(My bold):

A showdown is looming between the Maribyrnong Truck Action Group and truck drivers challenging the group’s decision to use women and children in its protest a fortnight ago.

Because of course all those women were protesting because the men had told them to… excuse me?
Does anyone think it’s a little strange that the journo reports that as straight-out fact, without any “he claimed” or “alleged” or other qualification?

About 150 protesters, including men, women and children, brought morning peak-hour traffic to a standstill for about half an hour from 8 am on Wednesday…They were demonstrating against increased truck traffic expected on Yarraville’s already congested roads when bay dredging works are complete.

…”The majority of the industry is very hostile towards [MTAG president] Peter Knight because he used women and children. That’s unprofessional…”

Got that? Men are the rational actors in the protest; women are mindless automatons who are used by, that is, brought along as props by, the real (male) protesters.

In the case of children, it’s possible that some people bring children who don’t understand the issues. It appears, though, that some children understand perfectly well. But Robinson lumps the “women and children” together as subjects to be “used” by the real protesters, that is, the men.

Could it be that the women present had read and heard some of the readily available information and had independently come to the conclusion that going to the protest was a good idea? Could it even be that some women had persuaded their menfolk to come along? Stand back as Paul Robinson’s brain explodes.

If nothing else, I suppose it shows consistency. A group that’s calling for the right of truck drivers to use residential streets forever, because that’s how they did it back before WWII, could only be expected to have strange ideas about the autonomy of sheilas women.
 
 
 
Crossposted at Road to Surfdom