Jane Caro is woman who has a way with words.
For instance, she describes herself on her Twitter profile as a ‘media tart’. See:
And then on that wonderful ABC show Q&A earlier this week, Jane went on to talk about housewives and prostitutes. This is how news.com.au reported it:
“She then proclaimed that traditional marriage was the backbone of prostitution, where women in powerless positions, like unemployment, were forced to sell their reproductive rights to their husbands.”
In one fell swoop, the atheistic, feminist stirrer that is Ms Caro insulted good women across Australia and the world. It’s something that atheistic, feminist stirrers seem to be quite adept at: ridiculing women who give up everything for their children.
Now to be fair to Jane, she has since clarified exactly what she meant. Yesterday she took time out from her busy schedule to explain herself in the Canberra Times.
Jane started out by enlightening us that she did not want to isolate sex-workers as a group. I guess she demonstrated that the best way to do this is by offending every married woman in the land.
Then she wrote that she does not believe today’s housewives are prostitutes. Jane just meant that yesterday’s housewives sold themselves sexually because they were unempowered:
“Given the reaction to my remarks about marriages from the past, I obviously expressed myself badly – an occupational hazard on Q&A, as others have also discovered. I was trying to talk about marriage in the bad old days when it was much more of an economic transaction than it is today.”
Considering her most recent comments, it’s pretty clear that Jane ‘Media Tart’ Caro’s opinion of her grandmother cannot be printed in a public place.
While Jane Caro was musing about the prostitute-like tendencies of housewives, a former housewife was also in the news. So we now know that mother of two, Amanda Goff, gave up on the ‘constraints’ of domestic servitude and swapped it for the freedom that comes when one sells their body so that wayward men can use it like an old rag.
Now Amanda devotes herself to selling pies at her kid’s tuckshop, taking photos of her toes for ‘clients’ while she waits to pick these children up from school and spilling the beans on national television about how her new hobby of prostitution has actually empowered her. I’m not sure many other mothers at the school are as supportive of Amanda’s ‘profession’ and her proximity to their children as she proclaims.
Amanda told the world that after her divorce, she got into the business of being an actual ‘tart’ because she decided to start charging for something that she was doing for free anyway.
So if I get the logic of this, feminists claim that housewives of old were the downtrodden prostitutes, but today’s divorcees leasing their bodies to fat, sad, old men who can’t be faithful are liberated women. And the sheilas that just sleep around outside of marriage are really nothing more than hookers who sell themselves short.
But then again, I’ve never understood feminist logic, which seems to be a clearly misunderstood oxymoron, like being a little bit pregnant. Of course, being a little bit pregnant is the goal of feminism, as far as I know. So maybe it does all make sense after all.
And Amanda has also got a way with words, too.
She defended her decision to spill the beans on national television about her bedroom antics while also being mother to a five and seven year old by stating that she protects her children from what they don’t need to know. What a great mother Amanda is. Of course, their father has had to let them know what mum gets up to because it’s all over the news – and probably the playground.
She then went on to say that having a mother who is a prostitute is like having gay parents. I’m pretty sure that I agree with Amanda on that point, but not in a good way. However, I will thank Amanda for highlighting how unfit homosexual parents really are.
And Amanda also claimed that her decision to take money from men so they could use her body improves their marriages. It helps them become better husbands, she said. After sleeping with married men for moolah, Amanda now knows the secrets to a happy marriage, the report in the Daily Mail Australia states.
Of course, Amanda is divorced. And a prostitute. That secret knowledge is not doing her much good.
I’m not sure any wife worth her salt would agree with this scarlet woman anyway. Amanda might like to lie to herself and claim that being a prostitute doesn’t hurt others. The devastated and distraught wives left in her wake will tell a different story. Her own despairing husband’s concern for his children does as well.
So Amanda Goff is nothing more than a fraud, masquerading under an illusory name and undressing for men who are only interested in her as far as their own selfishness goes.
And memo to Jane Caro: this is the type of woman you protected in order to insult those women (and their husbands) who sacrifice themselves to make a commitment to marriage work.
You might call yourself a feminist, but I think women could probably use a little less of your help.