Apparently, Mark Latham has entered the world of podcasting, with a podcast called Lathamland. One could be forgiven for thinking he’s entering the 21st century, finally.

But never fear, he is still wedged firmly in his own little world, with a 50’s mindset and an anti-feminist agenda that’s just as baffling as it was when he used his previous position as a columnist for the Australian Financial Review to attack various women including 2015 Australian of the Year, Rosie Batty. In the new podcast, for Triple M, he again utilises a wide platform that he has been granted (for reasons that continue to baffle many) to attack Rosie Batty. Again. To save subjecting your ears to Lathamland, Women’s Agenda have a transcript you can read instead.

Please, Mark Latham, just stop.

We get it, Mark. You don’t like Rosie Batty. For whatever reason, you would prefer she sat quietly in the corner with her grief instead of speaking out and actively campaigning against domestic violence to save others from the same fate. Despite the fact that she was a victim of it for years. Despite the fact that our system let her down consistently. Despite the fact that is cost her her son. Her strength and tenacity offends you, I guess.

Again, Latham blabs on about “left feminists”. As usual, it would appear that he doesn’t know what that means and really, there’s no excuse for it. He’s certainly been told often enough. Feminism means women having the same opportunities and rights that men already have. Nothing more and certainly, nothing less. This is clearly a threat to men like Mark Latham, who must be so aware of their mediocrity that any hint of competition is too much to handle. His continued and purposeful ignorance on what feminism means can only be the result of cognitive dissonance; it’s far too uncomfortable a prospect for him to admit to. He still hasn’t cottoned on to the fact that domestic violence is under reported and that speaking about it is not an effort to attack and demonise all men. Down-playing it and ignoring the overwhelming number of male perpetrators versus female perpetrators makes Mark part of the problem, really.

Yes, really.

I do find his constant use of “left” as a derogatory term interesting, as well. Was he not a Labor party member? These days, Labor and Liberal seem pretty close but back when he was politically active, Labor was certainly viewed as more left leaning, more working class. For someone who considers himself a voice for Western Sydney, you’d think he’d be a bit more left-leaning.

Why is it, though, that Triple M decided he was a solid bet? He “resigned” from the Australian Financial Review amid “controversy” for his views on feminism and social issues, right? His columns on mental illness, racism and domestic violence have been ignorant, ill formed and arrogant at best. What qualifies him as a social commentator? It’s not his social media skills, like using twitter to abuse women. The political background? That ended over a decade ago after a spectacular election loss.

Look at it this way. If Mark wanted to come and work in your office, would you hire him? You know that he has a reputation as a sore loser. He has been known for criticising women with little to no basis. He has proven that he doesn’t understand issues like domestic violence and mental illness. He is cavalier at best towards racism, for example complaining that he can’t use racist terminology and will therefore be forced to use “bland” language. He is intolerant towards transgender people. All of this is public record, by the way, but you know his prior employers would have no grounds to deny it. I think he’d be hard-pressed to find a job anywhere with that background.

That said, I don’t think Triple M are taking him on out of a sense of charity. I think they are banking on a controversial figure converting to ratings. I get that. I’m sure it’s the reason the AFR kept him on for so long and why Channel 9 insists on putting him on television. He gets people talking. Hell, I’m talking about him right now. But here’s what I don’t get. Triple M must have female listeners, right? Their main demographic might be men, but I even know a couple of women who listen to that station. I’m sure they have female staff members as well- not many, sure, but some. Out of the women that make up their staff and audience, how many do you suppose have experienced domestic violence?  How many of the men that make up their staff and listeners have experienced it? How many perpetrate it? Yet they have installed a man that consistently tries to minimise the issue, despite women being killed in DV situations every single week. How many listeners or staff members have experienced mental illness? Yet they hire a man who tells us it’s not a real problem. How many have experienced racism, yet they hire a guy that down plays it and doesn’t understand it? What message are you sending, Triple M? Especially considering Triple M is a White Ribbon partner.

I’ll just leave this here… pic.twitter.com/visUADrhta

— Mark Di Stefano (@MarkDiStef) January 21, 2016

Because the message I am getting is that Triple M doesn’t give a shit about these problems in our society. Triple M has happily given a platform to a guy who used it, at first opportunity, to attack a woman who has helped change the way we talk about domestic violence despite her own horrific loss. They are calling this podcast “Lathamland” and can I tell you, that sounds like a pretty fucked up place to be. As far as I’m concerned, Mark can set up camp in Lathamland and bloody well stay there- because he certainly has no place in a progressive society while he continues to hound us with his damaging, willfully ignorant opinions.

Petitions you can sign:

Mark Latham must be fired by Triple M for hateful, mysoginistic views towards feminists.

Triple M- Stop Giving Latham a Voice