Termagant (pronounced tur-muh-guhnt)
(1) A
mythical deity popularly believed in Medieval Christendom to be worshiped by Muslims
and introduced into the morality play as a violent, overbearing personage in
long robes (a proper noun and thus used with initial capital).
(2) A
brawling, boisterous, and turbulent person or thing (archaic).
(3) A
censorious, nagging, scolding and quarrelsome woman (not exactly synonymous
with “harridan”, “virago” or “shrew” but with a similar flavor of
disapprobation); for those who find some women worse than others, the comparative
is “more termagant”, the superlative “most termagant”.
(4) The act
of behaving violently; turbulent conduct.
Circa 1500:
From the Middle English Termagaunt (one
of the three fictitious deities (others being Apollin & Mahound)
represented as being worshipped by Muslims; any pagan god), from the from the Anglo-Norman
Tervagant, Tervagaunt & Tervagan
and the Old French Tervagant & Tervagan, a name bestowed on a wholly fictitious
Muslim deity, created by Christian polemicists to use in medieval morality
plays as a symbol of the Islamic faith.
In the Old French, Tervagant
was a proper name in the eleventh century chanson
de geste (song of heroic deeds (from the Classical Latin gesta (deeds, actions accomplished)) Chanson de Roland (Song of Roland). The epic poem is the oldest known work of
substantial length in French still extant and was drawn from the exploits of
the Frankish military commander Roland at the Battle of Roncevaux Pass (778)
during the reign of Charlemagne (748–814; “Charles the Great” and
(retrospectively) the first Holy Roman Emperor 800-814). That the text (more correctly “texts” as a
number of variants have been identified) survived to this day is accounted for
by the work’s popularity; it was between the twelfth and sixteenth centuries among
the most widely distributed pieces of literature in Medieval and Renaissance Europe. The alternative spelling was termagant. Termagant is a noun & adjective, termagancy
& termagantism are nouns, termagantish is an adjective, and termagantly is
an adverb; the noun plural is Termagants.
The
ultimate origin of the word is a mystery but the most supported theory suggests
the construct being based on the Latin ter
(three times, thrice) (from the primitive Indo- European tréyes (three)) + vagāns
(rambling, wandering) (present active participle of vagor (to ramble, roam, wander), from vagus (rambling, roaming, wandering) (the source of which may be
the primitive Indo-European hwogos) +
-or (an inflected form of -ō (the suffix forming regular
first-conjugation verbs)). Given that
possible etymology, it’s argued the appearance of Termagant in Chanson de Roland as one of the three
deities allegedly worshipped by Muslims was an allusion to the wandering of the
moon (the crescent moon a well-known symbol of Islam) in the form of the
mythological goddesses Selene in heaven, Diana on Earth, and Proserpina in the
underworld. The adjective was derived
from the original proper noun, the sense of a “violent, overbearing person”
(later applied especially to “difficult” women) evolving because Christian
scribes always applied these characteristics to the figure; the meaning shift
was thus a “partial transfer” in that the unpleasant personality was carried
over to earthly flesh and blood with no suggestion of anything
supernatural.
The Termagant was a wholly mythical deity invented by Christian writers in Middle Ages who claimed it was a figure worshiped by Muslims. Depicted as a violent, overbearing personage in long robes, unlike a number of cross-cultural creations there was no figure which existed specifically in Islamic belief, theology, or folklore that could be said to be a model for the fanciful imaginings of Christian polemicists so it was “fake news” rather than a distorted version of a figure in what was in the West long called Mohammedanism (also a misleading tern because of the implication Muhammad is worshiped by Muslims; In Islam only Allah (God) is worshiped while Muhammad is venerated as His greatest prophet). This was all part of Christianity’s misrepresentation of Islamic theology as not monotheist and thus in violation of first two of the Ten Commandments in the Old Testament’s Book of Exodus: (1) Thou shall worship no other Gods and (2) Thou shall not create false idols. It was a blatant untruth because strictly Islam was tawḥīd (monotheistic) and explicitly proscribed even the suggestion of a pantheon of gods. Unlike Christianity’s claims about Jesus Christ, the prophet Muhammad was never said to be divine and was never worshipped. Thus, the so-called “Saracen trinity” in medieval texts has no basis in Islamic doctrine although that didn’t prevent the notion spreading and being believed and variants of the techniques of dissemination have since been practiced by propagandists such as priests and politicians.
It’s true that there were then (as there are now) in Islam many figures of authority cloaked in long, dark robes but that was true also of Christianity and other faiths. By the late Middle Ages, even if the fake theology was proving unconvincing, the secular appeal of such a menacing figure was real and especially in English theatre (where there was often more leeway granted by the censors of church & state than elsewhere in Europe), the termagant evolved into a stock character: ranting, tyrannical, bombastic and often dressed in a costume of a type which late in the twentieth century the Palestinian-American academic Edward Said (1935–2003) in Orientalism (1978) identified as a clichéd “exoticized Eastern costume” (another Western construct). Of Termagant Apollin & Mahound, although there are in the Islamic tradition no true analogues, there are figures (perhaps better thought of as “concepts”) in which there are vague or superficial resemblances to the stereotype although there was never a hint they should be worshiped. The جنّ (Jinn) were supernatural beings made of “smokeless fire” and although some were rebellious or violent, depending on this and that, they might be benevolent, neutral, or malevolent but were certainly not deities to be worshipped and seem never to have been depicted as despotic tyrants in the theatrical sense of the Termagant of the Christian imagination. Best known in the West was إبليس (Iblīs/Shayṭān (Satan)) who existed as the primary adversarial figure in Islam and one representing arrogance, rebellion, and temptation. Iblīs however seems closer to the Christian Satan than a “false god”, not being nor portrayed as a blustering theatrical tyrant in robes. Most interesting in the tradition were the طاغية (ẓālim; the tyrannical rulers), a crew made especially interesting in the last few months, following the ayatollahs’ recent bloody crackdown on the streets of Iran to ensure regime survival, the death-toll in January 2026 believed to have exceeded 30,000 and the author and public policy analyst Robert Templer (b 1966) has estimated that on at least two days that month, there were more were killed in state-sanctioned violence than on any day since the end of World War II (1939-1945), his calculations including the genocides in Cambodia, Rwanda and the Balkans. The Qurʾān condemns unjust rulers (such as the Pharaohs) and to make the point, the ẓālim tended to be overbearing, violent and arrogant. Those Iranians killed by the thousand while chanting “Death to the dictator!” would have recognized what the Qurʾān condemns but the pattern is known from history.
By March 1945, it was obvious to most in Berlin that the end was nigh
and one individual brought to the attention of Adolf Hitler (1889-1945; Führer
(leader) and German head of government 1933-1945 & head of state 1934-1945)
a salient passage in his political manifesto Mein Kampf (1925-1926): “The task of
diplomacy is to ensure that a nation does not heroically go to its destruction
but is practically preserved. Every way that
leads to this end is expedient, and a failure to follow it must be called
criminal neglect of duty. State
authority as an end in itself cannot exist, since in that case every tyranny on
this earth would be sacred and unassailable. If a racial entity is being led toward its
doom by means of governmental power, then the rebellion of every single member
of such a Volk is not only a right, but a duty.” Unmoved, Hitler responded: “If the war is
lost, the people will be lost also. It
is not necessary to worry about what the German people will need for elemental
survival. On the contrary, it is best for us to destroy even these things. For the nation has proved to be the weaker,
and the future belongs solely to the stronger eastern nation. In any case only those who are inferior will
remain after this struggle, for the good have already been killed.”
Presumably, Grand Ayatollah Ali Khamenei (1939-2026; Supreme Leader,
Islamic Republic of Iran 1989-2026) would have concurred with the sentiments
for, just as the Germans had “failed
Hitler”, those Iranians chanting “Death to the dictator!” had failed him, thus
the holy duty to kill them, not for a motive as base as “regime survival” but
because the protesters were attacking Islam and thus Allah himself. In the Supreme Leader’s theological construct,
killing thousands in defense of God was not merely justified but an obligation.
Over time, in
English, “a termagant” came to mean a scolding or overbearing person, a meaning
wholly detached from its supposed origin in religion and under a number of
influences, it came to be used mostly of women.
The most significant of these influences was literature and the stage,
use shifting from elaborate epics about the crusades to popular entertainment. As a constructed theological fiction Termagant
was anyway perfect for the playwright and had it not existed it surely would
have been created, violence, bluster, and irrational fury staples of
drama. For students of such things, the
shift from the ranting tyrant to the “stock stage villain” was interesting
because in the latter role the Termagant needed sometimes to be a comic
character, bombastic and shouting with deliberate “overacting” often in the
stage directions.
The elongated John Cleese (b 1939) and Andrew Sachs (1930-2016) in Basil the Rat (25 October, 1979) the final episode in the BBC comedy series Fawlty Towers (12 episodes in two series (1975 & 1979)). It was in the Fawlty Towers episode The Germans (24 October, 1975) that the phrase “Don't mention the war” was introduced by Basil at his most termagant and in that case Shakespeare would have instructed Cleese to “out-herod Herod”.
So in early Modern English, the shift began from character to adjective and with the use in stage drama expanding during the sixteenth century, the transition accelerated. When William Shakespeare (1564–1616) had Sir John Falstaff faking his own death (Act 5, Scene 4) in Henry IV, Part 1 (circa 1596), he spoke of the fierce Scottish rebel, Archibald, Earl of Douglas as “that hot termagant Scot” and by then there was no hint of any connection to alleged Islamic deities; it was just about the man’s turbulent, violet nature. Shakespeare’s characters run the gamut of the human condition, something sometimes misunderstood by those who associate him only with what’s understood as “high culture” but he knew that while “overacting” sometimes was essential for comic effect otherwise it needed sedulously to be avoided. In his stage instructions for Hamlet (circa 1600) he cautioned the cast: “Oh, it offends me to the soul to hear a robustious periwig-pated fellow tear a passion to tatters, to very rags, to split the ears of the groundlings, who for the most part are capable of nothing but inexplicable dumb-shows and noise: I would have such a fellow whipped for o'erdoing Termagant; it out-herods Herod: pray you, avoid it.” That instruction also assumed a new life, appearing in modified form in All's Well That Ends Well (circa 1602) as “out-villain'd villainy” before in the 1800s “out-herods Herod” came widely to be used as a critique of any behaviour thought “excessive” and by then, in stage productions, “termagant” explicitly was invoked as verbal shorthand for the sort of strident ranting sometimes required.
Even before
the scientific and technical advances of the last two centuries-odd led to a proliferation
of creations, the English language's vocabulary was famously large and while
some categories have been more more productive than others, few proved quite as
imaginatively fecund as (1) coinings and re-purposings to describe female body
parts and (2) terms with which to demonize or disparage women (termagant one of
the latter). After the dubious link with
Islam had been discarded, termagant was understood as someone blustering, noisy
and tyrannical; it was in the late sixteenth century there was a distinct
gender shift and the word became specifically female, associated less with
domineering violence and more with shrillness, emotional excess, and scolding,
performed in a theatrical style that audiences coded as unseemly or grotesque,
applying the word to “difficult” women in the world beyond. It was a time of profound social and
political change and as social norms in England hardened around ideals of female
deference, obedience and modesty, the label migrated: While for men “termagant”
had meant (depending on context) threatening or ridiculous, when applied to
women it suggested social transgression.
It wasn’t quite Taliban-level repression but women with minds of their
own were apt to be judged quarrelsome, overbearing and scolding, terms like “shrew”
& “virago” becoming termagant’s companion terms. At this point, lexical fossilization set in
and by the mid-1700, the original sense (the fictional deity) had faded into
obscurity with the meaning stabilized as “a domineering, bad-tempered woman”,
thus the adjectival form “termagant behaviour”.
To etymologists, the long process was an interesting case study in that
the mechanism of changed happened in phases, the theatrical and religious
origins surviving only as residual footnotes while the metonymic shifts were driven
by changing cultural norms, not grammatical rules.
It was of course
a good name for a warship and between 1780 and 1965, the British Admiralty from
time to time had seven HMS Termagants attached to the Royal Navy’s fleets, the
last launched in 1943. One with a vague
connection to the original meaning was a Talisman-class destroyer, ordered originally
by the Ottoman Empire but in 1915 requisitioned by the Admiralty (as HMS
Narborough) before being renamed built HMS Termagant. Despite the expectations of decades, World
War I (1914-1918) was not a conflict of great naval clashes and although she
took part in the Battle of Jutland (1916, which seemed at the time
anti-climatic but was strategically decisive), her record was not illustrious
and, sold for scrap in 1921, she was broken up two years later.
The “Fuck Murdoch” T-Shirt she made famous was worn with a purpose. Happy to discuss the provocative fashion piece, Ms Tame said the message wasn’t aimed just at media mogul Rupert Murdoch (b 1931) but rather the “obscene greed, inhumanity and disconnection that he symbolises, which are destroying our planet. For far too long this world and its resources have been undemocratically controlled by a small number of morbidly wealthy oligarchs. If we want to dismantle this corrupt system, if we want legitimate climate action, equity, truth, justice, democracy, peace, land back, etc, then resisting forces like Murdoch is a good starting point. Speaking truth to power starts at the grassroots level with simple, effective messages. It’s one of my favourite shirts.” Few seem to think Mr Murdoch might have feelings too and may find the T-shirt's message hurtful but those who do probably take the view: “but anyway, fuck him”.
Ms Tame had
previously provided photographers with some good snaps, most memorably her stony
“side-eye” expression to Scott Morrison (b 1968; Australian prime minister 2018-2022), another politician she deemed not to have treated allegations of
sexual assault and toxic workplace culture in federal parliament with
sufficient seriousness, noting his casual dismissal of her as having “had a terrible life”. Less than amused at
some of the commentary about her sideways glance, she tweeted on X (the called
Twitter) that some in the media appeared to have reduced the matter of survival
from abuse to a culture “…dependent on submissive smiles, self-defeating surrenders
and hypocrisy”, adding “What I did wasn’t an act of martyrdom in the gender
culture war.” Expanding
things to a construct, she explained: “It’s true that many women are sick of being told to smile,
often by men, for the benefit of men. But it’s not just women who are
conditioned to smile and conform to the visibly rotting status-quo. It’s all of
us.”
If Anthony Albanese didn't previously think Grace Tame was “a difficult woman”, he probably now does.
In Australian political discourse, “termagant” has not often been heard but ALP (Australian Labor Party) luminary Kim Beazley (b 1948) did in 2008 so label the Liberal Party’s Tony Abbott (b 1957; prime-minister of Australia 2013-2015); while a by then untypical use, it did prove the word was still used of men. Unfortunately, that seems not to have stuck in the mind of mind of the ALP’s Anthony Albanese (b 1963; prime-minister of Australia since 2022) who, during a “rapid-fire word association game” at a function organized by Mr Murdoch’s News Corp, was prompted with “Grace Tame” to which he responded “difficult”. The remarks were noted by Ms Tame who had in the past been critical of politicians who she claimed treated her as a “problem to be managed” rather than doing anything substantive to prevent sexual abuse or assist survivors. Whether it would have been any better had he be called her “termagant” rather than “difficult” is debatable but at least the history of Mr Abbott being so labelled would have meant it could be argued it wasn’t a “gendered” word (the history of the last few centuries notwithstanding). Probably the best choice for Mr Albanese would have been “formidable” in the sense of the French très formidable meaning something like “wonderful” or “terrific”, such a woman being une femme formidable. Formidable was from the Middle English formidable, from the Old French formidable & formible, from the Latin formīdābilis (formidable, terrible), from formīdō (fear, dread); it was another example of a meaning shift. In fairness to Mr Albanese, it was a spur-of-the-moment response to an unexpected prompt and, in an attempt to make things better, he explained: “I was asked to describe people in one word and Grace Tame you certainly can’t describe in one word. She has had a difficult life, and that was what I was referring to. If there was any misinterpretation, then I certainly apologise. I think that Grace Tame has taken what is personal trauma and that awful experience that she had and channelled that into helping, in particular, other young women, being a strong and powerful advocate, being quite courageous in the way that she has gone out there.” That probably made things worse. Unimpressed, Ms Tame (a most adept media player) issued a statement: “Spare me the condescension, old man”, suggesting Mr Albanese was paraphrasing Scott Morrison who’d once explained her attitude as the consequence of a “terrible life”. Continuing her critique, she added: “We all know what you meant. A badge of honour anyway. A confession that I’ve ruffled him.” On social media, she found much support, one posting: “‘Difficult’ is the misogynist’s code for a woman who won’t comply. History tends to call her ‘courageous’.”
Ms Tame must have resisted the temptation to order a batch of “Fuck Albo” T-shirts which shows some generosity of spirit but the Australian Femicide Watch's Red Heart Movement is offering “Difficult Woman” T-shirts with Aus$5.00 from each sale donated to the Grace Tame Foundation. The garments are made with 100% combed organic cotton grown without the use of herbicides or pesticides and certified as compliant to the GOTS (Global Organic Textile Standard). Depressingly, Australian Femicide Watch tracks the death toll of women in Australia killed in “intimate partner violence”; in 2025 the rate was 1.44 per week and by the first week in April 2026, 1.23.
Anthony Albanese, shaggate & melongate
Applied kinesics: Linguists and anthropologists call the use of hand gestures as an accompaniment to speech (much associated with Italians): “gesticulations”. Mr Albanese gesticulates (left) and Nova’s promotional banner for Nikki Osborne’s “Bushie” persona on Bush Deep (right).
Mr Albanese seems not a quick learner. In July 2026, appearing in the Bush Deep podcast being interviewed by comedian Nikki Osborne, he was asked to play the “shag, marry, date” game, three Australian females from pop culture (singer Kylie Minogue (b 1968), actor Nicole Kidman (b 1967) & singer Rhonda Burchmore (b 1960)) offered as his options. He started well by mentioning he was “newly married” (to his second wife) but Ms Osborne was tenacious and after boxing him into admitting “Kylie, clearly”, managed to press him into saying (with a slight giggle): “all of the above” (that apparently in answer to: “You’d marry Kylie? And shag her? And date her?” rather than thoughts of intimacy with all three nominees but Ms Osborne, seeming pleased, did conclude: "all right, a triple" so who knows?). The public reaction wasn’t good (although muted compared with what would have been the outrage had the remarks been made by a conservative) and quickly his office issued a one-line statement: “I apologise unequivocally for the comments”. Educated by the Congregation of Christian Brothers (a branch of the Roman Catholic Church), the Australian arm of which was dissolved after shifting the bulk of its assets to a related but legally separate entity to protect them from civil litigation brought by victims child sexual abuse by Christian Brothers), Mr Albanese (selectively) operates on the church's long-established principle of “confess and be forgiven”. What he should have done was make the joke one of self-deprecation, telling his host a more interesting question would be to ask the trio if any of them would contemplate shagging him and all three were anyway “too good for him”. His second wife, by now well-acquainted with politics, would have forgiven him.
It turned out to be an eventful podcast because he also told the tale of meeting Sanae Takaichi san (b 1961, Prime Minister of Japan since 2025) during her Australian visit in May 2026. Knowing a comedian would likely be not interested in trade negotiations or maritime boundaries in the South China Sea, he instead described his surprise when presented with the gift of a pair of crown melons, a fruit grown only in the western region of Japan's Shizuoka Prefecture. The nation’s most exalted and expensive melons, farmers tending the vines in climate-controlled greenhouses each season cut away all but the most obviously fecund bud so each plant’s energy & nutrients feed a single fruit, ensuring “perfect melons”. Understandably, crown melons are a gift presented to someone as a mark of respect or appreciation, often in the intricately constructed packaging famously used in Japan for goods from sandwiches to stilettos. Mr Albanese described the gift as “strange” but said he found them “quite good”. While it's not reasonable to expect him to have been aware of the cultural significance in Japan of a fruit he’d have associated with the Aus$3.99 item familiar in Australian supermarkets, his office presumably was informed so it was bad staff work he wasn’t briefed on what to say. An additional reason for the choice of gift was to mark the “delectably honey-sweet” melons now being exported (tariff-free) to Australia.
Things got worse. Ms Osborne likened the melons to Canadian-US actor Pamela Anderson (b 1967) which must have amused Mr Albanese because almost instinctively he raised his hands to his chest and, making a cupping gesture, observed: “She brought two… as you do”. There was laughter in the recording studio and it would have been a good joke in the locker room of the South Sydney Rabbitohs (the NRL (National Rugby League) club the prime minister takes every opportunity to remind the country he supports) but as the clip went around the world, he’d have understood he’d put his foot in it… again. Well into the twenty-first century, it might be assumed politicians would by now be adept in handling the “new media” (social media, podcasts and such) but, beyond a certain age, many remain uncertain and often make the worst mistake of all: trying very hard to be “authentic” which is, of course, recognized instantly as “inauthentic”. Politicians have before had to attempt to master “changes in platforms”. In the nineteenth century, it was the shift from speeches being made on the floors of parliaments to public meetings; early in the twentieth it was the advent of radio (a medium better mastered by George V (1865–1936; King of the United Kingdom & Emperor of India 1910-1936) than most of his ministers), then in the post-war world it was television. Social media & podcasts are just the latest “shock of the new” and hopefully the ALP’s operatives will arrange additional training. Still, something good did come from the interview: Ms Osborne learning the Japanese prime minister is female. As the first woman ever to gain the office, there had in 2025 been extensive international coverage of her accession but presumably that was something crowded out of Ms Osborne's news-feeds by the algorithms selecting matters of greater interest such as Ariana Grande's (b 1993) weight or Kylie Jenner's (b 1997) new hairstyle.
Mr Dutton called the comments “unfortunate” but said they were “water off a duck’s back” and there was no need for politicians to be “nasty and mean”, concluding the affair by saying “I’m not the prettiest bloke on the block but I hope that I’m going to be pretty effective.” Students of political phraseology enjoyed that last remark, the original used by John Howard (b 1939; Prime Minister of Australia 1996-2007) as an election campaign hook for the not at all photogenic Queensland National Party’s Senator Ron Boswell (1940–2026; senator for Queensland 1983-2014): “He may not be pretty but he’s pretty effective”. That worked well and, in retirement, Mr Boswell wrote his memoirs, published as Ron Boswell: Not Pretty, But Pretty Effective (2023). As leader of the opposition, Mr Dutton’s effectiveness was limited, suffering the ignominy of losing his own seat in parliament at the 2025 general election in which the Liberal party suffered its worst defeat since formation in 1944. During the campaign, Mr Dutton limited his media appearances mostly to Mr Murdoch’s Sky News (now re-branded News24) where he could be asked “helpful” questions by other right-wing fanatics, the exchanges enjoyed by the channel’s small audience of the already converted, the only sceptical faction of which complained Mr Dutton was “not conservative enough”. Had he dabbled in the anarchic world(s) of the Tiktokers and podcasters things might have been worse still so his handlers were right to “draw the line somewhere”.
The photogenic TERF Katherine Deves (left) and that tweet (right).
Mr Albanese’s reaction to the brief “Plibersek-Voldemort-Dutton affair” must have been something of a special case. Although there are some things he’s done his best to forget (hoping others will do the same), otherwise his memory is typically ALP-sharp and he certainly remembered the occasions when Ms Plibersek told people she rather than him would have won the ballot for the party leadership had she chosen to contest. Had a close factional ally pointed out Mr Dutton’s resemblance to Lord Voldemort, Mr Albanese’s reaction might have been limited to a quite chat (over a beer and a laugh) rather than a public censuring. Sadly, the one who seemed to receive no sympathy was Lord Voldemort who was slighted by being called, by implication, “Duttonesque”; surely he had as much right to be offended by the comparison. Amusingly, even within the Liberal Party, there are those who have seen the resemblance and commented. Lawyer Katherine Deves (b 1978) is a (self-described) TERF (trans-exclusionary radical feminist) with a cult-following in the party and on Twitter (now X) on 1 December, 2021, while watching the televised proceedings of parliament, she tweeted: “New speaker [presiding officer of the House of Representatives] …struggles to keep order as Albo [Mr Albanese, then leader of the opposition) …calls Voldemort [Mr Dutton, then minister of defence] …‘boof head’” The tweet has since been deleted.
Old Harold Macmillan had his problems with women (being bi-sexual, he may not have been wholly blameless for his wife’s infidelity) but was fortunate to be prime minister during the last days when journalists were still deferential towards politicians (at least until they smelled blood in the water). Clearly, at least in his dealings with the press, he’d led a sheltered life because in his memoirs he compared the still polite English journalists to the breed he encountered in Australia during his Commonwealth tour (Jan-Feb 1958), noting they were as capable as the bowlers in the nation’s cricket team of “sending down a few fast deliveries”. By the standards of 2026 the questions he received (and played mostly with a straight bat although there was the occasional square cut) would be thought “tame” and while it can’t be certain how the old Etonian would have handled TikTokers, podcasters and YouTubers, he’d doubtlessly have been appalled and thought them all vulgarians to be avoided.
Mr Albanese probably wishes he could avoid appearances on the “new media” but knows a significant chunk of those with a vote long ago tuned-out of the “old media” where he for decades honed to a high-level his skills of spin and obfuscation; his office also would prefer his appearances be restricted to “more easily managed” platforms but know they must play the cards dealt. Those in his office take pride at being thought “political pros” but curiously, by August 2026 they appeared to have forgotten the wise adage from the Watergate affair (1972-1974) that claimed the scalp of Richard Nixon (1913-1994; VPOTUS 1953-1961 and POTUS 1969-1974) that in politics what’s lethal: “is not the crime, it's the cover-up”. Just returned from holiday, Mr Albanese “furiously denied” making a crude joke about Sanae Takaichi san’s ‘melons’ in the anyway notorious ‘shag Kylie Minogue’ interview. At this point, rather than digging deeper, it would have been a better tactic to apologize and hope for forgiveness but Mr Albanese learned his stuff in the “non-Trotskyite” wing of the ALP’s Socialist Left faction in which “never apologize” was less a mantra than a way of life. In what was described as a “terse statement” a spokeswoman for Mr Albanese denied the comments were a joke about prime ministerial mammary glands, stating: “This assertion is wrong.” Unfortunately, the "damn the torpedoes, full steam ahead!" approach is a tactic and not a strategy, the efficacy of "plausible deniability" depending not on the term's second element but the first.
So the seeking of forgiveness option (if “workshopped”) must have been discarded, the office instead opting for attack, an approach perhaps ill-advised because the spokeswoman was responding to a opinion piece (published in Mr Murdoch’s national daily The Australian) by Tokyo’s former ambassador to Canberra, Shingo Yamagami san (Japanese ambassador to Australia 2020-2023) that criticized the comments as “insulting”, speculating even that they may have damaged Sanae Takaichi san’s reputation: “However light-hearted it was intended to be, the recent joke delivered by prime minister Anthony Albanese at the expense of Japanese prime minister Sanae Takaichi is how he might be remembered by Japanese who most value the friendship with Australia. It is a time for toiling and not for crude jokes at another’s expense. So, prime minister, please enjoy Japan’s sweet and juicy melons without thinking about a woman’s anatomy, and instead focus on what our two countries must do together.” As a former Director-General of the Intelligence and Analysis Service of the MoFA (Ministry of Foreign Affairs), Shingo Yamagami san was well-informed and concluded his opinion piece by reminding Mr Albanese of the special cultural significance of the revered fruit: “A crown melon is the most prized fruit in Japan and treasured as something special. Moreover, this particular fruit was painstakingly nurtured under intensive care in a special greenhouse. A single melon costs more than 30,000 yen (Aus$270).” Translation: “Albo has gained melons but has lost face.”
Exhibit One: Shaggate.
While readers of The Australian mostly years ago made up their minds and concluded Mr Albanese is “a dud”, the reason Mr Murdoch continues to print and distribute the paper (despite large losses) is the content widely is reported on other media platforms (old and new) and while the influence is somewhat diminished, what appears can, on occasions, still “set the day’s agenda”. However, it’s unlikely Shingo Yamagami san’s piece was written in an attempt to change many minds in Australia and was likely intended for “internal consumption” in Japan. It’s improbable many Japanese voters would think their prime minister’s reputation much “damaged” by a foreign leader’s social ineptitude but, for a number of reasons (some geo-political but mostly economic), Sanae Takaichi san’s popularity has retreated from the stellar heights she enjoyed after assuming the presidency of the LDP (Liberal Democratic Party) and leading it to a stunning landslide in the 2026 general election (House of Representatives (lower house)) so the thought is the MoFA may have co-opted Shingo Yamagami san as a stalking horse to “muddy the waters”, seeking to exploit the “melons incident” for a bit of “blame-shifting”. Of course, in diplomatic circles, it was hardly a secret Shingo Yamagami san was "not a big fan" of the ALP government and he may have been "freelancing"; certainly there's been from Tokyo no suggestion an apology has been sought or is expected and observers suspect "melongate" will be a "three day wonder" that vanishes once Mr Murdoch's journalists conclude the story is "going nowhere" a likely to be a "storm in a D-cup".
Exhibit Two: Melongate.
One who seemed gleefully to relish the opportunity to defend Mr Albanese against accusations of having violated his own instruction to her (“We should not refer to people’s appearance”) was Tanya Plibersek (an unlikely but energetic Sancho Panzo to Mr Albanese’s Don Quixote) who appeared on morning TV with Barnaby Joyce (b 1967; thrice (between local difficulties) deputy prime minister of Australia 2016-2022 and now a convert from the National Party to One Nation), the latter not previously noted for his feminist credentials. Echoing her leader’s thoughts on the matter, Ms Plibersek said she thought the former ambassador was “…100 per cent wrong, and we have an excellent relationship with Japan. I think the former ambassador is wrong in his interpretation.” Now in the improbable role of being the One Nation Party’s sole intellectual, Mr Joyce disagreed, saying it was “a really dangerous thing to say”, twisting the blade a little deeper by expressing some faux sympathy for his fellow panellist being bowled up to defend the indefensible: “I know you’re doing the best job you can on this, Tanya, but it’s just like the Kylie Minogue comment – completely wrong, completely trying to be clever. It wasn’t clever. It just demeans the office of prime minister, and it certainly has created a massive problem with one of our major partners. I know in your heart, Tanya, you know it’s wrong. Okay? And if you came out now and said, “Yeah, that was a stupid thing to say. You should have apologised for it. People say: ‘Tanya, it’s telling the truth.’” Amateur theologian Mr Joyce conjuring (with no apparent intent at irony) an impromptu encyclical on “truthfulness” was one of the more amusing episodes in the “melon incident”. Undeterred by that surreal moment, Ms Plibersek maintained focus and insisted it was a “complete misinterpretation by the former ambassador”, unwisely adding: “People watching it for themselves can make their own minds up.” Probably not believing his luck, Mr Joyce responded: “They do, they do watch it, and they have made up their own mind. And it is inappropriate.” In cricketing terms, the English would have called that “being bowled a pie” (ie an “easy hit”) but anyway, Harold Macmillan would have admired Mr Joyce's riposte.
The last word in termagantism: Crooked Hillary Clinton
Although it’s
Donald Trump’s (b 1946; POTUS 2017-2021 and since 2025) “crooked” moniker which
will forever be attached to crooked Hillary Clinton (b 1947; US secretary of
state 2009-2013), more than most women who have dared trespass on the historic
male preserve of politics, she has attracted gender-based terms of
disparagement. Not content only with
words from English, Mr Trump also borrowed from Yiddish, referring to her
failure to secure the Democrat nomination for the 2008 presidential election as
having been “schlonged
by Barack Obama” (b 1961; POTUS 2009-2017) in the primaries. A schlong (from the Yiddish שלאַנג (shlang) (snake))
is “a penis” and usually carries the implication of “a big one” so his idea was
one of “man beats woman”; as “woman beats man”, the closest companion term is “pussy
whipped” which for men obviously is quite a put-down. Crooked Hillary has also been called “a tough little
termagant in a pantsuit”, “the virago of Pennsylvania Avenue”, “calculating”,
“disingenuous”,
“a radical
feminist”, “a harridan” (a bossy or belligerent old woman),
a “femocrat”,
a “feminazi”,
“a succubus”
(a female demon who had sex with sleeping men”, “Lady Macbeth in a headband”, “Ms bad-hair day”
and “a shrew”. All very sexist of course and there also been
a debate about whether she should be called a “habitual” or “pathological” liar but she shouldn't complain about that; she has “a bit of previous”.
No comments:
Post a Comment