Could banning social media for under 16s keep Australian teens safe and how would it work?
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
ABC News
4 hours ago
- ABC News
'Not all men': How the shifting political terrain is making harmful rhetoric seem moderate - ABC Religion & Ethics
There's a growing discomfort with some of the language we use to describe gendered harm. The debate over toxic masculinity is familiar, fraught and often circular. But a newer unease has emerged in social media discussions: the suggestion that even terms like manosphere — the longstanding descriptor for the online ecosystem of influencers, activists and communities that espouse men's grievance and promote male dominance — may now be too harsh, too alienating, too gendered. This is part of a broader commentary suggesting that the use of gendered language to describe male-dominated networks of harm risks shutting men out of the conversation. On the surface, this can sound like progress — part of an authentic effort to 'meet men where they are' and broaden their engagement in gender equality and violence prevention. But it's worth asking, Why now? Why are terms long used in research and advocacy increasingly being labelled divisive? What has shifted to make naming gendered harm feel too uncomfortable? Part of the answer lies not in the words themselves, but in the shifting political ground beneath them. We are living through a moment where discourse around gender and power is polarised and polarising. As far-right ideologies become louder, more organised and more visible, they promote traditional, hierarchical gender roles. Those who reject such extremism but remain wary of structural gender analysis begin to sound moderate by comparison. The political rightward shift not only amplifies the extreme — it repositions suspicion of feminist ideas as balanced, and even reasonable. Nick Adams addresses the DC Young Republicans at the Capitol Hill Club on 29 January 2024, in Washington, DC. (Photo by Jahi Chikwendiu / The Washington Post via Getty Images) Just look at what's happening in the United States. Earlier this year, Donald Trump, Jr offered praise and support for Andrew and Tristan Tate — high-profile figures known for espousing misogynistic, authoritarian worldviews under the guise of male empowerment, and currently facing charges of sexual assault and human trafficking. Then, just days ago, President Trump nominated Australian-American Nick Adams — a self-styled 'alpha male' and anti-woke provocateur — as ambassador to Malaysia. These aren't fringe actors. They're being platformed and legitimised by the highest levels of political power. This is the context in which softer critiques of feminist language start to look reasonable. The psychologist who questions the use of manosphere , the commentator who says we should avoid 'gendered generalisations' — they are absolutely not promoting hate. But their discomfort with naming gendered power now lands in a conversation that is already being pulled sharply to the right. And in that climate, simply appearing not-too-extreme becomes a kind of authority. This rhetorical repositioning matters. It shifts focus from how power operates to how language feels. It allows a soft revival of 'not all men' logic — not as an internet retort, but as a structural narrative. And while that logic was never especially extreme, it begins to start feeling more moderate, even reasonable, against the backdrop of louder, more overt forms of backlash. The result is a growing reluctance to name masculinity at all. A growing chorus singing that identifying men-dominated networks of harm might alienate the very men we should be engaging. That the real danger is not misogyny, but the discomfort that arises when we try to talk about it honestly. But gender is already in the conversation. It's baked into the structures we're trying to understand. The term manosphere doesn't indict all men. It describes a network of ideologies that organise around male grievance and gender dominance — including incels, men's rights activists, pick-up artists and self-professed misogynistic content creators. Calls to soften this language often come from a place of care, especially within the men's health sector. But when that care comes at the cost of political clarity, we have to ask who benefits. If we avoid naming gender because it feels impolite, we risk preserving the very hierarchies we claim to be addressing. More than that, we reduce gendered violence to individual bad behaviour, rather than expressions of entrenched power. This depoliticises the conversation, obscuring the broader patterns that sustain inequality. And that's the real danger of this shift. It allows harmful ideas to be repackaged as reason. It allows misogyny to hide in plain sight — not in overt rhetoric, but in discomfort with naming the structures behind it. And it leaves us with a strange, unsettling reality: that in a world where the discourse keeps moving right, simply saying 'gender matters' now feels like a provocation. Professor Steven Roberts is Head of School of Education, Culture and Society at Monash University.
ABC News
a day ago
- ABC News
Agriculture Minister Julie Collins denies 'flying under the radar' with live export transition announcement
The federal agriculture minister has rejected suggestions she is avoiding sheep farmers and industry representatives during a lightning visit to Western Australia. Julie Collins was in the state on Tuesday to reveal more details of the transition assistance package underpinning the ban of live sheep exports by sea. Ms Collins travelled to the saleyards at Muchea, 50 kilometres north of Perth, to reveal a $139.7-million package minimally changed from a draft leaked in April this year. The package includes $40m for WA's processing supply chain capacity, $30m for farmers transitioning away from sheep, $2.2m to assist shearers looking for different work and $1.5m for the transport industry. The announcement, made alongside WA Agriculture Minister Jackie Jarvis, was immediately criticised by farmers and industry representatives who suggested Ms Collins was trying to "fly under the radar". After the announcement Ms Collins told the WA Country Hour the industry had been fully informed ahead of the visit. "We've now engaged with over 300 people in 16 workshops to map out the best way forward for the Western Australian sheep industry," she said. Ms Collins said the package highlighted the government's commitment to farmers affected by the ban. "This package has always been about ensuring there is a sheep industry in Western Australia," she said. "We think $139.7 million is significant and we have a transition advocate who will continue to play a role on the implementation to make sure this money goes to where it needs." WAFarmers chief executive Trevor Whittington said Ms Collins had "taken the lead from the prime minister" in "running scared from dealing with 'difficult people". He said WAFarmers had not been made aware of the minister's announcement, but decided to drive to the saleyards uninvited to hear the details first-hand. "There was no detail today — we got more out of that leaked document," Mr Whittington said. "This is a failed roll out, it's going to be a failed transition — it would have been nice to get an invitation." Livestock and Rural Transport Association executive officer Jan Cooper said she found out about the visit early on Tuesday morning and that the organisations suggestions for the transition had been ignored. "The department said this morning they would be prepared to talk further about our ideas," she said. But the WA Shearing Industry Association welcomed elements of the plan. "This is not a position we wanted to be in, but it's where we are," President Darren Spencer said. "If we can't keep our shearing teams employed then we will lose a lot of people out of our industry and our local towns — no-one wants that. "The answer we settled on was by them having other work that aligns around the shearing seasons." Details are still being finalised, but the $2.2m provided for shearers is expected to allow them to get trained in other high-demand agricultural skills. Katanning Shire President Kristy D'Aprile said the council had been working with the community to work out how best to work through the transition. The shire is home to the largest undercover sheep saleyards in the southern hemisphere. "We have land behind our saleyards, we are thinking outside the box and looking for every opportunity that we can," Ms D'Aprile said. "There has been suggestion around maybe a feedlot and how we can further develop some opportunity between growers and processors." She had already noticed a "rapid change" in Katanning as producers moved away from sheep. "This is happening a lot quicker than anticipated, so we just need to know how to support our farmers going forward," Ms D'Aprile said.
News.com.au
a day ago
- News.com.au
Ellen DeGeneres backs Rosie O'Donnell after Trump threatened to revoke her US citizenship
Ellen DeGeneres is showing support for Rosie O'Donnell. One day after President Donald Trump threatened to revoke O'Donnell's US citizenship following her move to Ireland earlier this year, DeGeneres – who also reportedly fled the country after Trump was elected president – gave her fellow comedian a public shout out. 'Good for you,' DeGeneres, 67, who reposted Trump's threat and O'Donnell's lengthy response on Instagram. On Saturday, Trump referred to O'Donnell as a 'threat to humanity.' 'Because of the fact that Rosie O'Donnell is not in the best interests of our Great Country, I am giving serious consideration to taking away her Citizenship,' Trump wrote in a post to his social media platform Truth Social. 'She is a Threat to Humanity, and should remain in the wonderful Country of Ireland, if they want her. GOD BLESS AMERICA!' he added. O'Donnell quickly responded to Trump's jab in several posts that she shared on her social media pages. The A League of Their Own star posted a collage of photos centred around a screenshot of Trump's post on Instagram and blasted the politician in the caption. 'The president of the USA has always hated the fact that i see him for who he is – a criminal conman sexual abusing liar out to harm our nation to serve himself,' she wrote. 'This is why i moved to Ireland – he is a dangerous old soulless man with dementia who lacks empathy compassion and basic humanity.' 'I stand in direct opposition [to] all he represents- so do millions of others – u gonna deport all who stand against ur evil tendencies – ur a bad joke who cant form a coherent sentence,' O'Donnell added along with the hashtag 'never trump.' The former talk show host later shared a screenshot of her Instagram post on TikTok, where she slammed Trump in the caption, writing that he was a 'disgrace to all our beautiful country stands for' and a 'danger to our nation.' O'Donnell went on to bash Trump as a 'mentally ill untreated criminal,' claiming that he 'lied to America for a decade' during his time hosting the hit reality TV series 'The Apprentice.' 'Had u grown up in NY – as I did – u would know what a total fool he is. Add me to the list of people who oppose him at every turn -it's now or never America,' she wrote. Representatives for the White House and DeGeneres did not respond to Fox News Digital's immediate request for comment. A representative for O'Donnell told Fox News Digital, 'Rosie is thankful for her support.' Despite Trump's post, O'Donnell's citizenship is unlikely to be in jeopardy. The 14th Amendment guarantees citizenship to any person born in the United States and the actress was born in Commack, New York. In addition, many legal experts agree that the government cannot unilaterally revoke the citizenship of a natural-born citizen. One exception is if the government was able to prove that citizenship was obtained through fraud in the case of naturalisation. In addition, citizenship can be revoked if an individual commits certain actions, including treason, serving in a foreign military engaged in hostilities against the US, or renouncing citizenship. O'Donnell confirmed her move to Ireland in March, saying she left the US days before Trump's inauguration, and explained the new location would be a good fit for her 12-year-old son, Clay. DeGeneres, much like O'Donnell, left the country recently to establish a new life with wife Portia de Rossi across the pond. In April, O'Donnell admitted that while she hasn't been in touch with DeGeneres lately, she was 'shocked' to hear why the former talk show host fled the United States. 'I've never really known Ellen to say anything political in her life, so I was surprised to read that she left because of President Trump. Like, that shocked me, actually,' O'Donnell told Us Weekly. 'I've been a political person my whole life, not better or worse, it's just a different way to be in the world.' 'I was very clear about the reason why I was leaving, and I don't think it came as a surprise to anyone. We're not really in each other's worlds, and it's been kind of awkward but you know what? I wish her the best. I wish that she has peace and love in her life and that she is OK.' While they've never had a strong relationship, O'Donnell insisted she harbours no ill will for the comedian. 'I don't want to fight against another gay woman. It's not like we're tenaciously opposed to each other,' O'Donnell told the outlet. 'We're just very different people. We have had some stuff in the past that we never resolved. And not in any way as, as partners or lovers or anything like that, just as friends and comedians, but I wish her the best. I seriously do.' She added, 'I think that there's enough room in the world for all of the gay comedians, and we all need to stick together because gay people are the next group to be threatened. And the way they attack trans people is absolutely terrifying.'
