Conservative columnist and known stirrer of shit Miranda Devine has launched a piece damning an obvious joke by writer Benjamin Law, fulfilling a prediction Law made hours in advance.
In the wake of his seismic Quarterly Essay entry, which constitutes a forensic examination of News Corp’s obsession with the Safe Schools program, Law yesterday predicted that Devine would target him for highlighting her lax fact-checking on the anti-bullying curriculum.
Tomorrow @mirandadevine will focus on me in @dailytelegraph, given I examine the shortcomings of her reporting here. https://t.co/HilEKsjPop pic.twitter.com/L6Zts2u59X
— Benjamin Law 羅旭能 (@mrbenjaminlaw) September 12, 2017
Lo and behold, Devine’s No Apology For Yes Campaigner’s Vile Tweet has today appeared on the (paywalled) Rendezview corner of the Daily Telegraph’s site. In it, Devine rails against a (now-deleted) tweet law made in August, which suggested he’d “hate-fuck” homophobic MPs to get “the homophobia out of their system.”
Despite referencing his subsequent clarification that no, hate-fucking doesn’t refer to non-consensual sex, Devine posits that Law’s tweet constitutes hate speech, and that “surely tolerating hate speech has its limits when it comes to inciting violent sex against same sex marriage opponents in parliament?”
This, from the same columnist who compared LGBTQI activists to ISIS, and asserted that allegations of “historic sex offences” related to Cardinal George Pell constituted “#HuntingCatholics”.
For what it’s worth, the very prescient Law has issued a not-at-all-surprised response to Devine’s hit piece.
NEVERENDING MENSHIES. Miranda’s going wild for me in the Tele, it’s kind of amazing.
— Benjamin Law 羅旭能 (@mrbenjaminlaw) September 12, 2017
I got to her first. https://t.co/3QZn5qIPtD
— Benjamin Law 羅旭能 (@mrbenjaminlaw) September 12, 2017
Also worth noting: despite referencing Law’s essay, Devine doesn’t counter his claims that her reporting was flawed. Not once. That omission, combined with the blatantly false equivocation between Law’s tweet and the reprehensible rhetoric hurled by the ‘No’ campaign, renders Devine’s column as little more than toothless sniping.
Of course, all of this is happening before a vote on whether some Australians deserve to be treated the same as others.
If you’re so inclined, you can read an excerpt of Law’s essay HERE.
