unfortunately he didn’t leave a note behind.

Batty said,

“To the women and children who are unsafe, in hiding or living in fear, who have changed their names, left their extended families and moved from their communities to find safety, you do not deserve to live a life that is dictated by violence,” she said. “You are not to blame.”

Batty is perpetuating the modernist lie that actions do not have consequences or that blame logically must always rest with a single individual. This destroys lives because it condones reckless behavior. The better advice would be to be very selective of whom you let into your personal life.

Perhaps it is most concerning that this has become an issue of women’s advocacy when really the man just had extreme mental distress that wasn’t shown proper care. Murder has always been illegal. Domestic abuse is also illegal. So what new law is supposed to be enacted? Or is she just raising awareness for a commonly-known problem? Apparently she wants Australia to have their own version of the American money-hole known as VAWA.

The most obvious conclusion is that Batty is taking advantage of her son’s brutal murder to gain money and fame. This is enabled by the left, who who also have much to gain from this. You don’t have to be Scooby Doo to solve this mystery. If she had real humility, she’d ask people to stop spending their hard-earned money to send her to the spa. But she wants her celebrity victim tour, and the left wants their funding.

Read More: 9 Reasons Why Sydney Sucks For Men

163 thoughts on “Is Rosie Batty Using Her Child’s Death For Her Own Fame And Fortune?”

  1. Amen when I was listening to the radio and heard this I was like are you fucking serious. Look at last years winner an aboriginal football star who was called an ape by a teenager and gets a coveted national prize for it. I think Abbott couldn’t give a fuck about the whole things and has just given the awards for political purposes. I mean racism and women’s issues are so hot right now.

    1. Yay…everyone feels good and gets a trophy.
      That’s where we are at in society, today. What used to take real achievement is now handed to anyone who can bring in more publicity (dollars) to any cause, the media, etc…
      Not to mention the “feel good” effect it has on women (and some men).

    2. Yeah goodes didnt deserve the australian of the year title just because he was insulted, im insulted by our idiotic prime minister every day does that mean im in the running for australian of the year im surprised abbott didnt knight the gorilla.

  2. Why exactly didn’t he murder-suicide her instead of his own kid?
    The only thing I could think of is he wanted her to suffer in agony which apparently she’s isn’t doing. She’s parading around in full attention whore mode when a warpig such as this wouldn’t be able to get otherwise.
    This was an epic fail of epic proportions for the phaggot known as Greg Anderson.

  3. I dare say Greg Anderson was a legally unimpeachable citizen before finding himself out on the street due to a ” restraining order”. Perhaps that and having his child illegally removed tipped him over the edge. It would be enough to do it to most people. Interestingly, The Australian newspaper attempted through Freedom Of Information laws to obtain details of the restraining order but was blocked by St Rosie. One has to wonder why and what she was hiding. The fact too that her son Luke carried his mother’s surname and not his father’s is evidence enough, if more were needed, that the sainted Rosie is something of an ideologue. ie rabid feminist.
    By the way, the father didn’t get the opportunity to top himself. The local Plod mowed him down in cold blood.
    It’s good out here.

    1. Apparently he wanted the cops to shoot him, he didn’t have a gun. Aussie gun laws are pretty strict, he wouldn’t have been able to get a license.

    2. The guy had some serious issues – look it up, plenty of info out there. The mother knew this about I would say, so she is fucked in the head as well. Don’t feel sorry for the parents at all – feel sorry for the poor kid. His father bashed his head in with a cricket bat and then stabbed him – restraining order or not, you would never do that to your son.

      1. That’s what the industry propaganda says but if that was the case, why oppose an FOI request? I reckon the lawers faked some quotes from the son, saying he didn’t want to see the father, accusing him of all manner of horrendous actions, and when the father read it, he snapped. This sort of criminality is common fare in the involuntary divorce industry. It’s huge and is peopled by unscruplous legal parasites and dreadful ideological women and dykes. Plenty of queers in the industry too; and all have a vested interest in destroying the orthodox family.

        1. Me either although I wouldn’t recognize them now. They were kidnapped by the Judiciary 10 years ago and I haven’t seen them since. However, persecution and injustice affects everyone differently. There’s no knowing what one might do if one loses one’s mind.

        2. It is par for the course whereby those in this criminal industry are unchecked by juries and unaccountable in sham courts, and have financial inducements to commit such acts. It’s nothing but a glorified kidnapping & extortion racket that generally rewards the party that brings them the business, be it man or woman. In other words, all the old checks and inducements to remain married have now become handicaps to those dragged unwillingly into its ghastly maw. Treachery, adultery etc is now rewarded. It is diabolical in its intent and effect.

    3. Mowed down in cold blood? Not quite, he was threatening police with a knife he had used to stab his son to death. I’m sure he was given plenty of warning.

  4. That woman is to blame for letting a psychopath in her life and her son’s, nobody else, I hope her conscience chases her with nightmares for the rest of her life, she does not deserve one single night of peace.

    1. Nup. The psychopath is to blame, but he’s dead. Then the bullshit media circus should have just left it all alone. The woman would have suffered her whole life about it, but that’s normal. The pedestalisation of her is what’s not normal. Anyways, whether or not she ‘deserves it’, I guarantee she has nightmares over losing the only child she was ever gonna have.

  5. Good point about females who kill their children, that’s treated differently, just a mental health issue, and how society failed by not getting the mother the help she needed.
    Also consider if it was a gay male who committed suicide, after killing his adopted child, the self appointed enforcers of political correctness would have introspective discourse about how difficult it is to be a gay parent.

    1. I don’t give a shit whether someone is gay, straight, or whatever because at the end of the day, it’s still an act of murder and should be punished accordingly. Anyone who commits suicide has deep seated issues.

        1. I know but if in theory, this occurs then the person that commits murder should be punished regardless of what they are.

        2. How are you going to punish a person who committed suicide? This is a mental illness issue being manipulated to support a feminist narrative.

    2. What’s interesting is if the situation were reversed: the woman killed the child and then herself.
      Would the authorities have arrested the man for not reporting the family abuse (or child abuse) that went on in the house?
      Society (and the media) are always ready to burn a man at the stake but we’ve all seen different cases where a “second look” is needed when a woman is on the hot seat. The media doesn’t help (or give a shit) at all because it’s just about ratings (money) to them.
      Also, (and society will never admit it), domestic violence (physical or mental) at the hands of a woman is rarely reported or seen as an issue, while the reverse gets a ton of attention and support (money).

      1. I remember reading a government information website page (might have been somewhere in Perth?) for domestic violence with two different sections.
        Women – if you fear for your life, here are the list of shelters and numbers to call.
        Men – if you think you’re going to hit your woman, call these numbers.
        Equality.

        1. Agree. It is “in your face” on a constant basis yet society (and the MSM) will consistently follow the feminist narrative which is “women constantly being abused by men” and calling it domestic abuse. We all know what is being said here: domestic abuse equals men hitting women.
          It’s a fucking joke but they’ll just keep on like there is nothing to see when a woman is in the hot seat (rarely).

        2. “Men – if you think you’re going to hit your woman, call these numbers…”
          And then what?
          Will “The government” send someone over to beat your wife for you?
          No they won`t.
          Doesn`t matter if your food is burned, if the bitch talks back or in other ways displays an attitude or insubordination, the government will not help you crush the rebellion.
          So why the fuck would you “call these numbers” ?
          Here`s a better idea:
          Until the day comes when you can actually call “the government” to have your wife beaten by a team of Government Sanctioned Specialized Wife-Dicipliners, then don`t call anyone at all.
          Beat your bitces back to kitchens yourself.

        3. I think you’re missing the point mate. The website was clearly suggesting that domestic violence only happens when women are the victims. I don’t think any man would actually call that number before slapping the shit out of his woman. If he did, the government would use the records as ‘evidence’ of pre-meditated grievous bodily harm, attempted murder or whatever other charges they could lay on him.

  6. I’m currently mourning the death of a loved one. I used to wear black but now I wear bright colors since I don’t want to be TOO depressed. To believe that all people would be all emotional and dark in public after the death of someone you loved is too simplistic, we all have different ways to cope. That being said, I believe she’s just a token woman for the establishment to popularize the intromission of Government in private, domestic spheres.

    1. People handle grief differently, to be sure. My wife died and I alarmed people by acting pretty much normal within about six months. I had to; I had to move on. To do otherwise would have been a disservice to our kids. But there is a difference between actions that raise eyebrows and behaviors that leave you fundamentally unsettled.
      There is also the general social trend of airing dirty laundry. In an earlier time, someone who had suffered such trauma would essentially go into hiding. I know I avoid, and still avoid, talking about my late wife, not because I am in denial, but because my grief is a private thing. Now people use personal tragedies to generate clicks. It’s awful.

  7. As an Australian, the absurdity of it all has reached a new zenith. It’s embarrassing.
    What was once conceived as a prize for those who have achieved or brought pride/international recognition, has become a political/pop-culture farce. Yes in the past there have been some ‘popular choices’ (usually national sportsmen) but there were also worthy winners (doctors, opthamologists, a plastic surgeon who helped victims in the Bali bombings, a man who lead the recovery effort for our equivalent of Hurricane Katrina, entrepreneurs).
    But the last two years (2014 was an aboriginal football player) are clearly leftist-motivated decisions, responding to the growing influence of leftist cultural sentiment. Her only ‘achievement’ was to be the victim of a brutal attack, which as others have pointed out, she had the potential to prevent if she had listened to the warning signs.
    But to be fair, it also represents the phase the media here in Australia is going through – it is awash with sensationalism, both left and right, so that art imitates life and vice-versa: it’s no longer possible to see where the media ends and real life starts. The media used to be a 3rd party observer and reporter, now they are a participant constantly manufacturing stories and ‘life’, influencing peoples thinking to ridiculous levels.

    1. Men reward achievement. Women reward sympathy. Just look at singing and dancing shows. It’s all feminized and the winners are people who are the most likeable.

      1. Absolutely. No doubt. 100%
        What angers me is the set-play feminism is – now that civilisation is established, operating and running, they want to come in and take the cream off the top. It’s only since the 1960s that women have had the consistent capacity to make any contribution to the economy as we progress to a service/information age (albeit within the framework already established by men). Its taken hundreds/thousands of years of economic evolution to get to this point and now they want to swoop in and claim cash and prizes.
        Funny how feminism doesn’t get much play in stone age economies.

        1. “It’s only since the 1960s that women have had the consistent capacity to make any contribution to the economy as we progress to a service/information age”
          Moreover. We should have twice the innovation, standard of living etc since the 60s. But we don’t. To the contrary…

        2. When I was a kid in California in the 60’s we did not have air conditioning in the house or car. The highs in the summer were above 110 F.

        3. I just printed my boarding pass for my flight to California (for a company I own) the price of which is less than I paid 30 years ago. My income is also many times greater.
          The benefits of medicine my friends and family have enjoyed are many orders of magnitude greater than folks in 1964.
          In our modern era, the nominal value of income rises relatively slow. But what those incomes can buy has exploded.

        4. Maybe.. I make 7 times more money than I was making 20 years ago and I don’t feel much difference..
          In this day and age, if you live in a big city I think the minimum one has to make and be able to enjoy life is over 200K. That, if you live alone.. If you go with the marriage lottery, resource sharing you still come around 200K combined, give or take.. Anything less, and you only get by..

        5. “We should have twice the innovation, standard of living etc since the 60s. But we don’t. To the contrary…”
          Then what is the source of your comment? What more would make our living standards double from the 60s? Are we close?

        6. Since the 60’s we have had a lot of incremental innovation. However disruptive innovation has been largely absent in most fields of knowledge excluding some like computer technology. If the rate of innovation had been kept, safe and affordable ways to travel outer space would have been developed. However that hasn’t happened.
          Think about this: If transportation technology (mechanical engineering, aerodynamics and physics) had followed the rate of innovation computer technology did, a travel from Amsterdam to New York would take much less than 10 minutes. By the way the life expectancy of Americans has been on the wane since 2010 http://news.discovery.com/human/life/united-states-life-expectancy-101210.htm.
          And basing my opinion in the obesity rates, the continuous increase in up-to-a-few-years rare diseases like autism, I don’t think your life expectancy will go up or that this generation will outlive their counterparts from previous generations, absent revolutionary breakthroughs…

        7. In our modern era, the nominal value of income rises relatively slow. But what those incomes can buy has exploded.

          In the last years the opposite has happened. The dollar (and for that matter most fiat currencies) can buy a lot less than 20 years ago. http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/page/2/.
          Granted, the trend has been bucked by deflationary pressures (China and other cheap manufacturers flooding western markets with extra cheap stuff and outsourcing providing cheap labor as well as cheap oil) at least for now and even so most of the cheap stuff cannot compare to old stuff designed to last a lot more.

        8. Yes, but blaming this on feminism would be giving them too much credit. Feminists aren’t pulling the strings from the shadows, they are but useful idiots.

        9. At 100K, you pay 30-40K in taxes. That lives you with 65K. Decent 1B rent is 2K/mo, so 65-24= 41K. Food + car = 1K/mo, 41-12=29K. Subtract miscellaneous 4K, and you are left with 25K disposable income/year in a big city. That is exactly nothing. Any unexpected expense will put you upside down. At 100K/year you are a slave(you only have your basics decently covered). Have no job for 2 months and you’re screwed. I don’t know about you but housing is important to me. I prefer not to be shot at on the way home… so I stand by my words.

        10. I make a little over 65k pretax in a big(ish) city, throw away $900/mo to student loans, put the max matchable percent into my 401k, eat healthy, pay a stupidly high car insurance for what I own, invest a couple grand into my ira each year, occasionally buy silver, donate 1k to a charity of my choice each year, and still can manage to thoroughly enjoy my life.
          The only thing I probably have on you is two roomates, so my housing costs are cut in thirds. Maybe you just have things that are a little unnecessary?

        11. In 1994 there were no iPads or iPhones. You could not buy one at any price.
          My argument has nothing to do with nominal dollar price inflation. If you think the world is moving backwards, I can’t help you.

        12. We’d like to think so but almost surreptitiously, the law has now become insidiously transformed into Feminist Jurisprudence. We’re being told one thing whilst another is being continually implemented. Jails are now full of men who’ve done nothing apart from earn the displeasure of a particular woman.

      2. That’s why narratives are so powerful. They are nothing more than proxies for…… feelings.
        No need to present facts, reasoning or a conclusion. Just emote. Repeat.

        1. It’s a play on the feelings. The feeling that there are people who are worse off than your ass to make your life feel like heaven even if it’s a mess. Also the feeling that there is hope for the ugly feminists and elder women to get their life on track and is never too late.

        2. “That’s why narratives are so powerful. They are nothing more than proxies for…… feelings.”
          Controlling the narrative is how power operates at the level of culture.

      3. Women have no self-esteem and people with low self esteem can’t cheer for anyone more successful Than them unless that person has some disability to even the score. They will enthusiastically root for the fat, ugly, crazy, weak, loser to soothe their own feelings of inferiority. You’re exactly right about singing shows. The least attractive person will have the most support”. If a woman is beautiful and talented their inadequacy complex flares up and they find a reason to dislike them. Look at how many women loooove Kloe kardashian. She is fat and unattractive so they don’t feel jealous following her every action. Sex and the City would not have been a hit if the 4 women were all young and hot.
        This is the premise of leftist ideology. Weakness, ugliness, laziness, loss, defeat, obesity, and all other forms of degeneracy are hailed as favorable traits in a person. Hard work and success are rewarded with anger and contempt. The entire country has been taken over by this way of thinking and it is the precursor to communism.

        1. “Women have no self-esteem”
          Bingo.
          Such a feeling is only felt in them through ACKNOWLEDGEMENT per se by others. It’s only a small percentage who are not reliant on others for their feeling of self or security (i.e. the female herd, getting fucked by alpha males, getting compliments from betas, social/cultural coddling). Men can survive with out it.
          Turn down the noise of society and it is as plain as day.

    2. Adam Goodes would not have received an award had not a young girl racially insulted him. Nothing about his accomplishments as an athlete made him any more worthy of the award than most of his AFL peers. Neither of our latest 2 medallists have performed any noteworthy deeds. Many Australians have been both insulted and lost loved ones this past year. Shouldnt we all get an award, too?
      Ashamed of this country.

      1. Oh absolutely I agree with you. It was a contrived situation that the leftist media ran with. I am not a Swans fan, but credit where credit is due, his longevity and skill as a player is fantastic. But Australian of the year? No.
        As a comparison, Lance Franklin from Hawthorn (for overseas readers youtube him, he’s just a freak of a player) has been racially abused a couple of times but hasn’t sought to get on a platform about it. If he did, he might have been Australian of the year! Absurd.

        1. Yes exactly, good point. There are a huge number of amazing players in the game right now, but only a prominent ‘victimised minority’ gets the award. It’s not just us though, the Nobel prize has become just as much of a leftist circle-jerk. Schools have been doing the same thing on a smaller scale for years. Forget about merit, just cry about your problems and you will be rewarded

        2. I believe he’s 33 this year coming, but I think he retired last season.
          Buddy Franklin though- freak of nature that man. Glad the Swans couldn’t capitalize on the GF, made it easier for my boys to wipe the floor, even without him.

      2. Totally with you on the shame mate. All you have to do is look at the state our politics have been in since Rudd came to power to right now. And the lefty influence just keeps getting worse and worse.

        1. The worst has been driving around Sydney all day Redfern, Newtown etc, and I’ve seen dozens of aboriginal flags and complaints about racism, and only seen our national flag once

    3. As an Aussie, too, I’d say Adam Goodes winning Australian of the Year was not COMPLETELY neutral and objective.
      But in this case I think he did actually deserve it. As an Aussie, you know that a lot of Aboriginals are filthy pains in the ass who smell like rotten piss (for the USA peeps, Aborigines in Australia are like blacks the US but worse).
      Adam Goodes has done a hell of a lot to give back to the community, especially the aboriginal community. He grew up with modest beginnings, and he hasn’t forgotten about his roots- you have to respect that. He is an exceptional representation of where Aboriginal Australians can go, even if they start off in the shits. He gives Aborigines a face in the media and in the elitist worlds (like sporting) with his integrity and character.
      Yes, there are probably people who deserve it a bit more (and are less sensationalised) but he’s a damn good choice regardless.

      1. I agree he has done a lot and in general he is a class act and an elite sportsman, one of the best in the games’ history. However, the question remains – would he have gotten Australian of Year if not for some 12(?) year old girl yelling at him from the sideline (and him hearing it)? No.
        BTW, Tony Abbott spends a week a year in Aboriginal communities yet no-one can even grudgingly give him credit for it.

        1. I think he would have. Being a legend of the game that exists mostly within just this country, I think he’d have enough reputation and publicity already to be given the award.
          From what I could tell, the girl calling him an ape was used as a new, refreshed face of anti-racism in sports WAY more so than any other social issue. If I didn’t follow AFL passionately, I wouldn’t have thought much of that little brat slurring him beyond it being part of general racism.
          Poor Tony Abbott. He did bring the public’s dislike on himself, though in this day and age not many people (especially the media) care for his traditional values anyway.

        2. I’m not a great fan of Tony Abbott, but I do sympathize with how he just can’t seem to win with the general public and the media. No matter what he does, his name keeps on getting dragged through the mud.

    4. “What was once conceived as a prize for those who have achieved or brought pride/international recognition, has become a political/pop-culture farce.”
      I’d like to take this time to point out that Australian of the Year, Young Australian of the Year, and Senior Australia of the Year were all give to women this year. One of them wrote children’s books for heaven’s sake.
      I’m Aussie, and I know where this country is headed. To the people who’re on the fence, it’s easy to justify this, but it’s obvious what we discuss on this site isn’t nonsense when you see it coming true in such a way that it has.

    5. Abbott is going to be cut soon. He is trying to appease the leftist with acts like these and then flopping to appease the right with knighting Prince Phillip. As soon as you stray from your base it’s game over in politics. The left wouldn’t like Abbott if he said that men will have half their pay cut to pay for some child daycare scheme.

    6. Funny…. all the smiles she gives in the photos and videos and quickly. Amazing how quickly she “bounced” back

    1. I love how she talks about repairing nature without you know discussing how women will maintain infrastructure, obtain energy, provide basic sanitation. If they engaged in the purge that she is looking for, the power would be out in a week.

      1. I love how the whole thing is one big logic fail.
        As an experiment, give radical feminists a large portion of Australia. Take away all men but leave the infrastructure, trade, sanitation, resources intact.
        The only rule is that the feminists are not allowed male aid or sperm. So they’ll have to produce via parthenogenesis like they always fantasize about.
        Then wait and see what happens.

      2. The sad thing is that feminism needs to be taking to it’s absurd, illogical extremes before the majority of people will wake up and see objective reality.
        There’s no point trying to resuscitate a rotting carcass so the best thing to do is simply ride out the insanity of the death of Western Civilisation. Eventually something new will be built on top of it but probably not in our lifetimes.

    2. Seen that blog before. Reading it is like staring into something dark and awful. I never thought just how hopeless the situation is until I read stuff like that and peeked inside the disgusting pit that is the depths of the female mind.

      1. “Our lives have no more or no less value than those of a rabbit, fly, tree, plant, fish, seashell or stone.”
        As well as being a logical fallacy, this is also an absolute negation of hierarchy which is something that is unique to the male.
        Have you ever read Otto Weininger’s “Sex and Character”?
        From Wikipedia:
        “Sex and Character argues that all people are composed of a mixture of male and the female substance, and attempts to support his view scientifically. The male aspect is active, productive, conscious and moral/logical, while the female aspect is passive, unproductive, unconscious and amoral/alogical.[2] Weininger argues that emancipation is only possible for the “masculine woman”, e.g. some lesbians, and that the female life is consumed with the sexual function: both with the act, as a prostitute, and the product, as a mother.[3] Woman is a “matchmaker”. By contrast, the duty of the male, or the masculine aspect of personality, is to strive to become a genius, and to forgo sexuality for an abstract love of the absolute, God, which he finds within himself.[4]”
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Otto_Weininger
        Woman is a sort of “un-god”, not anti-god because that would postulate some type of malign and powerful intelligence but rather that her nature is a negation of being and form into chaos.

        1. Ooh, no I had not. That’s remarkable. That’s a pill redder than red. It’s wonderful to read from writers who have struggled with the dissonance between our compulsion toward women and our revulsion with what we find when we actually get inside.
          I look at things through an evolutionary psychology lens. Women’s brains are optimized for functioning in a way that men find abhorrent. They are designed to live and work in a flat, individualistic social structure, with success defined by personal gain at the expense of others.
          Men are designed to function in a hierarchical social structure. Hunting does not work very well if the individual hunters go off in the bush to find themselves. They are better as a team.
          Women most closely identify with the lower ranking males, who grudgingly follow orders but feel so victimized by the social order that they forever seek to rebel. The omega male, forever victimized and downtrodden, fights overtly with his peers and covertly with his superiors. The beta male is loyal and useful; the omega male is treacherous and awful.
          Thus when men get past their desire for women, and peer inside their psyches, they find an omega male and are predictably horrified.

    3. ” . . .send men off to do the dirty work.”
      Wait a minute; didn’t she start the whole thing off by saying that she wanted things to change?

  8. Well, she’s got nothing going on for her and all that remains is to milk the attention udders of the public and get everyone on the bandwagon so she has a constant stream of support. This is quite sickening to be honest; just morn in peace and try to pick up your life, but that seems to be hard work for this woman.
    “Leftists usually adore the mentally ill” It’s their ultimate pinata, which, if they hit well enough will give off some nice publicity candy.
    “….we need you men to…” oh lord, here we go again with this Emma Watson shiz. Men better police each other and out-sheep the sheeps. Some Gestapo tactics thrown in there.

  9. It is a massive joke, anyone with half a brain finds her annoying and the situation horrible. Presenter calls her out on her shit and has to apologies for it due to the leftist control method. Then she gets on his show with fake crying. Anyone who looks at that can see this woman is a psychopath, of course, people who can see that have higher emotional compatibility and aren’t allowed to speak either way (‘conservationism’ as a non-political thought process is highly linked to empathy and noticing emotion in faces, e.g. of compassion, or psychopathy).
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2594845/Rosie-Batty-blasts-Joe-Hildebrand-comments-domestic-violence.html

  10. At first I thought she was a famous author or athlete or something, but nope
    Scandal or not this is at best a regular news cycle story and shouldn’t have been blown into all-out grievance worship
    Tells you something about the west’s mentality: Victim = hero!

    1. She’s an ordinary person which helps others identify and empathize with her, therefore sharing her pain and seeding panic in the minds of the people. She is pushed forward to highlight a problem then feminism will come in to save the day.

      1. Yup. She’s just a pawn in the feminist machine. The irony for Rose Batty is that I can well imagine the feminist agenda pushing her to be their ‘spokesperson’ were the very people who positively rejoiced when they first heard of her son’s death. They would have been rubbing their hands together with glee.

        1. Course, everything to accomplish the goals,and get every other feminists’ attention. It’s a competition between them to show who’s the most feminist, as opposed to what you hear as it being a sisterhood. If you had female bosses you know they will climb on any pair of shoulders to get their ass higher on the hierarchy.

  11. To be fair, she had her only kid brutally murdered in front of her.
    I don’t really blame her for anything that happened. The father seemed like a very fucked-up individual, similar to the guy who threw his daughter off the Westgate bridge. I don’t give a fuck if you hate your wife, you don’t kill your kids.
    And to bash your 13 yo son to death with the kid’s own cricket bat in front of his mates is revolting.
    I’d say it’s the culture to blame for this woman’s subsequent rise to fame and fortune. I don’t think she expected or asked for any of it. It’s highly disturbing that she has now become a saint-like figure and profited financially from it. But it’s hardly her own doing and I believe she’d swap it all to get her kid back.

    1. The point is these blokes, Freeman and Anderson, as far as I know, had never been in trouble with the “authorities” or displayed any “mentally ill” symptoms, until the compulsory divorce regime threatened and did steal their children. The thing to remember is, there’s big money in fasle allegations and it is the tool used to justify removing the children. Once that is done, the fix is on and industry parasites can helpt themselves to other adults assets. When it’s not run by the STate, it is commonly known as kidnapping and extortion.
      The sainted Rosie just hasn’t been displaying the traits of a normal person in this situation.

      1. Yeah. I don’t know her so I can’t fully comment on her mental health. And I get that it’s really soul-destroying to deal with divorce and custody issues, I sympathise with anyone stuck in that shit.
        But parents who kill their children are the lowest scum of the earth far as I’m concerned. Women, men, no excuses. They’re your own fucking kids… for fucks sake.

    2. Empathetic souls would agree. Reality check says I will reserve any respect or right to treat this woman as a someone to empathize with. I do recognize that YOU have a high regard for life and that is to be commended. Assumption is the mother of betrayal.

    3. She was the one procreating with a psycho. If she would have fucked a “nice guy” instead her kid would be well and alive today. No question about it.
      That alone makes her partly responsible for what happened.

      1. Of course that’s strictly true and y’know what I’m sure she does feel partly responsible.
        But by the same logic, any guy procreating with a woman who subsequently cheats, takes his ass to the cleaners, denies him access to his kids etc is ‘partly responsible.’
        We’re not all mind-readers. Heaps of guys get a huge shock to find out what the woman they thought they loved is capable of. I’m sure this woman wouldn’t have had a kid with the dude if she thought one day he’d kill him with a cricket bat. She’s guilty of having poor judgement, like millions of people. He’s guilty of killing his son. So I’m cutting her some slack on the whole blame thing.

        1. Starting a sexual relationship with a psycho and making babies with him/her are two very different things.
          When it comes to procreation with the wrong person you can´t blame it on poor judgement anymore, it´s more like carelessness and egoism. It´s a sign that you don´t really give a fuck about the future of your offspring. Otherwise you would choose a worthy father/mother. And if you don´t find a worthy one…you´d rather die childless.
          He´s the only one to blame for the killing though, no doubt. That´s what psychos do.

  12. The father was no angel in that he was facing possession of child pornography charges, had an arrest warrant out from a family relative for a threat to kill charge, and had a few arrest warrants out for assault (mostly against the mother in this case, so take that with as much NaCl as you will.)
    But the real irony of this case is that if you dig into it a bit you see at
    least suggestions that Anderson had very deep-seated mental health
    issues which had gone ignored or untreated. Take a look at a long interview with several people some months ago about him, done by the (sort of) well-regarded Australian Story: http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/stories/2014/07/14/4043135.htm
    This is pretty consistent with the manosphere’s general protest that men’s mental health issues are both underfunded and not taken seriously compared to that of women. Rosie, however, has decided to hitch her wagon to the reliable horse of “domestic and family violence” rather than the rather more significant factor that seems to have played into her son’s death: “men’s mental health.”

  13. A small correction to the article: Australia already has it’s own version of VAWA, it’s called the Violence Against Women and Children Act – VAWCA. They included children in it so that anyone who is against any part of it can be accused of being a misogynist, but also of “not thinking about the children”.
    Rosie Batty is the poster child for the “VAWCA doesn’t go far enough” camp.
    Funny, as I have yet to see a single one of the many fathers who lost their children to the women in the north of Australia who killed children interviewed over their loss.
    I guess being an aboriginal man takes a back seat to being a woman as far as SJW’s are concerned.

    1. It is a shame. It just depends how much the media can squeeze out of the story (and the publicity following it).
      The fathers losing their children “story” doesn’t have enough meat in it…they can’t tie it to another cause thus generating more publicity (money). Besides, they’re men, remember….there is no “group” for men so no worries about any backlash (in person or online from SJWs).
      It all depends on who the victim is in any circumstance. Older, white mother (great victim, great story)…plus they have to worry about SJWs and feminists coming at them.
      The child dying, the father with mental illness….that is a very distant second and third (not even on the radar).

  14. You can’t blame her for lapping up the attention and freebies, that’s what they do. This will be milked for all it’s worth. I wouldn’t be surprised if this ‘hero’ is marinating on Oprahs couch in a few months. If she was young and attractive this tragedy would be a distant memory. The prerequisite for Australian of the year is; female, ugly, poor and have a fetish for mentally ill men.

  15. excellent article. One of the very few with the guts to question some of the politically correct line that seems to pervaded every mention of this award in the last few days. Comments questioning the awarding have been removed from many sites, so a visitor to them might think that everyone is happy about the decision. This seems to be a dangerous continuation of internet and social activity in recent years, where any persons politely voicing an opposing opinion of the PC version are shouted down, have articles or comments removed etc etc. My personal opinion is that this awarding has been an opportunity for the shaming of males as the only committers of domestic violence. And of course men are never victims of abuse and always get to see their children. yeah right

    1. “Comments questioning the awarding have been removed from many sites, so a
      visitor to them might think that everyone is happy about the decision.”
      Good point. It’s how someone can control the conversation (narrative – feminist in this case). They don’t want to hear from the “other side” or anyone who might make a reader think a little bit. They want their “feel good” story and nothing but positive comments (we are talking about women, here).
      Any time I hear a female say that people should be more positive I questioned it. Should people be more positive….or delusional (to fit the female narrative)?
      Regardless, this “policing” of the comments on different web sites should have people worried (and thinking). It’s all about control (controlling the conversation). In this case, many people don’t agree but they don’t want to hear from us.

  16. The very top news item on ABC news was an indignant 5 minute sledge against the prime minister for awarding the duke of Edinburgh an knighthood of the order of Australia. They literally frothed at the mouth for five full minutes about how outrageous it was and “reporting” that even his own ministers were furious about it (although they didn’t back this up with a skerrick of evidence).
    How can the ABC, as a government owned entity, get away with such outright partisanship? If they were apolitical (as they are required by charter to be) they would simply report that Phil the Greek was knighted and move on to the next topic!
    I speculate that, if you were to do a world wide poll of feminists’ most hated person, Tony Abbott would win it, easily, which just makes me love him.
    And when he trolls the left so obviously by pulling stunts like this knighthood, it makes me love him even more.
    I believe every Australian red pill male should get firmly behind Abbott and help him get re-elected next year.

    1. Not to mention that in the next story they were cock a hoop about far left communists in Greece winning an election.
      The ABC is irredeemably corrupted by the feminist-Marxist left. It needs to be dismantled

  17. “How can I embrace it and enjoy it?”
    How in the hell can she be thinking in those terms? That is some world-class solipsism there. Shouldn’t she be asking, “How can I ever live with this agony?” “How can I ever get over the remorse of having put my own child in harm’s way?” “How can I ever expect to be forgiven?” No….”How can I enjoy it?” So her goal is to ‘enjoy it’ somehow. She acknowledges that it won’t be easy but her end-game is her own enjoyment. Phenomenal.

    1. That question is exactly the way last minute resistance works. When she says “Sex is out of the question” she’s thinking about you banging her brains out and that manifests itself verbally when she tells you she’s not putting out. “How can I enjoy it” means she’s enjoying it and the fact that the inverse didn’t come out of her mouth tells us all we need to know.

    2. Female psychology is truly a scary thing. It’s never about something horrible happening to someone else, it’s always “how does this affect me and how can I use this to my advantage?” This is an innate female trait.

  18. That’s Anglo people for you. I’m always amazed how casually they accept the loss of close relatives as if nothing has happened.

  19. It just confirms to me what I have always suspected. Women have no feelings. It has always been an act for them. Yes its sad. Her poor son was killed. But would she swap her new found fame to have her son back? Ask her on a dark day with nobody watching and im sure she would keep him dead. Its sad but its true.

    1. No, they very much have feelings. The difference is the emotional responses are strangely dysfunctional. Of course, not-all-women-are-like-that … but just like men have enormous ranges of intelligence, women have enormous ranges of emotional functioning. In general, the emotional responses are stronger and less regulated by cognitive controls.
      The Cluster B disorders are fascinating and horrifying. I’d bet you anything that she is being emotionally genuine up on the podium. And I’ll bet that the reason she had a kid with Mr. Sociopath is that she has an emotional disorder. Yes, mentally ill.
      I went to a funeral. Dad, age 45. Left behind mom and teenage daughter. Funeral was two days after he died. Mom and daughter both spoke, and their voices were almost completely devoid of grief. Six months earlier, my wife died and I don’t think I could have walked up to the podium, let alone speak. I left the guy’s funeral wondering what the hell I had just witnessed.

  20. Sounds like he was her first love with eight years and then another two. That’s TEN YEARS. Ten years with a ‘crazy’ man, seriously how CLUELESS can she be. I bet she sapped him of his dreams and tried to browbeat him to submission to please the femi-demigods. Ten years of playing her pussy for pentance but no rugrat. HOW WESTERN DECLINE IS THAT. So eventually the guy gets the horned bitch knocked up, maybe as a latent surge of instinct to preserve the species, race or culture. Everyone knows that getting an ambitious intelligent western femicunt with pedigree appearing genestock knocked up is like PULLING TEETH. Maybe he won on that account and her drive to put ‘dad’ in his place and emasculate the boy became like a fatwa. I’m only assuming on popular trends with femicunts. Ten years of ducking motherhood makes her quite femicunt. Her ‘wall’ was approaching but the guy barely had the tools to make her submit and carry a child to term. To make her shut up and just do it, much less to just shut up.
    Other details must also be uncovered like:
    1).Did she abort any others during the ten years?
    2).What is her ENTIRE SEXUAL HISTORY – and I mean the WHOLE rundown.
    What I smell here is a very average man, not the least bit alpha but perhaps VERY garden variety beta who was browbeaten by a woman to the point of a homicidal psychotic break. A woman like many who swears NEVER to be controlled by ANY man and can barely bond in a ‘complementary’ capacity even to the man she lays with for EIGHT FULL FRIGGIN’ YEARS. . . ‘JFK’ . . (no not the 35th pres.) . . but JFK as in JEEZUS FRIGGIN KARRIZE – HOW WESTERN DECLINE IS THAT. If the guy didn’t have the tools to control her, then the community should have at least required she cover that peachy ballsack of a face with burqa or at least cloth from head to toe. Mediterranian women don’t need burqas near as much as western white femicunts do.

  21. This sort of thing happens in the USA all the time. Single mom shacks up with boyfriend. Boyfriend abuses or murders the child.
    In the USA, sadly, single moms are held up as “heroes” by the left (I guess since they breed more leftists, that “makes sense”). Now Australia has gone one further and is giving this woman the five star treatment.
    Expect this to happen here soon enough.

    1. It wasn’t until my ex-wife found out that her unemployed live in boyfriend was charged with attempted murder of his ex-wife that my ex got scared and threw him out. I guess my ex having been married to a nice guy decided to go trolling for bad boys. Women keep these losers around even when all the red flags start popping up. It’s embarrassing that my ex would sink so low, considering her education and income. How women can be so stupid is beyond me.
      I blame the woman in this article 100% in this case for the death of her child.

    1. She became a spokesperson for the feminist issue of ‘Violence against Women’ which has since been shoved in people’s faces constantly, despite the fact that the violent acts which made her famous were the deaths of her male child and his male father.
      Logic.

  22. During her speech she asked me to “challenge each other” which means turn against one another to advance the feminine imperative. She did, however, drop a nugget of truth soon after when she stated about men “we cannot do this without you.”

  23. I thought this article was harsh at first. The murder of her son was a terrible and tragic event. But now I have listened to the speech you posted I think it was very interesting that she sees the death of her son as how she was able to have the opportunity to be heard – like it was an opportunity she was seeking but was only gifted following the death of her son.
    It is irritating how she then basically uses her extreme experience to then tar every man with the same brush. There is no acknowledgement that women can also be the perpetrators of domestic violence and psychological warfare against their male partners.
    I agree that she is typical of the women who get into a relationship, find that the relationship is a bad one and then don’t leave or leave and then actually return. As she knew full well that her ex partner was violent and unstable I think she holds responsibility for having a child with this man. She created the circumstances where her son was killed by having a child with an unstable and violent man.
    This is not to detract from the fact that this man was thoroughly responsible for his actions and if he had lived I would be advocating the death penalty for him. But she does seem to be making the most of the situation to insinuate there are millions of men that are just as bad as her ex partner.
    The final point that has been made by many is how when a woman kills her children there is an effort to understand her motivations and circumstances, and to find an excuse for her actions whether it is depression or lack of support of being in an abusive relationship. Sometimes I think this is not wrong, but when a man kills their children there is no such effort. For all we know this man was also depressed and maybe also in an abusive and psychologically damaging relationship that pushed him to the edge in absolute despair.

    1. Andrea Yates had quite a lineup of excusists and apologists blaming the husband for leaving the woman alone for eight hour stretches with her pills and the kids. A helping sister wife would sure have helped her kick the pills and get back in touch with her core genetic programming – TO BREED, TIT FEED and SERVICE HER MASTER. – – MARANATHA

  24. The award lost any semblance of credibility last year when a current footballer was chosen as the recipient. A fine footballer no doubt but didn’t deserve the honour. It was also a bad choice because about 95% of AFL supporters don’t want to see Adam Goodes succeed. When he does, their teams loses. A bit like making Tom Brady American of the Year. So people are now cheering against the Australian of the Year week in and week out. This year’s choice had to be a safe one that wouldn’t allow any sort of public criticism. So Rosie Batty it is. Great men such as Sir Macfarlane Burnet, Arthur Boyd and Fred Hollows once were given the honour. Along with the Nobel Peace Prize which ceased to exist, at least in my eyes, when Barack Obama received it, Australian of the Year now stoops to the level of Gold Logie winner.

  25. Thank you for picking up on the fact that this woman made poor choices and is not to be made into some sort of heroine. Dysfunction is always lauded in some sneaky way these days by the MSM–and this story is yet one more example. The new norm: bad choices are rewarded, and not just concerning the topic of women either. I guess the story of a woman who carefully chose her mate, cared for her husband and kids through good and bad times over the years just isn’t interesting enough. No one would “click” on that. I would like to think the more people can see through agendas being constantly pushed upon us. It’s ridiculous.
    P.S. Regarding her quote: “I was told by a friend of mine … ‘Maybe you should be a
    bit less strong to be more attractive to men.’ I was like, ‘How can you
    be something different to what you are?’ ” I’m so tired of the “Be who you are” mentality these days. Sometimes “who you are” sucks…listen to a friend’s critique every once in a while, a person may improve themselves. But then again, we go back to personal accountability which is lacking today.

  26. This is a cautionary tale. All nations of the world are under attack from team feminism. It could be yours next.

  27. Well if she herself had murdered him, she could have simply chalked it up to “post-partum depression” (the politely way of saying the child got in the way of her partying and cum-guzzling) and gotten off the hook, like women Stateside do on the regular!

  28. How is the world so blind and accepting of the clear and obvious stupidity of feminism? She’s awarded for her campaign against family violence when her ex kills her child and commits suicide… how does this even make any sense?

  29. Maybe the kid had it coming?
    We know nothing about the kid.
    The kid could have been a feminist, or even a faggot for all we know.
    Take a moment to ponder that.
    If my kid turned out as a feminist, I`d OFCOURSE rather see him dead than walking around, spreading the satanic filth that feminism is.
    And as for his mother I have no sympathy what so ever.
    Instead of saying to women that they should work harder to please their men, and that they should raise their kids to respect their fathers and threat their fathers word as law, she is trying to undermine Patriarchy by demanding “strong leadership” from “The government” in order to control what men do.
    Fuck “The government”.
    Every man`s house is his own kingdome where he reigns supreme under God.
    And if he wants to beat his wife or kids to death, that`s his own Goddamned business.
    What a fucking whore.

    1. No one has a right to beat their kids to death. If you spawn a gay kid, that’s your faulty genetics so deal with it. Don’t have more kids. And if your son turns out to be a feminist you either didn’t rise him properly and / or he wasn’t born with enough smarts to figure the truth out himself = again, your shitty genetics.
      Beat yourself to death.

      1. Are you a feminist troll, “kingslayer” ?
        Ofcourse you have *the right* to beat your kids to death if they become feminists.
        It may not be *legal* everywhere at the moment, but God has no objections about you off`ing them.
        You see, if you, or anyone else spawns a feminist, then that is akin to pollution on your part, and it is your responsibility to clean it up.
        So if your kid turns out as a feminist, then that is the same as if you break a glass bottle.
        You don`t leave shards of glass around for other beings to cut themselves on.
        No, you deal with the mess you`ve created, pick up the pieces and dispose of them in a manner that does not cause any harm to your fellow beings.
        So, if you spawn a feminist, take responsibility, clean the shit up and dispose of it in a manner that does not cause grief to your fellow man.
        Now, if all men took that kind of responsibility and killed their kids if they turned out as feminists, then THERE WOULD BE NO FEMINISTS.
        So people, if killing feminists are currently illegal in your state, then vote for someone who will legalize it.
        “Honour killings” they call it in Muslim countries, and it is a great tradition that we should adopt as part of our own judicial system.
        Imagine for a second the grief mankind would be spared, if Betty Friedans father, Mr Harry Goldstein, decided the following:
        “you know what!? What a little cunt that bitch-daughter of mine is turning into. No fucking way I`m letting her spread her feminist-filth and discontent around. Instead I`ll beat her to death in the garage with a hammer: One small bang for man. One giant leap for mankind…”
        So keep Australia beautiful – by killing all your feminist offspring before they turn into a hassle for your fellow man. And spare me the “faulty genetics”-bullshit, mate.
        You sound like a nazi with that crap, so give it a rest. Feminists have sold their soul to Satan, plain and simple, and that has nothing to do with “genetics”
        Now to cheer you up, here`s a fine version of Australias national anthem

        Disclaimer:
        Always check your local laws before you kill any feminists. Killing feminists except in self-defence can be illegal in some parts of Utah and/or other places. If killing feminists is currently illegal in your country of residence, then do not do anything that will place yourself in prison, but instead work to change the local laws so that you as a Father and a Husband, can rule your home as an absolute monarch, beneath God.
        Have a nice day.

        1. Yeah. Because me saying you’re a fuckwit if you think it’s ok to beat your kids to death makes me feminist. Good logic.
          If you spawn a gay or a feminist son, sorry to break the news to you but that is either your own genetics making him gay or dumb enough to be a feminist, so deal with it and accept your part in it. Beating him to death make you feel better? How about get a vasectomy and leave guys like me to have sons.
          My dad died early and my mum was a fucking hippy for fuck’s sake. Guess what, I didn’t turn out gay or feminist, because I’m smart enough to see through shit. Likewise, my offspring could be abducted and raised by lesbians, they’d still grow up to figure out the truth like me.
          Blaming women and feminism for why your own kids turn out crap sounds like feminists blaming everyone else for their mistakes to me. But keep on with the ‘Hey let’s just kill them all’ solution. Meanwhile back to the real world.

        2. “If you spawn a gay or a feminist son, sorry to break the news to you but that is either your own genetics making him gay or dumb enough to be a feminist, so deal with it and accept your part in it. Beating him to death make you feel better? … ”
          No Kingslayer, it would not make me *feel* better.
          But there would be one less feminist in the world, which could no longer cause grief, torment and destruction to my fellow man.
          There would also be one less feminist-traitor-mangina, who could no longer cause damage to Patriarchy.
          And thus the world would be a better place.
          Regardless of my *feeeeliiiiiings”.
          My suggestion that men be allowed to kill their kids if they turned out feminist, was not based on “feeling# either.
          It is based on the fact that we are at war with the feminists, in much the same way we once were at war with the Nazis.
          And if your own offspring turns out to be the enemy, and have chosen to betray you, and all our Brothers, and The Patriarchy, by becoming a feminist, then you as a Father should of course have the right to terminate your offspring for treason.
          Not because it feels good, cause it wont, but because it serves our cause and because it defends Patriarchy against it`s enemies.
          Vive La Resistance.

  30. All this went down only a few kilometres of where I was that night and I need to correct some errors of fact here.
    1. The father did not suicide, he was shot by police.
    2. The mother was not there at the time. Luke was at cricket practise when his father approached him and ended up stabbing him to death.
    Rosie Batty, has readily fallen into the figurehead role for campaigning against domestic violence this was such a public incident, this was always going to happen if she accepted the opportunity.
    The awarding of Australian of the year is done by a committee, so one would figure that a non-contentious person will be awarded it. It isn’t someone who’s actually done something magnificent and tangible any more, its about who is most palatable to the masses. You couldn’t begrudge a domestic violence victim, could you, or are you one of those men that thinks she really deserves it?

  31. Rosie Batty seems as mentally ill as her ex-boyfriend. Since Western Society treats this as a virtue there is no incentive for them to get the help they may need.

  32. Statistics show that mothers are the murderers of children, especially infants and toddlers. These figures do not include abortion, which is a form of infanticide. Is there any campaign to condemn women for these crimes? A mother murdered seven of her children in Australia recently, but all she got was sympathy and understanding from the media. Go figure.

    1. The modern woman see’s abortion as her right because its her body, not the reality the situation – infanticide brought on by an irresponsible mother who decided the child would not fit into her lifestyle (or she couldn’t remember who the father was), there is no excuse for abortion in the scale it is being practiced in the west there is enough contraceptives available to prevent any unplanned pregnancy.

  33. Fuck both the father and the mother. You kill your own kid, you’re a fucking piece of shit. You use your only kid’s and husband’s deaths for attention-whoring, you’re a fucking piece of shit.
    Both of them seem abnormal.

  34. Of course she would. Here in Minnesota Patty Wetterling did in her failed campaign for congress. Every subject brought was twisted back into her dead son.

  35. I wrote an article for another site saying very similar things. I agree with all you have said, but if you were to speak these words out loud at a social gathering you would be lynched.
    Her role as victim and grief stricken mother gives her iron clad protection and total immunity from any criticism.

  36. I’ve got something that may be of interest:
    Another woman nominated for Australian of the Year was a women named Gill Hicks. Hicks is known because she was in London during the bombings as has been tirelessly working (haven’t they all) to true to keep societal solidarity in the face of anti-muslin sentiment.
    So between her and Ms Batty we have two women who have suffered due to the actions of two individuals belonging to two different groups (Muslims and men) and one is up for the award for spreading a message of peace and that “not all Muslims are like that” and the other is now spreading a message the “domestic violence is overwhelmingly a male issue”.
    Somehow the irony of these two women taking up causes that, when viewed from this angle, aren’t all that different. The difference being that the government of Australia chose to hate on men and lump us all in the category of potential wife-beaters instead of the “Islam is a religion of peace and the perpetrators of those wicked deeds were exceptions, not the rule”.
    Either it really isn’t a left-right issue, or Abbott is still trying to prove he’s not a misogynist by given women every accolade and grant under the sun!

  37. Good honest points made. Perhaps if she sought mental health for the man she well loved as she said untreated for 20 years. I’m sure some doctors would have helped assess him. Its a shame the stigma and probably embarrassment stops people getting help its a shame it has happened. Though not quite domestic violence. More like mental illness caused this death. None the less money seems to make these situations better. Oh and a luxury spa day paid for by police.mmm that will stop n inquiry into what may have been another wrongful shooting. So many facts left out or ommitted. I know I wouldn’t have the strength so quick

  38. Some of the points you make are valid.
    It stereotypes domestic violence as only perpetrated by men. That they are protectors and vigilantes. That women are always the victims. Not all men are physically strong and fit this narrative of tall, dark and handsome or can live up to this ideal. It is divisive in it defines gender role stereotypes. Abuse it is not only physical it can emotional. Emotional abuse can sometimes be worse than physical abuse. If they are used in combination it can be the cause of mental illness in both men and women,
    Having said this. It is a sad crime, noone can excuse the killing of a child. Luke Batty should have been awarded the Australian of the Year posthumously.

  39. It really is disgusting. What they’ve effectively done is glorify this woman as a victim and then given her a seemingly permanent means for her to bask in her Munchausen Syndrome-like victimhood.
    All she does is talk about her ‘horrific’ experiences, spout oft-repeated but false and misleading statistics and rhetoric.
    From what I can see, she starts every speech or talk with “when Luke died…” cue tears…..
    He recent appearance on QandA demonstrated this clearly. When asked questions she umm-ed and ahh-ed, struggled to find anything meaningful to say and ended up repeating more useless rhetoric and platitudes.
    I, for one, would dearly have loved to hear Anderson’s side of the story. He was clearly disturbed but, most likely because the Mental Health system in this country is an absolute disgrace and the fact that he is Male, meant he missed out on genuine treatment. Together with Batty’s mysterious decision to maintain involvement with him, this led to poor Luke’s death. And now here she is profiting from it and basking in the limelight.
    Of course, if it were Rosie who was mentally ill and killed Luke, I guarantee you we would hear all about how she’s not really at fault, Anderson probably drove her to it, or the system let her down, she’s the real victim….and Anderson would be immediately under scrutiny and face suspicion for a multitude of things he had no connection to.
    I’m already starting to get well and truly sick of seeing her mug on TV.

  40. I though she had a restraining order against her “ex” and she still gave him access on the day of the murder / suicide by cop. Great article I’m glad there other people who see this woman as no more than an irresponsible liar looking for a hand out.

  41. ‘Apparently she wants Australia to have their own version of the American money-hole known as VAWA.’
    Where does she say this?

  42. What a load of crap. Her son was murdered in cold blood by his father after multiple failures of the system which should have protected him and his Mother. Rules and processes which let her down and the author has the gall to say “she is taking advantage of her son’s murder”. As a victim of domestic violence I challenge you to talk 1 mile in my shoes .. Raise awareness and let us stop domestic violence now.

  43. Rosie Batty doesn’t appear so clear-cut as the media portrays her. Her son was murdered by a man she chose to involve her self with and made death threats, even after being warned by law enforcement, therapists, psychologists, friends, and church leaders. Now she blames MEN as a group and society for not only the mental illness of one man, but her obviously horrendous decisions.
    Now she is receiving money, fame, sympathy, and a cult-like following of mindless defenders. It’s sick.
    And I say this as a man who personally helped one woman and her son out of a dangerous domestic situation and offered another woman and son the same help. But, as I have a penis, according to her, I am a potential rapist and abuser.

  44. is anyone concerned with the implications of murder/suicide?
    there is often a “protect the loved ones” concept even if one of the victims was killed for being evil others are killed to protect them from evil.
    In this instance I see no “killing evil”, it often would be killing the spouse. but where the parent kills the kids then self (or attempts self) there often is a concept of protecting the kids from the evil that exists… the implication being the spouse here is no longer loved by the murderer but the kids are being protected from her by killing them

  45. as to what new law is needed, since all the actions being addressed was pointed out… they are already illegal… the only law needed is the death penalty for anyone who wastes the time of productive citizens
    with emotional fluff like this

  46. what a fantastic article on a set of circumstances that has me wondering about this woman’s true motives.losing a child is hard enough,but losing one in such a violent way would have me in hospital with a nervous breakdown,not giving press conferences. boy if i didnt know any better i’d say she set the whole thing up,and knew what Anderson would do at that cricket ground……very fishy indeed.

  47. She still has not grieved over her son and never once spoken out when a mother murders her child. Reported now there is $135,000 missing from her foundation but the cover up started.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *