If you listen to feminists, women want it all.
Yup, they feel they can have a career, kids and a happy marriage.
In fact, in an interview the other day, the Aussie babe discussed a vital issue – what a woman needs to do to keep her man.
Apparently, this involves: "Always have make-up on and wear nice knickers. That will please him."
So, once you've brought the kids to school. . . gone to work. . . then gone to the shops on your way home from work to pick up stuff for the dinner. . . and then done the homework with your family, you can put the kids to bed.
So, after a day as long and wearing as that, what is the thing you most want to do?
Ah yes, go upstairs and put on some make-up and nice knickers before your husband gets home.
Now, I am the first to admit that the mind of a woman is a complete mystery to me, but somehow I can't see the above scenario playing out in too many Irish households.
Will you just grow up?
Well, Ming The Gormless is at it again.
Luke Flanagan (pictured) looks more like a scruffy Occupy Dame Street protester than a member of our national parliament.
In fact, can you imagine the likes of Flanagan and his partners in crimes-against- fashion, Mick Wallace and The Boy Barrett, ever meeting someone like Angela Merkel?
Honestly, the image that it conjures up is one of complete and total national humiliation – the most powerful politician in Europe meeting . . . The Bash Street Kids.
But showing that his priorities are as juvenile as his dress sense, he once more came to attention last week when he caused the Dáil to be suspended in a row over his clothes.
Now, no matter what your political allegiance, I am sure we can all agree that this country has bigger fish to fry than this eejit's jeans.
But I was particularly struck the other day when Flanagan came out and denounced his critics because, he said: "My kids are being bullied in school over these remarks."
No, I imagine if his kids are getting teased in school, it is more likely because their Da comes across as a complete and utter tool.
What big, brave protesters
I get it. I'm angry. You're angry. If there is anything we all have in common with each other in this country is. . . that we're all angry.
And angry people look for a target. They want someone to blame; someone on whom they can focus all their fury and resentment.
So how about picking on a 16-year-old boy?
That was the case this weekend in Donegal, outside Fine Gael TD John McHugh's office.
The kid, who is doing work experience in the politician's office, was set upon by people from a group calling themselves 'Donegal Action Against Austerity' (as opposed to their hated rivals, 'Donegal Action For Austerity').
According to the kid: "I was surrounded by protesters. One man in particular started shouting at me, calling me a Fine Gael coward."
So, what was your role in the great recession, grandad?
Well, I once abused a terrified teenage boy and I am still proud of that to this day. . .
Ah, so that's what they call it
When I was younger, I had a bit of an attitude problem.
In fact, now that I think about it, I was a right little bugger and I do recall meeting an old teacher of mine who basically called me a little toe-rag.
But it turns out that none of it – the bad behaviour, the bunking off school, the back chat and the sneering – was my fault.
Because I had ODD.
This is my favourite latest psychological disorder to come out of the States.
It turns bad behaviour is actually a sign of Oppositional Defiance Disorder – a state of mind which makes the victim incapable of doing what they are told.
Or, on other hand, it could be a condition dreamed up by the pharmaceutical industry in America to sell more tranquilisers to parents who are worried about their unruly children.
Back in the day, it was simply called being a teenager.
Just a thought.
Well, as long as we're being logical
I sat with my jaw on the floor while watching Adam Boulton on Sky News at lunchtime yesterday.
They were having yet another of those interminable debates about gay marriage and the argument was going back and forth between a gay dude and a woman from the Christian Institute.
Now, as regular readers will know, I am all for gay marriage, as well as protecting the religious rights of churches who don't want to marry gay people on their premises.
But as the debate went on, the woman from the CI became more animated and friendly and had a smile that spread from ear to ear – always a worrying sign in a religious person.
And while she made some valid points, the argument took a turn for the surreal when she cheerfully declared that she: "Believed in the book of Genesis."
Now, sorry luv.
But if you genuinely think that the world was literally created in less than a week (she's a Creationist as well, natch) then I'm not sure you're the best person to be discussing complex social issues in the 21st century.