Guardian’s Van Badham claims Weekend Sunrise ambushed her with Mark Latham

OMG. I just stopped reading Guardian Australia and watching Seven Sunrise. Feminists. Give me a bloody break. (Van, the loudest voice does not win an argument.)

Van takes the feminist thing way too serious. It’s kind of sad to see Mark seemed like the voice of reason in all of this shouting.

Well done @Steve and @Aaron for bravely reinforcing the marketing and media industry’s solid track record of gender equality. What the feminist movement needs is more male voices like yours to ensure it doesn’t become too big a deal.

I don’t think I’ve ever agreed with Mark Latham… yet here I am.

I couldn’t agree more with @Aaron and @Steve (above)

The losers win this ‘debate’ were;
Latham: Predictable professional stirrer.
Van: A really bad example of shouting feminism
Sunrise: For serving this rabble up on usually amiable weekend morning television
Might be a good idea to ban both for any future appearances …. Please!

The ridiculousness of Latham claiming that Badham and women like her are out of touch and ranting about public transport while he resides in his large, fully paid for house while living off his parliamentary pension including travel perks, which he was able to get due to the boy’s club of the ALP elevating him to stupid levels he never deserved on merit is quite something.

To say he got off track in the “debate” is an understatement. Boohoo…men are offended that women would like safe “women only” carriages on the train. Maybe men like Mark (or let’s be honest…it’s more likely to be men totally unlike Mark) can put some thought into why women might feel safer travelling without men (threat of being assaulted and raped perhaps?), without getting their little feely weelies hurt in the process.

Sadly, yet typically, any article about feminism brings out the small minority of male commenters who deep down, are scared of women and think women should know their place. Latham apologists hate feminism because they see how women are treated and don’t want to have to suffer the same. That’s how we know we need feminism…because to these men equality looks like oppression.

… have I stumbled in to Mark Latham’s secret fan group meeting?

It was poor form of the producers not to mention Latham, and I suspect they did this because Clementine Ford had already declined to appear after hearing he would be on.

Latham is a [Edited by Mumbrella]. No-one needs to be giving him airtime.

Mark Latham often describes great insight. He is a fine writer. Raises valid points.
He is also an opinionated Jerk and a Bully. Two all really.

How am I not surprised that the three men who decide to comment side with professional misogynist Mark Latham? I pity your wives/girlfriends.

@Kate, I agree with you, including whatever it was that Mumbrella edited out!

Mark Latham speaking about feminism is akin to Kim Jong-un speaking about human rights.

Personal attacks and bullying are poor show and not doing men any favours.

I vote for Egalitarianism and therefore people would be working together to make things work for all, without having to drag down others.

Embarrassing that Aussies behave this way on national TV.

Oh no! Badham didn’t get a trigger warning so she’d feel safe. Just like her entitled snowflake Social Justice Warrior allies.

I am a woman and I am sick of these loud and unruly ‘feminists’ getting on their high horses.
Mark Latham = idiot.
Women, be women and get on with it instead of feeling self righteous and stirring every pot.

Hey Sunrise producers this is below the belt, so to speak, to not inform guests of who else is on panel so you can get a ‘gotcha moment’ .This sort of TV only generates a lot of heat and no debate, just a lot of polarising crap – feminists are mad witches and men are maligned. We all know Latham is a loose cannon, why bother.

Yawn, the power play of professional public figures…

Two professional agitators going at it to see who can shout the loudest. How could it end but badly? Still, Sunrise – watched by a dog and the occasional dole bludger – gets a free, if totally unwarranted, headline.

Wow. I hope the ignorance on display in these comments is not really a reflection of our industry. Mumbrella you should be concerned if this is your readership. Have we really become like this?

If you are a man who is threatened by the idea of women being equal (and if you’re trolling above then, despite your denials, you are threatened) then what kind of a loser are you? You have virtually every aspect of history and societal structure set up to favour you. And that still isn’t enough? You still need to repress women to get ahead and make yourself feel better?

What’s amazing, tho unsurprising is that every bloke has supported Latham. Every woman, Van Badham.
Its like being back in the playground. Seriously everyone, get a grip!
Its two extremists (who hopefully) don’t truly represent any of our ideals

I’m a bloke.

Latham’s a flipping troglodyte. And all the people here calling Van a “shouty feminist” for trying to stand up for herself while being directly attacked AT VOLUME, IN NAME on National TV are absolute blithering hayseeds.

What would YOU do. Just sit there in silence while Mark Latham told lies about you on national TV? Turn it up, mongoloids. You wouldn’t.

So ninety per cent of the above comments are steeped in sexism of the most abominable variety. Who the hell are you people? Do you make comments like this at dinner parties, where you’d basically be the bloke who ruins the whole evening for everyone, or just on the internet, where you can remain a coward?

Answers below please.

Not everyone @whataboutobjectivity. Reading into some people’s comments too and some identities are not known.

I love that @Adam supports my view that people say terrible things online in the anonymity a UserName provides. It is sad that this sexism exists so vehemently in this day and age, isn’t it? Hard to imagine.

Mark Latham probably needs more friends to catch up with and talk. Mark visit http://www.mayeight.com and talk your issues through with a mate.

Does it count that I think they are both idiots?

Does that make me a misogynist and a raving feminist? I sure hope so.

Why don’t we all calm down and not give these pompous prats any more oxygen. Mumbrella – close the post.

The entire segment is a glaring example of political claptrap.

Okeefe grandstanding in the established Derryn Hinch style eg. “Shame Shame ” and don’t forget where you heard it first. Van Badham screeching quasi polemic feminist rhetoric and waffle filler from yesteryear, Latham exercising the devil’s advocacy on one hand, and the arguable on the other, and Cox attempting to play the calm and collected co host, but settling for the role of kindergarten or day care mum signing T for “timeout.”

This is the stuff that breeds confusion for the head-nodders and finger pointers. The debate is uneven to begin with, no sensible and responsible debate could ever have been expected. The producers expected fire, or why else did they involve Latham and the other two?

@AnneMiles I think after about 10 comments I got sick of reading such horrible Sexism from both sides.
Its really reconfirmed this major issue we have in our industry. And what its shown is that if the balance of Power was the other way, the same problems would probably still exist.
A window into the broken psyches in ad land 🙁

AUSTRALIAN WOMEN ARE BECOMING HATERS,OPEN YOUR EYES YOU ARE BEING BRAINWASHED!!!!!

I’m more worried about Mark’s increasing W.C.Fields’ type nose. What can it mean?

I am female and Mark Latham was just being a normal person without allowing himself to be shut down by Van whatever her name is. This race/ sex baiting (or whatever the latest form of propaganda) is merely social engineering which I, and my daughters will not be apart of. Don’t buy into the divide and conquer, victim mentality nonsense. Go to infowars.com for real news!!

WOMEN OF AUSTRALIA

STOP THE BRAINWASHING

INSTEAD TAKE THE TOTALLY MEANINGLESS STATEMENTS OF SOME BLOKE SHOUTING ONLINE IN ALL CAPS AT FACE VALUE.

3rd wave feminism is a cancer and holding women back. These are the kinds of women who belittle those who choose to raise a family at home or dress in a feminine way. Women now have equality in our society, they are dominating in schools, dominating in universities, dominating in the arts/humanities/journalism and even in the sciences (EG. Biology, psychology etc etc). Women like Van just love yelling and fighting for the sake of it.

Real stats or it never existed.

“Dominating the sciences?” There are more males in STEM careers than women. But please, prove me wrong with more than your white male opinion.

Re: @Larry

If [quote] “Real stats or it never existed.” [unquote] Where do you derive yours?

Sorry for my white male question, I tried a black female question but it didn’t seem right. Oh, what race and gender is your comment by the way?

P.S. There are more females than males in nursing, does that count?

The strange thing is, Mark Latham made the most sense out of the debate, which surprised me. Van Badham’s arguments just don’t stand up to scrutiny, and folded under pressure to explain herself.

And don’t all the contributions from OLD BLOKES here stand out like Donkey’s balls?

“Women like Van just love shouting”. In that sentence you’re referring to the woman who was shouted over the top of LITERALLY EVERY time she tried to speak, and unlike Latham wasn’t given FIVE SECONDS of clear air in her own right? From watching THAT you get that SHE, not Latham is the one who loves shouting. Have that persepctive if you want, but I’m going to call you a blinkered sexist moron for wilfully deriving black from the white that was clearly presented on screen.

How anyone could watch that and think Latham, the ranting dickwit who started out the interview by abusing other participants who hadn’t said ONE WORD yet, was anything other than the source of this interview going haywire CANNOT HAVE FUNCTIONING EYEBALLS. certainly not a brain.

Anyone who can wind up in this wrecker’s camp is a wrecker themselves. And I can mount a pretty good argument as to why the voices of wreckers don’t belong in ANY debate. Because those debates always windup looking like this one did.

The idea that anyone could watch that and think Van was even given enough clear air to make any sort of “argument” tells you how much some men responding here are totally self-propelled by not much more than residual sexism and hatred.

Seriously. Person gets harangued on national TV at length by a bloke who basically grabs the microphone as soon as the interview starts and starts abusing someone before they’ve said a word. And that’s the bloke you guys want to stand next to.

Doesn’t matter. Bowel cancer is coming for you …

@Adam got it nailed – count the airtime both sides of the story got and the facts speak for themselves. Not sure I would have personally resorted to more name-calling here, but the point is one of the most solid here. It was a circus, not very grown up behaviour by anyone other than the female presenter on the show who called it to order.

Oh, and @Viewer – seriously, ‘no’. If someone bullies everyone else and sucks up the airtime, what chance has anyone else got to talk sensibly? There is no way that there was one ounce of good sense coming out of anyone’s mouth in that segment.

Adam, you are 99% correct.

But not all the contributions from old blokes stand out like donkey’s balls – 99% do.

But I would agree that all the contributions that stand out like donkey’s balls come from old blokes (or angry young dickwads – the sons of those old blokes probably).