Uploaded January 2026 | Updated September 2026, 2 weeks ago
This is Aimee Stanton. She’s an Australian entrepreneur, co-founder of the off-grid accommodation company Tiny Stays. She’s also a mother, a wife, a former contestant on Australian Survivor, a TV presenter on Channel 7’s revived Healthy, Wealthy & Wise!, and according to her Instagram, a self-professed “lady tradie”—she’s a qualified plumber. Obviously, she’s very successful.
Before I get started, a bit of a disclaimer: my goal here is not to try to destroy somebody’s life. I’ll be sticking strictly to publicly available information. Thank you to the viewer who sent a lot of this information in.
We all make mistakes and do stupid things sometimes, and I don’t think anybody should be punished forever—except for the most heinous of crimes—but I am here to point out the glaring double standards and hypocrisy of some of our finest institutions.
This is Swinburne University of Technology, a public research university in Melbourne. On their official ‘Preventing Sexual Assault and Harassment’ page, they write: “Swinburne commits to preventing all forms of violence, harm and disrespect and providing a safe, respectful and inclusive environment to all students, staff and visitors.”
Hold onto that thought; we’re going to need it in a moment.
This is Channel 10’s now-defunct TV show The Project. In 2017, Aimee Stanton appeared on the show after her stint on Australian Survivor and had a bit of a back-and-forth with co-host Tommy Little. She said: “Do you remember me? I could not forget it. I’ve still got the picture on my phone.”
When Tommy asked what happened, she replied: “A few years ago, actually. I went to get a picture with you after the show, and I kind of got dared to grope on to your, um, downstairs region, and you were very shocked. I’ve still got the picture on my phone!” The result? “I got removed by security, and then you blocked me on Facebook.”
The panel had a great laugh about it, including host Carrie Bickmore—who has consistently used her platform to advocate for gender equality and women’s safety. But it seems when a woman touches a man in a private region without his consent, oh, that’s just a bit of fun!
Just to be clear: when I first saw this video, I knew I had to be careful in this day and age of AI-generated content, but this is a matter of public record. You can find it on news sites like News.com.au and Mamamia. It’s worth noting that Mamamia—an outlet with explicit feminist leanings—also essentially laughed off the incident.
Okay, so Ms. Stanton did something stupid when she was young. Well, not only was it stupid—it was immoral and illegal. As we know now, it didn’t stop her from going on to have a very successful career. But what’s this got to do with Swinburne University, I hear you ask?
Well, on their ‘Stories for a brighter tomorrow’ page—where they promote “30 years of people and technology working together to build a better world”—you can find one Aimee Stanton.
Yes, the same university that says sexual harassment is a stain on society also happily has a page dedicated to Ms. Stanton, titled: “Swinburne alum Aimee Stanton survived (and thrived) as a lady tradie.” They note that she competed on Survivor and “became a female plumber.”
Um… I don’t think you become a ‘female plumber’—you just become a ‘plumber.’ But I guess Swinburne thinks that gender is the most impressive part of the qualification.
On Swinburne’s Facebook page, they happily announce “Happy National Tradies Day!” And guess who’s in the picture? Plumbing alum Aimee Stanton, of course. Duh.
They’ve got even more pages dedicated to her on their website, like: “From beauty school to pioneer for women in trades.”
I want to be clear: this isn’t some archived post from ten years ago. This is from September 2025. That is well after her national appearance on The Project, where she admitted to non-consensual touching of a man’s private region.
Since her appearance on The Project was in 2017, the university has had eight years to vet this “pioneer”—yet they continue to use her as a brand ambassador as recently as a few months ago.
Just to make it very clear, on their ‘Preventing Sexual Assault’ page, they state: “Swinburne is proud to be part of the national Respect. Now. Always. initiative.” This initiative aims to prevent ALL sexual assault and harassment, but apparently, only one gender is capable of being the perpetrator.
Obviously, despite their words and their ‘Gender Equality Action Plan’, this was never about equality. This was always about protecting a narrative, even if that narrative is built on a foundation of blatant, sanctimonious hypocrisy.
But hey, as long as the marketing looks good, right?
MUSIC
Allégro by Emmit Fenn
This is Aimee Stanton. She’s an Australian entrepreneur, co-founder of the off-grid accommodation company Tiny Stays. She’s also a mother, a wife, a former contestant on Australian Survivor, a TV presenter on Channel 7’s revived Healthy, Wealthy & Wise!, and according to her Instagram, a self-professed “lady tradie”—she’s a qualified plumber. Obviously, she’s very successful.
Before I get started, a bit of a disclaimer: my goal here is not to try to destroy somebody’s life. I’ll be sticking strictly to publicly available information. Thank you to the viewer who sent a lot of this information in.
We all make mistakes and do stupid things sometimes, and I don’t think anybody should be punished forever—except for the most heinous of crimes—but I am here to point out the glaring double standards and hypocrisy of some of our finest institutions.
This is Swinburne University of Technology, a public research university in Melbourne. On their official ‘Preventing Sexual Assault and Harassment’ page, they write: “Swinburne commits to preventing all forms of violence, harm and disrespect and providing a safe, respectful and inclusive environment to all students, staff and visitors.”
Hold onto that thought; we’re going to need it in a moment.
This is Channel 10’s now-defunct TV show The Project. In 2017, Aimee Stanton appeared on the show after her stint on Australian Survivor and had a bit of a back-and-forth with co-host Tommy Little. She said: “Do you remember me? I could not forget it. I’ve still got the picture on my phone.”
When Tommy asked what happened, she replied: “A few years ago, actually. I went to get a picture with you after the show, and I kind of got dared to grope on to your, um, downstairs region, and you were very shocked. I’ve still got the picture on my phone!” The result? “I got removed by security, and then you blocked me on Facebook.”
The panel had a great laugh about it, including host Carrie Bickmore—who has consistently used her platform to advocate for gender equality and women’s safety. But it seems when a woman touches a man in a private region without his consent, oh, that’s just a bit of fun!
Just to be clear: when I first saw this video, I knew I had to be careful in this day and age of AI-generated content, but this is a matter of public record. You can find it on news sites like News.com.au and Mamamia. It’s worth noting that Mamamia—an outlet with explicit feminist leanings—also essentially laughed off the incident.
Okay, so Ms. Stanton did something stupid when she was young. Well, not only was it stupid—it was immoral and illegal. As we know now, it didn’t stop her from going on to have a very successful career. But what’s this got to do with Swinburne University, I hear you ask?
Well, on their ‘Stories for a brighter tomorrow’ page—where they promote “30 years of people and technology working together to build a better world”—you can find one Aimee Stanton.
Yes, the same university that says sexual harassment is a stain on society also happily has a page dedicated to Ms. Stanton, titled: “Swinburne alum Aimee Stanton survived (and thrived) as a lady tradie.” They note that she competed on Survivor and “became a female plumber.”
Um… I don’t think you become a ‘female plumber’—you just become a ‘plumber.’ But I guess Swinburne thinks that gender is the most impressive part of the qualification.
On Swinburne’s Facebook page, they happily announce “Happy National Tradies Day!” And guess who’s in the picture? Plumbing alum Aimee Stanton, of course. Duh.
They’ve got even more pages dedicated to her on their website, like: “From beauty school to pioneer for women in trades.”
I want to be clear: this isn’t some archived post from ten years ago. This is from September 2025. That is well after her national appearance on The Project, where she admitted to non-consensual touching of a man’s private region.
Since her appearance on The Project was in 2017, the university has had eight years to vet this “pioneer”—yet they continue to use her as a brand ambassador as recently as a few months ago.
Just to make it very clear, on their ‘Preventing Sexual Assault’ page, they state: “Swinburne is proud to be part of the national Respect. Now. Always. initiative.” This initiative aims to prevent ALL sexual assault and harassment, but apparently, only one gender is capable of being the perpetrator.
Obviously, despite their words and their ‘Gender Equality Action Plan’, this was never about equality. This was always about protecting a narrative, even if that narrative is built on a foundation of blatant, sanctimonious hypocrisy.
But hey, as long as the marketing looks good, right?
MUSIC
Allégro by Emmit Fenn



![NSW Police: “English Optional, Virtue Signalling Mandatory”
This is the New South Wales Police recruitment page, and this is their latest campaign: “You Should Be A Cop.” Like so much in modern Australia, the focus is squarely on diversity. Just look at the images:
• Woman.
• Woman.
• Woman.
• Ethnic minority.
I think the women have it.
But this is the specific campaign we’ll be focusing on today—and thank you to the viewer who sent this in: “Be a Cop in Your Community.” It sounds innocuous enough. Well, here is the ad they’ve been running on Instagram and wherever else.
Now, I’m not going to play the video because I always get stung when I do that, but I will play the audio. See if you can notice the pattern.
[Audio Clip]
And to be clear: no, this is not an April Fools’ joke.
As you heard, they are speaking in every language other than English. Apart from Mandarin—which I study—I don’t even know what languages they were speaking.
Now, the first question is: Why? What is the purpose of running an ad in foreign languages? Look, I’m a realist; there are many different languages spoken in Australia, and I’ve got nothing against people speaking their own. However, there’s one language that bonds us all together: English. You can’t get by in Australia just speaking Swahili. You can’t get by just speaking Japanese. If I walk into a Woolworths and start speaking Chinese, I’m just going to get a blank stare and a very awkward silence.
Not to mention, anyone living in Australia who is proficient enough to become a police officer would surely already know English. If they aren’t proficient in English, they’d be a liability as a police officer. How can you serve the broader community if you only speak Hindi?
So, who exactly are the police targeting with this ad? Well, I think the answer is simple: virtue signalling. “Look at us! We’re inclusive!”
They state in the blurb that they’re looking for recruits who can speak another language. Okay, fine—but couldn’t they have just done that in English? By sticking to only four languages, they were actually being quite exclusive.
Obviously, what they should have done was have these same people speak in English:
“Hi, I’m from China, but now I’m an Australian citizen and I can speak Chinese. Look at me! I’m a police officer now. If you’re from China, you too can become a police officer… as long as you’re not a spy for the Communist Party. But hey, even if you are, I won’t tell anyone. It’s our little secret… I hope that wasn’t recording.”
According to the “Be a Cop in Your Community” page, they are seeking “applicants who identify with one of our targeted cultural or language groups.” They provide a list of very specific languages, including Arabic and Syrian.
But why these languages? Well, they note:
“The Be a Cop in Your Community program is focused on four Priority Areas in the South West Metropolitan Region: Auburn, Burwood, Cumberland, and Liverpool. These Police Area Commands serve some of NSW’s most culturally and linguistically diverse neighbourhoods.”
So, apparently, “community” only matters in specific postcodes. Are they suggesting that if you live in the Northern Beaches or The Shire, you don’t need a “community connection”?
Or perhaps it’s just that those residents don’t have the “right kind” of diversity.
But of course, being a “diverse” police officer involves special skills that require reimbursement. As they note on their page:
“You may be entitled to allowances, such as the Community Language Allowance Scheme.”
Yes—it certainly sounds like a “scheme” to me. While most people get paid for what they do, these recruits get a bonus for what they are.
And finally, remember the all-important motto: “Your culture is your strength.” Yep. As long as you’re not “just” Australian, your culture is super-duper important. You may have thought the “strength” of a police officer was their ability to uphold the law, maintain physical fitness, and display courage under pressure.
But no. You were wrong.
Apparently, it’s your “culture” that is the most important thing. Forget about your black belt in Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu; being able to order a kebab in Arabic is far more important.
MUSIC
Allégro by Emmit Fenn NSW Police: “English Optional, Virtue Signalling Mandatory”](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/aoHKnuT3S4k/mqdefault.jpg)





![The “Controversial” New Olympic Rule: Biological Reality
Ever since the second modern Olympic Games held in Paris in 1900, Olympians have been broken into two distinct categories: male and female. I know—that sounds absurd in the modern world. But it’s true; people back in 1900 thought that men and women were different when it came to sports. They were sexist, they were transphobic, they were probably even—dare I say it—racist.
But fast forward 120 years or so, and biological reality is now questionable. Now, in the name of inclusivity, we’ve seen a push to allow athletes to enter female-only competitions based on how they identify.
For example, my male stallion—who identifies as a female human—recently entered the Queensland 100m final. Not only did she win the age championships, but she also broke the world record. See? Women can do anything!
But enough joking around. Let’s get back to the real world, where the new strategy for breaking female records apparently involves being a biological man.
But in the year of our Lord, 2026, something strange has happened—something that went completely against the approved script. As the ABC simply put it: “Trans athletes banned from competing in Olympic Games.” Apparently, the IOC has decided that only biological females will be allowed to compete in female events from now on. What? That’s crazy! Only females can compete in female events?! Who could have possibly seen that coming? Unsurprisingly, this “return to reality” has caused absolute chaos and controversy—at least in some circles.
The new IOC president, Kirsty Coventry—the first female and the first African to hold the office—made her decision very clear. She said:
“At the Olympic Games, even the smallest margins can be the difference between victory and defeat. So, it is absolutely clear that it would not be fair for biological males to compete in the female category. In addition, in some sports, it would simply not be safe.”
In classic, “impartial” ABC style, they’ve questioned the move with headlines such as: “Warnings of abuse as trans women banned from Olympic female events,” and “Australian Olympic Committee backs Olympic transgender rules despite human rights concerns.” Human rights concerns? What about the rights of women to actually have a fair competition in their own category?
The Conversation, of course, got in on the sanctimonious moralising, claiming: “The Olympics’ transgender athlete ban is a legal and moral minefield.” And we can’t forget The Guardian: “Human rights experts raise concerns over Olympics transgender women athlete ban: Critics say new IOC guidelines violate fundamental human rights.”
That’s right—I was born a man, went through puberty as a male, and have increased bone density and other physical advantages, but now, as a trans woman, it’s my “fundamental human right” to dominate biological women in the Olympics!
Just to be clear, nobody is saying trans women can’t compete. They just can’t compete in the female category.
Unsurprisingly, The Guardian brought race into this. They actually claimed: “Athletes who are intersex or have differences of sex development, including cisgender women, will be overly affected by the new guidelines, with women of colour likely to be disproportionately targeted due to their appearance.”
What are they even saying here? That “women of colour”—whatever that means this week—are more likely to “look like men” and therefore face more scrutiny?
So, is this Korean sprinter more likely to be tested? What about this Indian tennis player? Who exactly are they talking about? It seems the only ones “targeting” women based on their appearance are the very journalists claiming to protect them.
The Guardian also interviewed human rights lawyer and former Olympic swimmer Nikki Dryden, who is firmly against the move. She warned:
“If these rules are adopted… your daughter… may be subjected to sex testing just to participate. Worse, it creates a culture where [someone] feels entitled to question whether your daughter ‘looks female enough’ to belong. That is not protecting women’s sport. That is policing girls’ bodies… The IOC’s new guidelines will be unlawful in Australia… Moving towards exclusionary, invasive rules is not only unnecessary, it is a step back over 25 years.”
But exactly how “invasive” are we talking here? The Conversation spells out the process:
“The screening will be done via an athlete’s saliva, a cheek swab or blood sample. Any athlete whose test shows the presence of the SRY gene [the gene associated with men’s sexual development] will be banned from the women’s category.”
So, a cheek swab. One time. To ensure the category for biological females actually contains… biological females.
So, what do you think? Has the IOC finally made the right move here? Or is the very fabric of human rights and the future of civilisation at risk because we’ve gone back to defining a woman as… a woman? Let me know your thoughts in the comments—I’m sure they’ll be civil.
MUSIC
Allégro by Emmit Fenn The “Controversial” New Olympic Rule: Biological Reality](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/cokAfcq6phA/mqdefault.jpg)
