“Men controlling women with DV orders”- Gold Coast Bulletin – 18/05/2016

Link to article

Here I am, a month after my last post, once again furious at another News Corporation article aimed at the lowly uneducated masses of Australia. What a sensationalist headline. It’s a thing of beauty actually. “Men controlling women”. That’s enough to get the blood boiling.

In fact, the article is so biased, I’m pretty sure it’s goes against the Newscorp Editorial Code of Conduct:


See that keyword? IMPARTIALLY. Evidently the journalist has no idea what that even means.

How horribly one sided this whole article is.  It just reeks of man-hating bullshit that serves only to portray the act of domestic violence as being gender specific to men only. That men beat women and that women are always the victim. The pink brigade will have you believe this is the way of the land, that women can do no wrong. But how correct is that? Is it very well possible that perhaps, both men and women are capable of the exact same depravities? That women can be just as evil as men?!?

10 Mothers Who Killed Their Kids Brutally


The fact of the matter is that women are just as capable of domestic violence as men. Be it woman-on-man violence or woman-on-woman violence, the ability to discount the fact that women can be violent, both physically and emotionally, and they can seemingly get away with it too. Just watch this video on such reactions to see for yourself. Where everybody suspects that the man deserved it. If I beat my wife, NOBODY, would snigger at it and claim that “she deserved it”, yet the video shows how prevalent acceptance of women-on-man violence really is.

So let’s dissect parts of this article to present some proper critical feedback to it:

“Director of the Gold Coast Domestic Violence Prevention Centre Amy Compton-Keen said male perpetrators of domestic violence were known to take out orders against women as a means of control.”

This is not native to men. It’s a well known fact that a common tactic for women is to claim false allegations of abuse either against themselves or their kids. Divorce lawyers inform their male clients to prepare for it, and to obtain parenting statements. While almost always untrue, judges choose to err on the side of caution. They do not want to be the one judge that questions it and something actually does happen. The result of this? Fathers unable to see their kids for a minimum of one month, and even after that, permanent supervised visits, despite the fact that no charges were ever laid.

“It’s about them trying to get in first and, from our experience working with women, if the man has a good story he is more often believed,” she said.

Because it’s always about the story, isn’t it. By that very logic, does that also discount the woman should she spin a good story? If she’s the first one to come to court with a sob story, then surely she must be the one that’s often believed, even though she’s lying, right?

“Ms Compton-Keen said women subject to orders against them had often lashed out after sustained abuse.”

Ahh yes. The good ol’ “I’m violent because he/she is violent” response. You could argue that the fact that the woman lashed out because of “sustained abuse” is evidence enough that the protective order is more than warranted. Especially if there is a lack of evidence to it. Given how easily they are awarded to women, this is more than enough for it to be taken out against them. And finally;

“While it has always been an issue, people now feel like they are going to be taken seriously by authorities,” Mr Scott said.

BANG. Domestic violence is, and always has been, an issue with women as well. Men who brought it up in the past were regarded as weak and not manly. Their “man-credentials” questioned and joked about. But it has now become more acceptable for men to open up about their feelings. All of a sudden, men are finding other men in the same position as them. In relationships where their wives are abusive. Now that they feel open enough to bring it up, and the judicial system is becoming more acceptable of the issue, women in these situations are finding themselves on the back-foot, desperate to ensure that people believe that they could never do what men do.

Woman-on-male domestic violence is on the rise in Australia. To not think that men can be victims just goes to show how ingrained it is in peoples minds and as a result, buy in to the crap that this article spews. To the journalist’s credit, she does mention that there are genuine cases of domestic violence but immediately goes on to dismiss it because violence against women, as opposed to both genders, is worse.

The NSW police said it best. NEVER think you know the full story.





“Telstra data guy won’t apologise” – News.com.au – 05/04/16

Link to article

I didn’t think I’d be somebody to go out, create a blog and use it as my own personal soap box but sometimes there are things that just piss you off. Something that angers you so much that you stop and you think “You know what? No, this is not cool, man!” This is one of those things. This is why this blog exists and why it will continue to exist. When I read something that pisses me off because it’s so factually wrong, I’ll post it here.

I’m Australian and like a few million others of us, the #1 telecommunications provider in this great land, Telstra, had a few issues where businesses and individuals were left without the internet for a day at a time. It happened twice in one month. Maybe 3 times, I don’t remember. The point is that it wasn’t cool and Telstra went out of their way to give us a Sunday of unlimited data on their mobile network.

Cool, hey?

Except that we were unfortunate enough to encounter dog slow speeds during this time because all these millions that were affected decided that would be the day to blow gigabytes of data by streaming and downloading stuff. Telstra copped it on the chin pretty well. We all knew the network would be slow so none of us were surprised.

Except some journalist at News.com.au

Let me introduce you to a man named John. Over these two days, John went out and downloaded a combined total of 1.5TB of data. That’s 1.5 TERABYTES. 1500GB of data. I can’t even begin to describe the number to those less technical. I work in IT. I know that’s a lot and it is an impressive figure for somebody to download it. How did he do it?

You see, he is lucky enough to possess a 4GX phone. 4GX is the successor to the 4G network. It operates on a different band than 4G and theoretically twice as fast as 4G. It’s an amazing piece of technology that exist in only a few phones and on a few wifi hotspots around the country. John was lucky enough to either be near one of those spots or possess the phone. So having a horrible ADSL2 service at home, he decided to use this technology. Either he created a hotspot on his phone and tethered to his laptop or he used the public hotspot and downloaded away.

Now despite the 2 days of copious downloads, nothing John could have done would have slowed down the network. Millions of people doing the exactly the same thing as him over the 3G, 4G & 4GX networks flooded the network and it slowed to a crawl.

Except some journalist at News.com.au feels differently.

According to this journalist, a dapper looking bloke named Matt Young, John is the guy that has caused all of our troubles and expects him to apologize. What for, you ask? Well, good ol’ Matthew was asked this on twitter and his response?


That was it. Nothing in Matt Young’s story explains why. Instead, he has used Reddit as his source for the story and merely making claim that: “[John] won’t apologize to critics despite copping it from the rest of the country for abusing the system.

Who are the critics? One or two anonymous posters on Reddit, some twitter users. Only a small sub-section of Telstra users. However he does go on to mention that Telstra gave John a shout-out and that was in a positive light.

In a later edit of the story, Matt did mention that “Yet other users complained to the Telco giant of slow speeds, and when they found out of [John]’s gains, blamed him for adding to the traffic trouble.” Fair enough. If hundreds of thousands of others like John did, then this would be true. And guess what? That is exactly what happened. So many other people enjoyed what is so rarely made free to them but journalism at its finest ensured that they could mark out just one person for it. Here’s some news for you Matt. If Telstra’s systems can’t handle one guy leeching from the network, the problem is with Telstra, not with John. In fact, Telstra had anticipated the congestion and looked at it as a stress test which helps them identify any critical issues in the event of emergency and were more than pleased with their performance.

What about all the slack that John has gone on to receive because of articles like this which News.com.au broke the first time it happened? According to John himself: “I’m getting a stupid amount of messages on Facebook, including abuse” He later states on Reddit that he has “been getting Death Threats all afternoon and evening, It is pure madness yet so funny at the same time”.  So thanks Matt for making all of his details completely public. This is no better than a good ol’ 4Chan doxxing that you have encouraged.

So it’s clear that we have a journalist who creates a click bait story with a sensationalist title about a guy that has done nothing wrong on a system that that he didn’t break. Back in my day, stories like this were verified via a sub-editor and an editor. It was also done by a person that was aware of the technology and thoroughly researched. All the hallmarks of a good journalistic piece. If this was written by a fresh intern, the various mistakes & lack of knowledge in the area could be excusable but instead, it’s a piece written to do nothing more than vilify a guy that never did anything wrong on a service that Telstra placed no limits on. The journalist has gone on to use John’s full name, his age, occupation and personal pictures he has stolen from his personal Facebook. Yet the question must be asked:


UPDATE – 06/04

I have reached out to both John & Matt. John was kind enough to show me the sort of Facebook threats he has been subject to since his name was made public via http://www.news.com.au:



He also wishes to express the professional manner in which Matt conducted himself in their communications:

“I do have to say, The journalist was pretty nice to me when we spoke. I have no complaints.”

Should Matt choose to comment, I will update further.