Prostituting feminism: Amanda Goff & Jane Caro

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 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.

Donate $10 today $400

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.

Author: Bernard Gaynor

Bernard Gaynor is a married father of nine children. He has a background in military intelligence, Arabic language and culture and is an outspoken advocate of conservative and family values.

Share This Post On


  1. Thank you for your fair analysis as usual Bernard. The real issue is that feminism is anti-Christian because it reverses God-given gender roles. It is because of this that it has lead to broken down marriages, sexualised liberalism, and the hatred of the “traditional” father, mother and family.
    It is a spiritual thing. These atheists cannot see anything spiritual and are being controlled by demonic forces. Their wisdom comes from demons, literally.

    I think we need to pray for their repentance and that they will turn to God.

    Please check out and like our fb page at ‘Anti Mammon and Usury Conquerors’ and our blog at

    Post a Reply
  2. I don’t see why this woman, Amanda Goff, needs to be disparaged like this. It kind of reminds me of the woman caught in adultery and her treatment in this article kind of reminds me of the way she was treated by the Pharisees.

    The words coming out of her mouth in that interview seem to me to be a reflection of what the modern relative society is telling her. So what is our role? To condemn her, to throw the stones, or to be the light of Christ? I don’t think Jesus would sarcastically call her a “great mother”, call her a fraud or a scarlet woman. He would probably ask her to repent and would preach the Good News to her, as she seems in need to hear it, as is anyone caught in sin.

    Jane Caro is a different target, as she is not being displayed as a sinful subject of derision, but as someone who has her own ideological framework. Yes, the framework should be exposed for it weaknesses but ridicule is a poor weapon. I actually think that it is actually an evil attempt at humour, because it attempts to raise yourself up while putting down your subject at the same time.

    Please try and be the light of Christ.

    Post a Reply
    • Gary, it is obvious that you prefer pseudo-intellectual waffle to expose so-called ‘weaknesses’ rather than tell it like it really is. Pointing out the truth of the matter in short simple terms should not be mistakenly deemed ridicule.

      Post a Reply
      • Are you calling the words and actions of Jesus Christ pseudo intellectual waffle?

  3. Feminism is a death-trap, which unfortunately has taken root across Australia with devastating consequences. What happened to those beautiful, brave homeschooling moms with a new child every year all helping to run the family farm?

    Post a Reply
  4. I’m always bemused by self-professed atheists thinking that, on their own beliefs, anyone would take them seriously; after all, they must believe that we all are merely a result of random arrangements of material…mud, if you like. So who cares what a pile of re-arranged mud thinks…if you could even use the term ‘think’!

    Post a Reply
  5. Whatever one might think of Amanda Goff’s rationalisations, she did draw attention to something that I believe is a serious problem within relationships in Australia and probably throughout the Western world.
    I have seen evidence of this problem during my work as a journalist, in which capacity I have interviewed more than one prostitute and/or madam. All of them have told me the same thing, which was that (a) most of their customers were married men and (b) if wives and girlfriends took care of business at home they (the prostitutes) would be out of business.
    What they meant by this was that the men who visit them say that they are not getting enough (or any) sex at home. I believed them. Ask any group of married men on the high side of 35, selected randomly, and at least half of them will say that their wives have turned frigid. This happens commonly after there is a baby.
    A published study reported that in 25 per cent of Australian marriages there was no sex. In another 25 per cent there was little sex. The remaining 50 per cent of marriages were found to have a enough sex to keep those involved happy.
    As a man who has been in a sexless marriage for the past 13 years I do not doubt that finding. I stay because my children need the male presence and need to be provided for, not because I aspire to celibacy or sainthood. If I had my time over I would not get married (to anyone). The gain is simply not worth the pain and the gain is illusory in the case of the 50 per cent of women who turn frigid after they give birth. Nor is it worth the legal risk that is posed by Australia’s 50 per cent divorce rate and the misandrist Family Law Act.
    There are a lot of very, very unhappy men out there whose sexual needs are not being fulfilled at home. Little wonder that they look elsewhere. In my case, I have almost lost interest in women. Simply not worth it.

    Post a Reply
    • The problem isn’t just that women turn frigid (as you put it), but us men have more likely than not been brought up with the idea that our rights are being violated if we’re not having enough sex, but that just isn’t reality. Women are people too, and they don’t exist just to serve as our sperm depositories. I’m sure someone will disagree with me on that last point, I am posting on a christian site after all, but it is reality that women are people with their own free will, not slaves whose will must be dictated by men.

      Post a Reply
    • This is a very interesting comment, and from what I have seen a particularly western one. I have found women from more traditional christian cultures tend to understand the needs men have in marriage. Unfortunately, I have to say, the reverse is not true, men from traditional christian cultures tend not to understand the needs of women as well as western christian men. ( Understand I am seriously generalising here) It was quite striking when I spent time overseas in asia, people would ask me if I wanted to get married (yes) followed by do I want to marry a western woman or an asian woman (asian) why? Well to be honest I would say, “western women tend to want a lot more than asian women do, and tend to want to control the marriage’, I would respond. I would then ask the men of asia if they were interested in marrying a western woman. So many reacted with a look of mild shock. No was the common answer. Why not? I would ask, they are scary or they are strong willed was a common answer.

      Post a Reply
    • What a patheticly selfish comment. I don’t think I blame your wife. Maybe you should take a good look at your self before slamming women and marriage as a result of your own failures.

      Post a Reply
    • Been reading thses comments and find it quite sad none of them raise the issue of contraception. When contraception is used,
      Women feel used, couples become bored and there is a strong link between high rates of contraception use and marriage breakdown. The deliberate avoidance of having children also contributes to marriage breakdown as there are less incentives for couples to resolve their marital problems. Contraception are also used by prositutes to sell themselves, and prey on men who have no self control. Feminist thought they had sexual freedom when contraceptive use became widespread, but it only has lead to depression, increase in STIs, abortion and being viewed as an object by men.

      Post a Reply
    • Carl, I wouldn’t put all the blame on women or children as you do. Try to remember that we are all part of a world and social systems and are influenced by things we don’t even realise. While I also am in the midst of an almost sexless marriage, my understanding of the situation is quite different. It seems to me that a woman’s sex drive disappears when she is very busy, and we in the west have created very busy lives for ourselves, both men and women. The economic system we have wants to take workers out of the home. And it is really the case that we tend to create unnecessary work for ourselves. As an example, my wife and I were on the verge of buying an investment property when we both said “hang on, why would we put this ball and chain around our ankle”. It seems that just because we were in the financial position to do so, we felt compelled to enslave our future selves to paying off a mortgage on a property that we wouldn’t even use personally. What for? an extra couple of percent yield on our money. Or was it so that we could say we owned an investment property? I assume that a lot of other people could simplify their lives if they too didn’t want so much stuff. Here I am reminded of what Jesus says about the rich young man: it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for him to enter the kingdom of heaven. Every moment of our lives are a gift from God, what are we spending this time on? I do aspire to sainthood. It should be the goal of every Christian to become a saint sooner or later. Neither me or my wife are that greedy and whilst we have young kids I don’t expect to have a great sex life but my hope is that we can both reduce our workload over time and the situation will improve greatly. Until then, I’ll keep believing that patience is a virtue. think too many people today want everything right now and aren’t prepared to wait.

      Post a Reply
      • A lot of problems stem from the fact that couples are no longer given correct doctrine on the Holy Sacrament of Matrimony. When the husband and wife say “I do” this implies a total self-gift i.e. the husband giving all rights to his body to his wife and vice versa. Hence, a good husband should never refuse a request for marital relations and vice versa. When you are not feeling your best, it’s termed self-sacrifice, an essential virtue in any good marriage. Obviously an insensitive request for the marital embrace e.g. within hours of childbirth could be overlooked without committing sin.

      • You are right, the problem does stem from a lack of self gift, but not in the way you think. Go onto any marriage forum and you will quickly see that wives love their husbands but their husbands are either absent, aggressive, violent, rude or controlling in other ways, don’t help around the house but still try to initiate sex as his marital right. A man who is so selfish in every other way is no longer sexually attractive. A lot of these wives who have problems getting their men to have sex is because the man is addicted to pornography.

        I certainly would not recommend the type of submission you propose. Rather I would recommend a self gift that consists of staying away from masturbation and pornography and learning chastity from an early age, because there are going to be times during marriage when you are going to need it. I would also recommend a self gift that consists of being a full partner in sacrificing yourself in the family. Doing something as simple as the dishes at night when you are physically tired, when every impulse inside you resists the work, can teach you a lot about self giving.

        “should never refuse”? That’s not what I understand from Humane Vitae and the Catholic Church’s promotion of Natural Family Planning. If a woman knows she is in her fertile period and the couple have discerned not to have another baby for the time being, why should she not refuse? If a husband has been obnoxious all day and killed her sex drive, why should she not refuse? I think your concept of self gift is not giving at all but rather a mutual objectification of husband and wife for personal gratification. That is not what I understanding self sacrifice to be at all. Self sacrifice is meant to be for the good of the other. To always submit to another’s will is not love, as it can cause an extremely selfish person to stay selfish.

      • Gary,
        The norm in Catholic marriage is welcome as many children as the Good Lord can send. Natural family planning or periodic continence can only be used if the following 3 conditions are met – grave circumstances e.g. proximate danger of death, mutual consent of both spouses (freely given with no duress whatsoever) and for a limited time while the grave circumstances permit.

      • Where is this norm expressed that you speak of? If it is in Humanae Vitae, I can’t see it. Specifically referencing the section on responsible parenthood it says:

        “With regard to physical, economic, psychological and social conditions, responsible parenthood is exercised by those who prudently and generously decide to have more children, and by those who, for serious reasons and with due respect to moral precepts, decide not to have additional children for either a certain or an indefinite period of time.”

        That seems to be saying something very different to “as many children as the Good Lord can send”. The above sentence even implies that you can imprudently and selfishly decide to have more children and this, by definition, is not responsible parenthood.

        In regards to using Natural Family Planning it says:

        “If therefore there are well-grounded reasons for spacing births, arising from the physical or psychological condition of husband or wife, or from external circumstances, the Church teaches that married people may then take advantage of the natural cycles immanent in the reproductive system and engage in marital intercourse only during those times that are infertile, thus controlling birth in a way which does not in the least offend the moral principles which We have just explained.”

        and in regards to the moral order it says:

        “the exercise of responsible parenthood requires that husband and wife, keeping a right order of priorities, recognize their own duties toward God, themselves, their families and human society.”

        Again, that seems in contradiction to your “can only be used” rule because a lot of wiggle room for discernment seems to be allowed.

        I may be mistaken, and please put in references for rules if I am wrong. But the above is my understanding of Humanae Vitae, which is a wonderful document.

      • Gary,
        Who knows better about children? You or God? Why then would you seek to limit God’s blessings by promoting unrestrained NFP? Abusers of NFP are little different from the contracepting crowd. We have 7 children (oldest 10 years of age), and like many other traditional Catholic mothers, my wife is still very happy to accept “as many children as the Good Lord can send”. Relying on God’s Providence is much better than resorting to NFP.
        Here is a reasonable discussion of this topic – quoting from Casti Conubii and Pope Pius XII…
        Incidentally, Casti Conubii should be required reading for any married couple…

      • I’m not promoting unrestrained NFP, I’m promoting responsible parenthood which is directly from Humanae Vitae.

        Are you saying that Humanae Vitae is not a reasonable position?

      • From CASTI CONNUBII:

        “This subjection, however, does not deny or take away the liberty which fully belongs to the woman both in view of her dignity as a human person, and in view of her most noble office as wife and mother and companion; nor does it bid her obey her husband’s every request if not in harmony with right reason or with the dignity due to wife; nor, in fine, does it imply that the wife should be put on a level with those persons who in law are called minors, to whom it is not customary to allow free exercise of their rights on account of their lack of mature judgment”.

        From Rory:

        “Hence, a good husband should never refuse a request for marital relations and vice versa.”

        Now these two don’t really seem to be saying the same thing.

      • Gary,
        The paragraph you have quoted from Casti Connubii relates to the a wife’s duty to obey her husband, and discusses the limits of that obedience, as the preceding sentence makes clear:
        “This order includes both the primacy of the husband with regard to the wife and children, the ready subjection of the wife and her willing obedience, which the Apostle commends in these words: “Let women be subject to their husbands as to the Lord, because the husband is the head of the wife, and Christ is the head of the Church.””

      • I am tending to agree more with Gary in this discussion. Us Women do get tired, and having multiple children so close together can be a drain not only on the Physical but the Psychological as well. Using NFP to space ones children for a time is perfectly acceptable, it is a mutual decision between husband and wife leaving no space for the word refusal. however contined rejection and refusal when the mutual decision is not made, NFP methods do not work unless both husband and wife are willing, for petty reasons like “too tired, or headache” can actually lead the rejected spouse to struggle with self control. Husband and wife are supposed to help each other, not cause each other to fall into sin. However if one party seeks sex with self gratifying reasons, such as pornoraphy use, or contraception use then refusal is justified. For avoidence of any further pregnancy using NFP methods there has to be grave reason, such as possible death in both mother baby or both, or maybe the woman is receiving treatment for a medical condition that would be dangerous for the baby if pregnancy occured, and also some treatments can lead to sterility. these are just examples as is can be a complex situation that requires guidence from those who are experts in Catholic medical Ethics.

      • Amazing how NFP cult-members are happy to accept money or other gifts on a very regular basis, but when it comes to the far, far greater blessing of children, they’re suddenly too tired and need space. Too selfish and short-sighted might be more honest. Don’t you silly control-freaks realise that God Who is the Author of Life will never send more children than you can handle??? Saint Catherine of Siena was the 23rd of 25 children. Thank God the modern NFP cult was not operative back in her day.

      • Wow Rory, your last comment was very judgmental. I myself have six children, and am in the process of recieving treatment which could lead to sterility. Good on those who have large familys, but please do not pretend to know everyones personal story, and attack them if they do not have as many kids as some. And for the record I am not a Cult member I am Catholic.

      • Kat,
        I was not attacking you personally – only the NFP cult mentality. Sorry, but those who promote NFP without mentioning the grave requirements have become a dangerous cult within the Catholic Church – subtlely undermining the good women who are virtuous enough to trust in Divine Providence and welcome as many blessings as the Good Lord can send. The 3 major reasons why there are so few children in the Novus Ordo Church are abortion, contraception (which applies to most of the liberals) and NFP (which seems to have become the conservatives method of refusing children).

      • Not a personal attack? I do believe you used the words silly-control freaks.
        I have also seen large familys in both the Latin Rite and the Novus Ordo Rite, I think the concept of contraception would be more suited to your attack as NFP methods can be used to acheive or avoid pregnancy, it is also invaluable knowledge to monitor Gynecological health personally during childbirth years and post menapause.

      • Kat,
        You are correct that NFP can be used for infertility. Unfortunately the NFP cult-members almost never clarify that this technique is not relevant to fornicating couples (including divorced and “remarried” couples) who have a fornication problem – not an infertility problem. Traditionally, Catholics have refused to use infertility treatments on fornicating couples. What they should be advised to do is stop fornicating and/or get married before seeking infertility treatments. Like the grave reasons required for spacing children using NFP, these very pertinent points regarding infertility never get mentioned by the NFP cult.

      • Kat, This is also what I have been saying – there need to be grave reasons before anyone can use NFP
        From Brian Harrison’s article:
        “Taking into account the whole spectrum of biblical and Church teaching in this area, I personally think that we need to bring back the word “grave” into the discourse about family planning. That is, we should be teaching that the temporal or worldly problems to be anticipated by another pregnancy and birth (mainly of health or poverty) need to be really grave in character before a married couple is entitled to conclude that they have a “just reason” for them to use NFP. (I said “bring back” above, because, as I shall show in this article, that key adjective, “grave”, has in fact been used by the Magisterium in this context, in certain decisions that have been generally forgotten, but by no means repudiated.)”

      • Kat,
        Many of the problems in the Novus Ordo stem from exceptions then being enforced as the norm. Communion in the hand was a permitted exception for someone who couldn’t kneel and didn’t have a tongue. Now it’s the norm in most Novus Ordo Masses. Altar girls was a permitted exception if there were no boys in the parish able to serve the altar. Now it has become the norm. NFP is a permitted exception to the norm of welcoming as many children as the Good Lord can send – and only permitted if there are grave reasons and mutual consent. However, NFP cult members now wish to make NFP the norm, and even suggest that those good parents who rely on Divine Providence and willingly accept as many children as the Good Lord can send, are somehow irresponsible parents.

      • NFP is not a cult. the article I posted is my position on the matter, and please refrain from getting on your high horse to assume you know everything about NFP. Not every couple has to disclose there personal reasons as to why they may be using NFP methods. Also I never said you were an irresponsible parent, good for you for having 7 children you are obviously coping well. For example a family with 5 or more kids, who are not coping and are struggling with basic everyday chores in the house and the kids are misbehaved and grimy, and are not very well kept, this to me says the mother is not coping, oir is depressed and she needs a break to get on top of things and get the children into order, and this is a reason to space children. Also when families have quite a few little ones, and I am talking 5 or more, they have done their bit, they have been very generous to God and He has been generous to them, and God may be calling them to discern as to if He wants them to have another baby. This requires prayer communication and understanding and NFP methods provide this. It gives the couple greater understanding to each others needs physically and psychologically. NFP methods must be used with mutual consent between husband and wife to work,

      • “Family planning” has been so successful that parents who now have 6 children think they have a large family. More than sixty years ago, Catholic families who had only 6 children were considered a small family – 7 to 14 children and you had a medium sized family, more than 15 children was considered a large family. My Irish grandfather was one of 13 children (who had very little after a minor potato famine at the turn of the century) – and his family were still deemed medium sized.

      • Once again good on those who have large familys and cope well. But remember some cope better than others. And if you have more than 7 good on you, but do not sneer at those practicing Catholic families who do not have as many as yourself. As I said, they do not need to consult everyone about why they may be using NFP.

      • It’s nothing but pride to imagine that anyone with a fairly small family of 6 or 7 children has been “very generous to God”. I know a Phillipino family of 21 children (which includes fellow pathologist Dr Batitang) and I don’t think even they would be so bold as to claim that they have been “very generous to God”

    • Carl, did it ever enter your mind that the reason that you and all of those other poor diddums are not getting any sex is your own fault. Have a real good look at yourself, your dress, your manner, your habits, your attitude and your general appearance before you go off putting the blame on women. I have any number of friends and acquaintances, married couples, who will tell you that you are wrong.

      Post a Reply
      • Nihilists such as Carl96190 are as destructive to the traditional family as the feminists.

  6. “Given the reaction to my remarks about marriages from the past, I obviously expressed myself badly . .” No, she is lying in an attempt to take some of the heat out of the criticism. The blond haired bimbo said exactly what she meant to say, but who would expect anything different from people of her kind. In the process insulted the women from an age when families stayed together, men worked to keep their families provided for and women were happy to stay at home and look after the children and their home.

    Post a Reply
  7. These two “wymon” must be congratulated as they have exposed feminism for what it is, I did not think it possible feminist could be so honest.
    Another great article Bernard, and thank you for standing up for every mother and wife who has been insulted by the comments these two women have made.

    Post a Reply

Submit a Comment

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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Pin It on Pinterest