Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
Anidav
Feb 25, 2010

ahhh fuck its the rats again
The no vote might be higher than expected for various reasons. Such as people who were gonna tick yes, open up the envelope and think wait a minute homosexuals I think are kind of weird and then tick no.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Luceid
Jan 20, 2005

Buy some freaking medicine.
Voted yes despite living overseas. I am QLD's greatest export. I also desire to never return there.

cohsae
Jun 19, 2015

Ireland's SSM referendum:
Turnout was 60.5%, Yes received 62.1%.
We're already close to 60% turnout or maybe higher by now.

JBP
Feb 16, 2017

You've got to know, to understand,
Baby, take me by my hand,
I'll lead you to the promised land.

Zenithe posted:

I work with a broad range of demographics and people from different backgrounds and it's safe to assume everyone is a scumbag in advance and change your mind when given the correct promts hth.

:same:

Pocket Billiards
Aug 29, 2007
.
Maybe I'm a pessimist, but I think the survey will be closer to 50/50 than the ~70% approval from informal polling. Then this will be used to shelve the whole proposed changes.

Not to say that 70% doesn't reflect public opinion on gay marriage itself. It's just that what should be a question of rewording the requirements to enter a marriage contract is being framed as a referendum on gender politics, 'progressive' sexual attitudes and conservative victimhood.

Look at the main thrust of the big money public No campaigning - gender fairies and don't feel bullied by the majority public sentiment, the actual proposed changes don't even get a mention. These tactics are definitely finding their mark, 2 minutes on Facebook makes that clear. That's among older/regional folk, kind of vocal PHON supporter crowd and the younger alt right types also.

There's recent examples of this. Many people treated Brexit as a referendum on immigrants and political correctness, same with Trump presidency. Look at the Australian republic referendum. A lot of folks who support republicanism in general voted No on account that they felt that the public didn't get enough of say into who their President was like Americans do. Regardless of the fact that the proposed 'president' role was a replacement for the governor general and not the PM and that they would be decided by parliamentary vote rather than just nominated by the PM. 20 years later and we are still stuck with it.

racing identity
Apr 5, 2017

by FactsAreUseless
Nobody other than absolutely munted culture warrior lunatics care about gender theory so trying to make it a wedge isn't going to be very successful.

Conversely, most people do care about keeping non-whites out, so that was an effective wedge for Brexit.

Senor Tron
May 26, 2006


racing identity posted:

Nobody other than absolutely munted culture warrior lunatics care about gender theory so trying to make it a wedge isn't going to be very successful.

The safe schools argument has worked well unfortunately precisely because they avoid talking about what the safe schools program actually involves and people can speculate the worst.

Pocket Billiards
Aug 29, 2007
.
It's not just gender theory its grooming, AIDS, poofters in the womens' loo, etc.

Saw two macros today. One was a kid photoshopped between two leather gay dudes, another with pony play people. Thise wedges work with more people than its comfortable to admit.

Intoluene
Jul 6, 2011

Activating self-destruct sequence!
Fun Shoe

Pocket Billiards posted:

Maybe I'm a pessimist, but I think the survey will be closer to 50/50 than the ~70% approval from informal polling. Then this will be used to shelve the whole proposed changes.

Not to say that 70% doesn't reflect public opinion on gay marriage itself. It's just that what should be a question of rewording the requirements to enter a marriage contract is being framed as a referendum on gender politics, 'progressive' sexual attitudes and conservative victimhood.

Look at the main thrust of the big money public No campaigning - gender fairies and don't feel bullied by the majority public sentiment, the actual proposed changes don't even get a mention. These tactics are definitely finding their mark, 2 minutes on Facebook makes that clear. That's among older/regional folk, kind of vocal PHON supporter crowd and the younger alt right types also.

There's recent examples of this. Many people treated Brexit as a referendum on immigrants and political correctness, same with Trump presidency. Look at the Australian republic referendum. A lot of folks who support republicanism in general voted No on account that they felt that the public didn't get enough of say into who their President was like Americans do. Regardless of the fact that the proposed 'president' role was a replacement for the governor general and not the PM and that they would be decided by parliamentary vote rather than just nominated by the PM. 20 years later and we are still stuck with it.

The problem with the Republic vote was that the question wasn't in regards to "do you want a Republic", it was "Do you want THIS Republic."

Cartoon
Jun 20, 2008

poop

Lid posted:

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/no-compelling-evidence-matthew-leveson-was-killed-by-boyfriend-inquest-told-20171003-gyt8cg.html

Not copying and pasting because what i want to bring up is why in an article about the death of Matthew Leveson, all likelihood murdered by Michael Atkins, did they think it appropriate to include a picture OF MATTHEW LEVESON'S SKELETON?
He was gay. Gay people don't have rights. Where's the problem?

Here's a problem:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-10-03/death-in-custody-how-did-tane-chatfield-die/9011948

Police state we don't need no steeeenkkin' police state, we're way past that now

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-10-04/renewed-push-for-terrorism-suspects-to-be-held-for-a-fortnight/9012588

"Sure they are environmental vandals and proven corrupt crooks but that shouldn't stand against them!" (Actual QLD politician)

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-10-03/queensland-government-defends-adani-amid-damning-allegations/9010532

JBP
Feb 16, 2017

You've got to know, to understand,
Baby, take me by my hand,
I'll lead you to the promised land.

Senor Tron posted:

The safe schools argument has worked well unfortunately precisely because they avoid talking about what the safe schools program actually involves and people can speculate the worst.

I have one friend who is voting yes but opposes safe schools on the grounds that he doesn't want the government teaching his kids how to respect other people and (in my opinion as well) would do a better job himself. Unfortunately he won't factor in the slowest walkers on this one.

Whitlam
Aug 2, 2014

Some goons overreact. Go figure.
Personally I reckon yes is going to romp it in. Maybe I'm just being overly optimistic (I'm fully prepared to admit that it may be a bit of an echo chamber effect), but I'm confident enough to put it in writing here, preserved for all time until the heat death of the universe (or the result comes in and reminds me that this is a garbage country full of garbage people).

JBP
Feb 16, 2017

You've got to know, to understand,
Baby, take me by my hand,
I'll lead you to the promised land.
I am deeply concerned that it will be very close despite all the data from the last two years indicating everyone is down with gay marriage except for QLD.

UrbanLabyrinth
Jan 28, 2009

When my eyes were stabbed by the flash of a neon light
That split the night
And touched the sound of silence


College Slice

Man claiming to be ‘Man Living in Body’ questions court’s jurisdiction over him posted:

A DEFENDANT claiming he should be known only as “Man Living In Body” has questioned a court’s jurisdiction to deal with his criminal charges, even telling a judge he doesn’t actually exist.

County Court Judge Barbara Cotterell was left stumped on Tuesday when the case of Gregory Norman Francis — who faces charges of criminal damage and making threats to kill — came before her.

He refused to talk to Judge Cotterell until she addressed him by his “right” name.

He told the court he could not speak because “he doesn’t exist”.

When told he was booked in to face two trials over a full week, the accused man replied: “I don’t accept that. That’s not my name.”

He refused to participate in the pre-trial hearing until Judge Cotterell accepted a bundle of evidence he claimed proved he was in fact “Man Living In Body”.

The bundle appeared to include several pieces of identification in that name, including a Miner’s Right, MasterCard and Medicare card.

He also claimed Centrelink also acknowledged him as “Man Living In Body”.

Crown Prosecutor Neill Hutton — who has handled many high-profile cases — told the court the prosecution had acknowledged the title “Man Living In Body” in a summary of allegations to be put to the court.

Judge Cotterell asked that the name be linked to the court file belonging to Gregory Francis, but that did not appear to placate the accused man.

“Do you have jurisdiction over living man?” he asked.

Judge Cotterell assured him that she did:

“I have jurisdiction of that,” she said.

“What about the 10 commandments?” the accused asked. “Do no harm.”

Judge Cotterell suggested it would be good if he could live by that.

“Who is on trial today? What name is here?” the accused man continued.

“Gregory Francis, also known as Man Living In Body,” Judge Cotterell said.

The case is due to go to trial next month.

starkebn
May 18, 2004

"Oooh, got a little too serious. You okay there, little buddy?"
If the name doesn't fit, you must acquit!

I would blow Dane Cook
Dec 26, 2008
A graphic homophobic sign hung above three northbound lanes of the M1 through Springwood on Tuesday took aim at the media, government and the LGBTI community.

The sign was hung over the side of the Watland Street overpass and featured hand-drawn images of both male and female reproductive organs, telling passing motorists to "wake up".

A picture of the sign was posted to a Facebook page and attracted comments and jokes about the "childish illustrations".

"Ashamed this is Brisbane," one person wrote.

"Is that meant to be two vaginas touching? I do not think they have ever actually seen a vagina," another commenter wrote.

"What a waste of a couple of nice white bed sheets. And....a life drawing art class - cause honey....they don't look like that," said another Facebook user.

In one comment on the post, the page administrator said the sign has since been taken down.

LGBTI Legal Service president Matilda Alexander said far-right groups had been given a platform for their messages of hate and vilification by the same-sex marriage survey.

“This is a public act that exposes people to a form of homophobia that we hadn’t seen before the vote,” she said.

“We are just seeing so much unlawful hate-speech being directed at gay and lesbian people throughout Australia.”

The legal service established the Like Love project to address vilification during the Australian Marriage Law Postal Survey period.

They plan to present similar cases as part of a complaint to the Anti-Discrimination Commission at the end of the campaign period.

The Department of Transport and Main Roads was contacted for comment.

Lid
Feb 18, 2005

And the mercy seat is awaiting,
And I think my head is burning,
And in a way I'm yearning,
To be done with all this measuring of proof.
An eye for an eye
And a tooth for a tooth,
And anyway I told the truth,
And I'm not afraid to die.

starkebn posted:

If the name doesn't fit, you must acquit!

I DO NOT CONSENT I DO NOT CONSENT I DO NOT CONSENT

simmyb
Sep 29, 2005


My visual image of this was just Malcom Roberts in court?

BBJoey
Oct 31, 2012

racing identity posted:

Nobody other than absolutely munted culture warrior lunatics care about gender theory so trying to make it a wedge isn't going to be very successful.

do you actually believe this or is this satire

Pocket Billiards
Aug 29, 2007
.

Intoluene posted:

The problem with the Republic vote was that the question wasn't in regards to "do you want a Republic", it was "Do you want THIS Republic."

Yes but consider what THAT republic was (going by memory here).

Status quo - GG selected exclusively by PM and approved by Queen.

Referendum proposal - 'President' replaces GG and is selected by lower house from public nominations.

Not insignificant number of pro republic people vote no on the basis they don't have enough power, maintaining a system where the person in that role is picked by the PM and approved by the Queen and forfeiting the chance to both become a republic and transfer the power to select the head of government from 2 people to 150.

All I'm saying it's a pretty recent Australian example of how something can be framed to get in-principle supporters to vote against it and nullify it for decades.

Anidav
Feb 25, 2010

ahhh fuck its the rats again
There is a generation on Uni Students growing up right now that believe the internet created a bunch of crazy people who identify as some alt right troll pronoun which was probably created in Moscow and that society is a few years away from destroying itself.

Of course the Safe Schools argument works, the internet made it possible to believe anything you read.

This survey is gonna be atleast 60/40 to yes and anything closer will be ignored by the Coalition.

Anidav
Feb 25, 2010

ahhh fuck its the rats again
"I want gay marriage but not if my children are involved!"

Capt.Whorebags
Jan 10, 2005

Which is exactly why Howard is running a full page ad saying "let's see the details on SSM" because this trick was very successful in the Republic debate.

Doctor Spaceman
Jul 6, 2010

"Everyone's entitled to their point of view, but that's seriously a weird one."

Pocket Billiards posted:

All I'm saying it's a pretty recent Australian example of how something can be framed to get in-principle supporters to vote against it and nullify it for decades.

That's why Abbott wanted people to vote on the actual legislation, rather than a general statement of intent.

The nature of the process (voluntary postal voting in a country used to compulsory in-person voting) is a big unknown but the polls are pretty overwhelming in support of YES. A NO result wouldn't be like Brexit or Trump where what happened was still within the margin of error.

CrazyTolradi
Oct 2, 2011

It feels so good to be so bad.....at posting.

Anidav posted:

There is a generation on Uni Students growing up right now that believe the internet created a bunch of crazy people who identify as some alt right troll pronoun which was probably created in Moscow and that society is a few years away from destroying itself.

Of course the Safe Schools argument works, the internet made it possible to believe anything you read.

This survey is gonna be atleast 60/40 to yes and anything closer will be ignored by the Coalition.
You clearly were in the QUT student bar far too much.

open24hours
Jan 7, 2001

Pocket Billiards posted:

Yes but consider what THAT republic was (going by memory here).

Status quo - GG selected exclusively by PM and approved by Queen.

Referendum proposal - 'President' replaces GG and is selected by lower house from public nominations.

Not insignificant number of pro republic people vote no on the basis they don't have enough power, maintaining a system where the person in that role is picked by the PM and approved by the Queen and forfeiting the chance to both become a republic and transfer the power to select the head of government from 2 people to 150.

All I'm saying it's a pretty recent Australian example of how something can be framed to get in-principle supporters to vote against it and nullify it for decades.

I don't know how appropriate this comparison is. A republic of any sort isn't the goal, it's a specific type of republic. If you're not being offered what you want why would you vote for it? What was on offer was perceived as worse, or at least no better, than the status quo and was rightly rejected. There will likely be another referendum on the republic at some stage, if the 1999 one had passed we'd be stuck with it forever.

birdstrike
Oct 30, 2008

i;m gay
we should have a republic only with the historic Venetian electoral system

Pocket Billiards
Aug 29, 2007
.

Anidav posted:

There is a generation on Uni Students growing up right now that believe the internet created a bunch of crazy people who identify as some alt right troll pronoun which was probably created in Moscow and that society is a few years away from destroying itself.

Of course the Safe Schools argument works, the internet made it possible to believe anything you read.

See also younger white collar workforce that dedicate 12 hours a week to listening to Joe Rogan podcasts.

Synthbuttrange
May 6, 2007

I would blow Dane Cook posted:

A graphic homophobic sign hung above three northbound lanes of the M1 through Springwood on Tuesday took aim at the media, government and the LGBTI community.

The sign was hung over the side of the Watland Street overpass and featured hand-drawn images of both male and female reproductive organs, telling passing motorists to "wake up".

A picture of the sign was posted to a Facebook page and attracted comments and jokes about the "childish illustrations".

"Ashamed this is Brisbane," one person wrote.

"Is that meant to be two vaginas touching? I do not think they have ever actually seen a vagina," another commenter wrote.

"What a waste of a couple of nice white bed sheets. And....a life drawing art class - cause honey....they don't look like that," said another Facebook user.

In one comment on the post, the page administrator said the sign has since been taken down.

LGBTI Legal Service president Matilda Alexander said far-right groups had been given a platform for their messages of hate and vilification by the same-sex marriage survey.

“This is a public act that exposes people to a form of homophobia that we hadn’t seen before the vote,” she said.

“We are just seeing so much unlawful hate-speech being directed at gay and lesbian people throughout Australia.”

The legal service established the Like Love project to address vilification during the Australian Marriage Law Postal Survey period.

They plan to present similar cases as part of a complaint to the Anti-Discrimination Commission at the end of the campaign period.

The Department of Transport and Main Roads was contacted for comment.

https://twitter.com/petertaggart/status/915344039930503169

ewe2
Jul 1, 2009

IDK how the vote will go but I do know the LNP will do anything to ignore it. The Pyrrhic victory could be the mobilization of a previously-disinterested demographic to enrol to vote.

BBJoey
Oct 31, 2012

if you believe that there isn't a significant amount of Australians out there who are honestly scared their children are going to be turned gay or trans by radical gender theories in schools, i must ask whether you've paid any attention to the news in the past year

Doctor Spaceman
Jul 6, 2010

"Everyone's entitled to their point of view, but that's seriously a weird one."


And a bunch more questions about voting intentions etc.

hooman
Oct 11, 2007

This guy seems legit.
Fun Shoe
Has any body said "Smash the Gay-triarchy" yet?

Also poorly drawn sex organs ITT.

foolish_fool
Jul 22, 2010
18% of greens voters think no. How does that even happen.

JBP
Feb 16, 2017

You've got to know, to understand,
Baby, take me by my hand,
I'll lead you to the promised land.

foolish_fool posted:

18% of greens voters think no. How does that even happen.

Tree huggers in the Whish-Wilson mould but they think gays are creepy rather than penalty rates being in the Quran and therefore evil or whatever.

Aesculus
Mar 22, 2013

foolish_fool posted:

18% of greens voters think no. How does that even happen.

Doctor Spaceman
Jul 6, 2010

"Everyone's entitled to their point of view, but that's seriously a weird one."

foolish_fool posted:

18% of greens voters think no. How does that even happen.

People who don't think marriage should be a thing, tree tories, protest voters, etc.

If you really want an odd result for the Greens, look at this survey.

Aesculus
Mar 22, 2013

*in extremely evilelmo voice* How can the greens convince Middle Australia if they can't even convince 9% of their own voters

Recoome
Nov 9, 2013

Matter of fact, I'm salty now.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Synthbuttrange
May 6, 2007

a realistic depiction of two vaginas kissing

  • Locked thread