Ramblings of Today's Yoof

Ok, time to actually get round to posting

2010-04-22T05:35:00.000-07:00

I've been busy, hence the not-posting. Let's kick start everything again with a nice easy links round-up.

Here's what I've been reading recently:

An article about Nawal El Saadawi, an Egyptian feminist I had never heard of until this (Guardian) article.

Lap Dancing: The Empowerment Myth at UK Feminista

In Defense of Hit Girl - Kate Harding at Shapely Prose

The Estrogen Dilemma at NYTimes Magazine

LGBT and Allied Critiques on Marriage at Fannie's Room

argue that we can't judge people from the past by today's standards at stuff white people do

LADYPALOOZA PRESENTS: I Went To Your Concert and There Was Nothing Going On, or, A Meditation on Dude Music at Tiger Beatdown

And another thing! "More men than women died on the Titanic!" at A View From Abroad

I'm sure there are more, but these are the ones most recent in my memory. I'll think about actual proper blog posts (GASP!) and try to post something within a couple of weeks. Not promising anything though... I am very, very lazy and it's wonderfully sunny here.

Argh!!!!

2010-04-21T20:34:00.001-07:00

Was talking to a friend about insomnia. To be honest I was hoping for sympathy but I would have settled for common sense. Sadly alas! Her comment was (and I quote) "Can you not just force yourself to sleep?"

WHAT THE FUCK!!

Need I say anymore?

ME - is there enough support available?

2010-01-27T23:09:00.000-08:00

I've suffered with ME for two years now. Maybe that is why I empathise with Lynn Gilderdale and how she suffered for years with ME.

Here is a link to her diary: http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/andrewmcfbrown/100023714/lynn-gilderdales-distressing-diary-shows-that-chronic-fatigue-syndromeme-can-be-real-and-catastrophic/

Reading this made me wonder why there is little support available for ME sufferers in the UK? Why so many people are suffering without support for years at a time? Bloody hell if we had broken legs or were drug addicts then we would be overrun with help. A bit hypocritical me thinks.

I consider myself to be lucky. I have a GP who is understanding, a consultant who actually understands the illness and amazing help from a local Physical Disability Team. I know that I am the minority here and most sufferers don't have this support available to them.

What is the solution...? To be honest I have no fucking clue! There are so many things that could help improve the quality of life of a ME patient: better understanding of the illness; more practical help available and of course raising awareness of the illness. No-one should have to be told they are suffering from "Yuppy Flu"!

Sorry... bad night... pain too much...

Make Noise for Free Choice!

2009-06-10T09:33:00.000-07:00

Sign this petition to get free, legal abortions recognised as a human right and to put pressure on EU countries who have not yet bothered to help women out.

Abortion is a human right. I absolutely believe that.

It's about choosing when or whether to have a family. It's about life and death. It's about escaping poverty. It's about rape. It's about having a choice, having another option.

Most of all, it's valuing a woman's right to her body and her own life.

BBC In Blissful Hypocritical Ignorance Shocker (Or, why you should listen to real scientists and not mass media for cancer advice)

2009-05-25T04:33:00.000-07:00

Snappy title, eh? I do my best. There's more of this brevity to follow, so make yourself comfortable - I'm going to talk about cancer.

It's a horrific disease, with many causes ranging from the genetic to the environmental. Something happens to cause cells in a part of the body - the liver, the brain, the cervix, the testicles, the breasts... any tissue can harbour a cancer - to mutate. Something causes the genes which regulate cell growth to act in a way that they shouldn't, and the cells begin to divide rapidly out of control, produce toxins, damage the surrounding tissue and metastasise - spread. They somehow convince the body to give them a blood supply, and they need a lot of blood because they use so much energy. If they get big enough they can press against vessels and block them, among other things. If damaged they can bleed into the surrounding tissues. A particularly malignant tumour can produce cells which, via the blood or lymphatic system, can spread to any part of the body where they spawn a fresh tumour. Each type of cancer is different, and what makes one tumour shrink may have no effect on another. It kills thousands every year, and the scariest thing about it is how uncertain we are of a cancer's origins and mechanisms, knowledge without which we cannot find a cure easily. It can strike at any time and occur in anyone: young and old, people of all nationalities, backgrounds and lifestyles.
Some cancers can be screened: the mortality rate for prostate and cervical cancers, once diseases with a very poor survival rate, fell dramatically in the UK when programmes were put in place to detect and treat them early in the groups most at risk. Other cancers are more insidious. Lung cancer is the most deadly cancer among men and is set to become the biggest killer among women too. Detecting it is extremely difficult because it is often asymptomatic, or presents with symptoms that are so general that they could be anything - tiredness and general malaise, for example. It often doesn't show up in X-rays until it is in an advanced stage, by which time your outlook is bleak. Here are some facts and statistics from Cancer Research UK:

Lung cancer can be generally divided into two categories - small cell and non-small cell.
In non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) there are 4 stages of development, each stage with an A and B phase.

If caught in stage 1A, people with NSCLC have a 54-80% change of surviving for the next 5 years.
In stage 1B, this drops to a 38-65% chance.
2A - 50% chance.
2B - 30-40% chance
3A - 10-30% chance
3B - >10% chance
4 - >5% chance.

Unfortunately, very few people are caught in the early stages. With small cell lung cancer, there are only two stages - limited disease and extensive disease. 2 out of 3 people have extensive disease at the time of diagnosis, with less and 5 out of every 100 surviving for the next 5 years. Limited disease sufferers only have around a 25% chance of doing the same. And now, to bring this all together, the statistics for overall lung cancer survival are as follows:

Overall, of all those people diagnosed with all types of lung cancer at all stages, only about 25 out of every 100 people (25%) will live for at least 1 year after diagnosis. About 7 out of every 100 people diagnosed (7%) will live for at least 5 years after diagnosis.

There are currently some trials running to find new ways of detecting this cancer early on, due to end this year. However, the best way to survives lung cancer - and indeed all cancers - is to not get it in the first place. Naturally, everyone wants to know how not to get cancer, and that's where the media steps in.

Mass media can be useful in many ways. We need it to find out about events around the world and in neighbouring towns, it keeps an eye on the common people and authorities alike, it educates and informs. Unfortunately, the newspapers and T.V. stations also need to make money, and will often build up a story and sensationalise it if it will boost ratings and sell more copies. The extent to which the happens varies with the quality of the news source, but all of them, highbrow to tabloids, will do this to some degree. When it comes to health issues they are particularly bad, latching on to any study - no matter how poorly conducted, inconclusive and unreviewed - and present it as indisputable fact. Readers of the fantastic Bad Science book, column and/or blog will be aware of Ben Goldacre's constant frustration with the poor quality of science and health-related new reporting that we currently endure. Fads abound, but everything is true until it isn't, it's all 'official' - the scientists said so! Except they didn't. One week, we are told that antioxidants cure everything, the next that they cause cancer; selenium may or may not be of help to diabetics; every month has a new superfood whilst last month's dish has been found to shorten our lifespan by a billion years. Sometimes studies are quoted as proving something that they didn't even mention, as in this case of man flu being proven to exist by a study that... didn't have anything to do with influenza at all.
So it may come as no surprise when the BBC reports that the UK public are now 'deeply sceptical' of cancer advice from scientific sources.

The UK public is deeply sceptical about scientific claims for what causes or prevents cancer, a poll suggests.
The YouGov survey of 2,400 people for the World Cancer Research Fund (WCRF) found more than half thought scientists were always changing their minds.
More than a quarter said health advice changed constantly and the best approach was to ignore it completely.
But the WCRF said its advice, including eating more fruit and vegetables, had stayed the same for more than a decade.

So, the advice has barely changed, but people think that scientists are so confused than they keep changing the guidelines on a fortnightly basis. Why?

Let's have a look at the BBC's own cancer headlines to find out.

TV Dinners That Prevent Cancer
Could Cabbage Prevent Cancer?
Vitamins 'Do Not Prevent Cancer'
Vitamin 'Protects Against Cancer'
Vitamin C 'May Harm As Well As Heal'
Eating Pizza 'Could Help Stop Cancer' - great advice to the kids, CBBC. Well done.
Sunshine 'Prevents Cancer' ... but wait I thought it could CAUSE skin cancer! this next article says it does, and to avoid sunburn you should eat chocolate and oily fish. No, really.
Preventing Sunburn - A local dermatologist informs us that it's all down to what you eat... but staying in the shade and covering up and using sunblock might be a good idea anyway.
Curry Spice May help Cancer Fight
Apples May Ward Off Colon Cancer
Tea 'Could Help Prevent Cancer', BUT!
Tea Health Benefits 'Exaggerated'

And those are the sensible ones. Dig a little deeper or go to the Daily Mail and you'll get a whole tonne more.
Yep, the BBC and every other news source has jumped on so many health claims before they've been properly tested or peer-reviewed that the public has gotten fed up. the result? They beginning to ignore ALL the advice - even the sound stuff. Even the advice that experts who know what they've been talking about have been doling out for a decade.

Here's the basic, no-nonsense, sensible advice for cutting your cancer risk that has been tested, reviewed and shown to work for ages. This advice, you may notice, is the same basic advice given to anyone wishing to improve their health and cut their risk of developing a variety of our illnesses.

Quit smoking. That's the most important piece of advice to ever be offered. No matter what the tobacco lobby keeps saying, independent researchers have shown time and again that, without a doubt, smoking hugely increases your risk of cancer. Not just lung cancer - although that's the main one and, as I explained above, the most deadly right now - no, smoking has been linked with a whole host of diseases and several cancers. It contains thousands of chemicals that can damage cells and trigger mutation. Also, even if you've smoked for years, cutting down and stopping now will immediately begin to improve your life expectancy.
Cut down your alcohol consumption. We're not saying 'never drink'. Well, some might*. But be aware of how strong your alcohol is - learn your units. Your liver can cope with the occasional overindulgence remarkably well, but if you do have a night on the razzle give yourself time to recover afterwards - that poor organ needs TIME to recover! One possible routine would be to have some days of the week when you don't drink anything alcoholic, some where you do drink but stick to the limits (3-4 units for most men, 2-3 units for most women) and try not to get yourself kicked out of the club on the weekends.
Eat a balanced, healthy diet. Never mind food fads and fancy programmes. Just eat plenty of fruit and veg, eat meat in moderation (if at all) and cut down on saturated and trans-fats (often shown on the label as 'hydrogenated oils/fats'). Three meals a day = great, just make sure they provide all you need. Snacks are fine in moderation. If your diet is healthy, your body will get all the nutrients it needs to maintain a strong immune system, you will reduce your chance of suffering cardiovascular disease, improve your digestive health - all of these things and more. You may feel more energetic, it may improve your visible health - skin, teeth, hair. Diet is really important.
Exercise regularly. I don't mean going to the gym or anything like that, though that's good for you too. Take a half-hour walk in the evening, or to work. Get off the bus a stop or two early. Take the stairs. Cycle and walk instead of driving. When you're bored, go outside instead of switching on the telly or computer.
Maintain a healthy weight. The evidence of a link between obesity and cancer isn't some vague thing - it's been getting continuously stronger for many years. The reasons for exactly why this is are less clear - one theory is that denser, fat laden tissues often harbour and release hormones that have been linked with cancer formation. There are other theories to do with the link between obesity and a poor diet and/or an inactive lifestyle. We don't all need to be a size ten and a certain amount of stored fat is normal and healthy, but we DO need to be aware of the risks associated with significant weight gain over the healthy range. Alongside cancer, obesity is also linked with higher rates of atherosclerosis and heart disease, complications like arthritis and a greatly increased risk of developing Type II Diabetes Mellitus, which can progress to Type I (insulin-dependent) Diabetes if poorly controlled. Complications of diabetes include peripheral nerve and blood vessel damage (which, in tunr, makes it the greatest cause of non-traumatic amputation in the UK), kidney damage, retinopathy (leading to blindness). The best thing that anyone can do to mainitain a weight that is healthy for them is to follow steps 2 and 3. My mother is probably the healthiest person in the family lifestyle-wise and is still the heaviest. If you are still concerned about your weight, it is best to consult a doctor, qualified dietician or other expert - don't follow expensive fad diets. They often make matters worse.
Get your health info from people who know what they're talking about. Here are some examples.

NHS Behind The Headlines - a site that take the news articles and examines them to see how well they present the evidence. Also has NHS advice on a range of health topics.

The Science Behind It - for those of you who want to read the original studies behind the sensational stories that don't cite their sources. Plug in the URL of the science story from whichever news site you found it in and the search engine will attempt to track down the source material.

Bad Science - A bit more to the lighter side, but still cuts through a lot of nonsense ranging from AIDS denialism to Gillian McKeith's 'PhD'. Ben Goldacre is a doctor. A doctor who is sick of seeing the public mislead with pseudoscience and fad diets. He also likes the occasional lewd joke.

Stay healthy, kids. Play nice. Don't do drugs.

*I don't drink and I'm amazing.

Vote Match

2009-05-24T05:41:00.001-07:00

Fellow UK residents! The EU elections are on June 4th, and I shouldn't need to remind anyone of the importance of taking part in the democratic process. If you're stuck on which party to vote for, a tool called Vote Match may be of some help. You are asked whether you agree, disagree or are open-minded on subjects covered in 30 questions. You then pick out the issues that are most and least important to you, and the parties you are thinking of voting for. Your answers are then compared with the stances of your selected parties. I'm quite pleased with it as I'll be voting for the first time this year and I'm not sure where to start.

It's not perfect, of course, and there are some issues that are barely covered if at all, such as:
Women's rights - only one question on whether you think there should be a 50-50 gender divide in the European Commission.
Disability rights - nothing.
Parenting rights - nothing.
LGBTQI issues - nothing.

I'm not sure whether these issues will be coming up at all in the elections but they're still worth knowing. However, it's a starting point, and you can look up more detailed info on the 'close match' parties after narrowing down the options.
Also, you won't be able to find out how you compare with the NO2EU, the Christian Party or BNP's stance (the first two missed the deadline and the BNP are standing, but feel that questions relating to EU participation are inappropriate and irrelevant to them... yeah...), but chances are if you're voting for them you won't need this application to tell you - the differences between them are more pronounced than those between, say, Labour and the Conservatives! More on the BNP party later, by the way - I really enjoyed looking up the Scottish Christian Party in 2007 and I think I may spend an evening getting pissed off at our country's favourite bigots this time around.

Now, the little thingy.

Your browser does not support iframes. Click here to continue.

What a good idea... (yes it's a shop)

2009-04-24T19:02:00.000-07:00

Made By Survivors is a shop that sells handicrafts made by survivors of, and those at high risk of slavery. It sells jewelry, bags, scarves, cards - that kind of thing. I thought I would spotlight some of the products and the shop itself.

First up is this silver dragonfly bracelet. Ok, it is $120 but it's silver and gorgeous.

I like these glass bead earrings ($14). I don't have my 'lobes pierced, but if I did I'd get the blue ones.

In the bags section, I like the look of these clutches ($50, not suitable for veggies), and I love this French Market Bag ($20).

I like the designs on these napkins ($20 set of 4), and I would definitely go for these pashminas ($60 each) if they came in more colours (currently only pink or light blue)... since they don't I would definitely go for one of these Batik scarves ($25 each) which come in orange, natural, light blue, navy and pink (I'm unclear as to what 'natural' means).

I must say, silk trousers for $6 is not to be sniffed at, though it's unclear from the picture exactly what they'll look like (and importantly - how they do up).

There are other lovely things on the site, so do give it a look. I think some of the paper crafts would make wonderful gifts, and it's great to know that you're really making a difference (just by shopping). It's American, so all the prices are in dollars and you do have to pay for shipping. The price is fixed at $10 (p&p), but it's sometimes lower (in which case they will refund the difference) and sometimes higher (in which case they will warn you before shipping). Some of the products are available in the UK at Hatti Trading, which also sells some different products (fair trade, eco-friendly, made by survivors, organic - usually more than one).

I thought this post belonged here as well as at Eclectic Tastes because it's relevant to issues of trafficking and prostitution, which are pretty important topics in feminism.

Outdated Moral Code

2009-04-24T01:27:00.000-07:00

Good morning folks, just thought I'd make a brief mention of a Radio Scotland phone in debate I'm currently listening to, with the subject being an advert for the morning after pill that went out for the first time last night, predictably bringing the religious old ladies out from whatever rock they hide under until their hyper sensitive nostrils pick up the stench of moral corruption in today's youth. The whole thing is a true storm in a teacup.

Not so bad right? Well apparently the important matter of educating teenagers and young adults about all the methods of contraception available to them is nothing... NOTHING, compared to the poor young minds that are being corrupted and convinced that killing unborn children is alright. Now I know that radio phone-ins are hardly the best place to hear convincing arguments, or any evidence of public awareness about the issues of the day, but I found that this one threw up some very odd arguments. Let's take a look, and try and come up with some thoughts on them.

1) This is an abortion pill and it's being advertised to children!

Solution- Now calm down, take a chill pill... Oops, I forgot, you don't like pills do you? Anyway, you're kind of wrong on both points here. Firstly, the morning after pill cannot be compared to having an abortion, on any level at all. You're not really "killing" anything, since conception doesn't happen as soon as you finish having your immoral sex outwith the bonds of matrimony, but it is in fact a slower process. Indeed, we could hardly say that the wee clump of cells is a life until much further along in the pregnancy; where we draw the line is the issue, but the answer isn't "the minute the man ejaculates into the woman". As a philosophy student I'm meant to be able to give good answers to problems like this, but rather than that I'll just show you a good answer. It might not be everyone's cup of tea, but Judith Jarvis Thomson's A Defence of Abortion is one of the most important philosophical arguments ever produced, and certainly should be required reading for anyone willing to spend much time on this problem. Secondly, the advert was required to be shown after the 9PM watershed, so that it would lessen the chances of children being exposed to it. Now maybe it's just me, but the advert is hardly the kind of thing I'd be terrified of a child seeing, lest it blow their innocent young minds sky high (or straight down to Hell, depending on your religious point of view), but since people seem to have a problem with it, all I can say is that it's your own fault for letting the kids stay up to watch TV after their bedtime. What kind of a parent are you? If it's teenagers you're worried it'll corrupt, then you're missing the point entirely, it's teenagers that need to see this kind of information, and much more than they already do. When schools begin to sort out a proper curriculum of sex education, aimed at younger age groups, whilst also making information about all the possible or recommended methods of contraception available, whilst also making sure they understand that sex still isn't something to be rushed into, then you might begin to see a difference. Until then, stop trying to get in the way of important steps forward like this advert. Next!

2) This advert tells young people that they can always rely on options like this, and so encourages them to have unprotected sex without thinking of the consequences!

Solution- I feel that if you actually watch the advert you would see that it hardly gives out the vibe that it's encouraging young people to have unprotected sex, but let's break it down anyway: It depicts a young woman (who doesn't look like a teenager, though it's hard to tell as it's drawn in a happy chirpy cartoon style, so I guess it's no wonder that people think it's aimed at 6 year olds) who wakes up in bed with her handsome young partner, and worrying that at some point during their no doubt lengthy romp the condom might have split, as her weird floaty thought bubbles and the terrifying sperm with faces swimming around over her indicates. But she's not ready to get pregnant! Nor, hopefully, is she ready to catch one of this stud's many STI's, but we'll assume that they're a trusting long term couple. She rides the bus to her destination, throwing terrified looks at mothers carrying babies, and gazing wistfully at the melting writing on the window telling her she's not ready for such a commitment. We then cut to a pharmacy, where an equally pretty young lady behind the counter cheerily waves, then pushes the morning after pill towards her. Personally, I've never had a pharmacist wave at me when I came into the shop, I guess it's a girl thing. Anyway, she walks away with a smile on her face, and everyone lives happily ever after. The end. Now, the ad is less than 30 seconds long, so for it to subtly include the incredibly evil notion that sex might be ok is quite something. The important thing to note here is that though the advert is presented in a stupid cartoon style, as opposed to using real actors (presumably this is to prevent the country from moral meltdown in the instance of seeing REAL PEOPLE buying CONTRACEPTION on their screens at home) the young woman depicted within is not obviously drawn as a teenager, and though it's a moot point, the relationship with her handsome male friend is not obviously depicted as being fleeting. She seems like a 20-something woman, going out to take extra precautions to prevent something that would completely change her life. She doesn't know if the condom split or not, nor does she know that she's pregnant, she's just making sure that she doesn't end up with a benefits gobbling sprog in her arms 9 months down the line. In this way the ad is not encouraging people to have unprotected sex and to rely on the pill; rather, it is suggesting that people should use it, or other contraceptive methods, as well as using a condom, which is a very commendable stance. Next!

3) The jolly presentation of the advert contrasts with the implication that pregnancy is something bad, like a disease, and this will put young people off getting pregnant at all.

Solution- Well you're insane for starters, with particular reference to your accusation that the advert implies that pregnancy is a "disease" of some sort, but the idea of pregnancy being seen as a bad thing is worth commenting on. Today we are encouraged to aim high, stay in education, gain some skills in something we enjoy, then find a job that requires those skills and enjoy our lives. For young people at the beginning of this cycle, say 16-24, pregnancy with a view to keeping the child is a bad thing. It messes up their ambitions, makes staying in education or finding a job much more difficult, and possibly worst of all it is potentially bringing a child into an environment where they are not going to have the opportunities and support that they need. If you have a child at, say, 18 years old, you're almost certainly not going to be in a position where you have the income to support both yourself and the child, you may not have the family/friends network that you'll need to cope with the strain of raising it, and it will be a drain on you for at the very least the next 18 years. Surely it's better to encourage young adults to go out and have some life experience, and settle into a decent income and environment before having a child? Next!

4) Sexual intercourse from age 11/12 almost guarantees cervical cancer in later life, and this advert encourages that.

Solution- Man, do I really have to say something about this? Ok... Well I'm afraid that there's little to no evidence to back up your bizarre claim, but if you're implying that sex from an age where the body isn't fully developed can lead to complications in later life, then fair enough, there is potentially a risk of that. However, I must again stress that neither this advert, nor the fact that it is being broadcast, will encourage children as young as 11 to have sex. You're looking in the wrong place if you're trying to find the problem, and all you're doing is hindering people who will benefit from seeing this information by blasting their moral standards. Nobody wants to see 11 year olds having unprotected sex and getting pregnant, but that's an issue for the parents and the children's schooling, and doesn't concern the young adults this advert is aimed at. Next!

5) This advert shows just how morally vacant this country has become, and I think that all children from underprivileged families should be taken away from their parents and put into foster care. If we don't break the cycle then they could become pregnant at a young age and be miserable benefits grabbing chavs for the rest of their lives!

Solution- Personally, I think most of the public would rather see people with opinions like yours taken away by social workers and put into care homes. Hopefully, no further comment required. Next!

6) Why is contraception only aimed at women? This encourages men to rely on the woman to deal with it if there's a risk of pregnancy, leaving them free of responsibility.

Solution- This is an important question, but one that I don't feel I'm fully equipped to answer as a man. Really, the only contraception we can aim at young men is condoms, and they are already advertised (occasionally), and are freely available at many locations for boys or men that are sexually active. Sure, they should be much more widely available, and boys need to be educated properly on the importance of their use, but the fact remains that the moral outrage directed at this advert is sadly typical of the outrage directed at most forms of female contraception. To use an example, let's look at the Catholic Church: Now they're against the use of condoms, and encourage people to avoid any form of contraception, but their members don't go and bomb condom factories or pharmacies that stock condoms, nor do they protest outside clinics where young men can go and be given free condoms. Contrast that with the whirlwind of nonsense that comes around wherever there's an abortion clinic, or when potentially life changing contraception is aimed at young women; oh all of a sudden everyone's on their high horse, telling everyone that it's "wrong" to encourage us to kill unborn children, suddenly we're the evil youth of today, running about shagging everyone and murdering potential children for a buzz. It's ridiculous, and clearly indicative of the male dominated moral code by which we are expected to live our lives. When I was younger I used to think that once every member of a certain generation died, issues such as racism, sexism, and bigotry would just vanish, because people of our generation were beyond such outdated bullshit, that we knew it was all rubbish and were just trying to ignore the vocal minority, who were too old to be convinced that they were wrong. Sadly some time in the real world has shown me that misinformed and outdated opinions exist in all generations, and that they won't just vanish of their own accord one day. If the public can only handle small steps at a time, then so be it, at least we're making progress however slow it may be. Adverts like this are key to the progress of sex education in this country, and if even one young women sees it and benefits, then it's done its job.

Oh, and go and listen to the phone-in itself, I promise that I wasn't making these problems up. Some people really are that insane.

Support Religious Freedom. Support Gay Marriage.

2009-04-15T08:37:00.001-07:00

Here's something for your five-minute tea break. It's focussing on cases and quotes from America relating to religious opposition to gay marriage over there, but it's got a fairly widespread relevance, I think.

A brief interlude...

2009-04-10T07:07:00.000-07:00

Never forget, my friends, that we live in a turtle-eat-pigeon world where the crows are smarter than we think and probably plotting our downfall.
However, take comfort in the fact that at least, in this futuristic dystopia, you can make tea with lasers.

Nellie McKay

2009-03-27T07:47:00.000-07:00

A vegan feminist singer with the voice of an angel and biting wit... gorgeous ^_^. Here's her site, and her myspace.

Found over at Female Impersonator.

(Cross-posted at Eclectic Tastes)

This struck a chord

2009-03-24T19:09:00.000-07:00

Feminocracy: An open letter to guys at bars - about being hit on by men at bars (funnily enough), but in a sometimes-creepy and inappropriate way

I would like to voice my agreement with points 1, 2 and 10... all of which are "Don't touch me".

How is it possible to emphasise this enough?? Don't ever touch me. Not if we've never spoken, not to 'help' me in an awkward corner, not a handshake or a hug, not a tap on the arm (unless very brief and after attempting to engage me verbally over either an emergency or a real issue; e.g. I'm sitting on your coat or there is a fire).

What is it with some pricks who think they can invade your personal space?

Just like I couldn't stand people trying to play with my hair, pick me up or tickle me as a child, I am not going to accept someone I don't know well touching me unless it's absolutely necessary (say, I break my leg or black out randomly and have no friends with me - never gonna happen *touch wood*). I have had complete drunken strangers requesting kisses from me when I was 17 and with my partner, and after I refused was harassed. It's not my responsibility to touch someone else unless their life is in danger, and I'm going to avoid it as much as possible.

I guess this is partly a feminist pet peeve, but mostly a personal one. Thank feck I never really have to deal with this as I don't go to bars unless pressed.

(And about point no. 9... I agree that whoever approaches you, especially if you're already with friends, should be making some kind of offer to be polite and as an icebreaker. I mean they are the ones interrupting you. I would do the same if I ever approached a stranger in a bar [I don't really frequent them as I barely ever drink]. I dunno, it just seems like common courtesy more than anything to do with gender relations. But on the other hand, I wouldn't accept a drink from a stranger unless they bought me a sealed bottle, because I'm paranoid like that.)

ME/CFS/PVF or whatever other name they are calling it!

2009-03-24T15:17:00.001-07:00

Well you may have guessed this is a bit of a rant at the lack of support for ME. Despite there being like 5 different names for this illness lets just stick to ME to keep me sane.

I've had ME for 18 months now. There isn't really a nice way to describe the hell that this illness causes. The pain, tiredness (and I don't mean "oh I'm sleepy nap time" tiredness), confusion and the horrible way that the basic tasks suddenly seem impossible.

Thousands of people have ME. I am sure that many sufferers have more extreme and sever symptoms than myself (and I am pretty bad). If thousands of people suffer this then why do I always feel whenever I speak to a medical professional that I am wasting my time??

I completely understand how difficult it must be for a doctor to treat ME - but don't dare suggest to me that I am choosing this lifestyle. There is no choice. It seems to me, from the months of tests and appointments with several doctors, that if there isn't a pill that can cure my illness than it is all in my head. Two words to say to that: FUCK OFF!

Don't tell me that this is depression.
Don't send me to a psychologist who sits there being condescending.
Don't suggest to me that I "get up and walk".
Don't say it is all in my head - there is medical evidence to the contrary!

Do doctors not understand the pain and suffering that sufferers go through? Have they no fucking compassion?

People say that in twenty years time the medical profession will be able to pinpoint exactly which virus/infection or whatever triggers ME. Great, and if i can help in anyway I will... But what will that achieve? By the time they have worked it out there will be another illusive virus that they don't understand to take its place. There is no magic cure, sadly.

People do recover. I will be one of them.
But in the mean time I refuse to accept that there is no help for me.

Does The Man In Your Life REALLY Need A Job?

2009-03-21T18:47:00.000-07:00

Because, what with girls doing better in school, outnumbering boys at university and generally kicking ass... we need the most qualified people for the job. And by people I mean women. Especially in these recession-riddled times, what with women heading most single-parent households. Oh yeah, and you can pay women 17% less even when they're better qualified! Bonus!*

Sound ridiculous?

Check this out.

Stumbled across at The Pursuit of Harpyness (which is an awesome blog btw).

*No I didn't fact-check any of these apart from the 17%, because I was trying to be unresearched and sloppy in that kinda truism-pop-psychology way. A bit like the way journalists throw out unsubstantiated claims about the 'battle of the sexes' bullshit.

Peaceful anti-apartheid protesters viciously attacked

2009-03-19T04:06:00.000-07:00

Sometimes, no matter how angry you are about something how opposed, you let it slip to the back of you mind for a few days of blissful ignorance. When this happens, then trust me, it will come crashin back into your reality, and you will be sickened at it and yourself for daring to forget.

On Friday night, I wandered home from a party, breezing along through the empty streets with nothing but the thought of a long lie in occupying my mind.
On Saturday afternoon, I received a text from a dear friend that forced me out of my cozy little bubble and reminded me that, for some, a decent night's sleep was a luxury that they couldn't afford.

"Fuck fuck fuck just found out my mate Tristan... shot in head by Israeli Army."

Oh Christ. I'd let myself forget that the battle against that monstrous wall was still raging. And whilst I'd been messing about, occasionally ranting into cyberspace before settling down for a nice lunch, protesters both local to Palestine and from all over the were risking their lives as they stood up to bulldozers and soldiers, fighting for the right for people to live on their own land without prejudice or fear. And now someone who'd done nothing more than stand in front of someone's home in Ni'lin and refused to budge was... dead? Comatose? Because they refused to forget whilst the rest of the world ignored the plight of those villagers facing exile from their own homes.
Some news stories have been running in American news outlets about Tristan - the white man who gallantly stared down guns to help those in danger. But remember: these 'poor, defenceless Palestinians' - for them, this is a daily reality. Whether we come to 'rescue' them or not, they have to live with and fight against this kind of brutality on a daily basis. And, what's more, there are still people out there who feel that their treatment is perfectly justified.
This is just one event in an ongoing conflict. Spread this around, and if you hear anything else, about any other such event over there or in any other part of the world - talk. Spread the word. Don't let anyone forget about these crimes, not even for a moment. Think of Tristan, think of the protesting villagers, the families bulldozed in their own homes. THINK.
Now, here is what happened to Tristan.

________________________________

[GRAPHIC FOOTAGE WARNING]

He was with a group of unarmed protesters holding a demonstration against the wall being built through the village of Ni'lin. The Israeli forces opened fire with live ammunition and tear gas. (In the video, note how tear gas is still being aimed at them even as the Red Crescent medics are trying to help). Whilst someone else got a bullet to the leg, he was hit in the head by one of the gas cannisters:

The black canister, labelled in Hebrew as “40mm bullet special/long range,” can shoot over 400 meters and weighs 130 grams without the propeller. The gas canister does not make a noise when fired or emit a smoke tail and has a propeller to accelerate the weapon mid-air. A combination of the canister’s high velocity and silence is extremely dangerous and has caused numerous injuries, including a Palestinian male whose leg was broken in January 2009.

So, hardly a harmless crowd-breaker. These can break a leg - imagine one smashing into your face. He went into a coma and has undergone surgery to remove his skull from his brain (some of the frontal lobe's been removed too). He was in a very critical condition but appears to have stabilised and may be on the road to recovery (wiggling a few digits here and there), but what with all the dangers and high infection risk of brain surgery, there's still no certainty about his chances. Things weren't helped by the amount of hassle they had getting him to the hospital:

When the medics had successfully situated Anderson, an Israeli soldier stood in front of the ambulance and would not allow it to move, Silverman said.

Silverman detailed with clear agitation in her voice the circumstances that followed, as Anderson was “getting worse, vanishing further.”

She said they underwent another 15-minute holdup at the checkpoint, the reason being, she said, that “Palestinian ambulances are not allowed to enter into the state of Israel from the West Bank.”

“Tristan’s life was in serious danger. He was bleeding terribly everywhere from the head,” Silverman recounted. “We had to just sit and wait until eventually an Israeli ambulance from God knows where showed up and we had to change to another ambulance.”

This is happening. This is real.
This is wrong.

A Question: Feminism/Clothes/Islam

2009-03-18T14:11:00.000-07:00

I have had the same frustrating conversation twice with two different older women (who will be referred to as A and B). They both claim to be feminists, are white, non-religious, in their 40s and are very liberal in their politics. Neither of them were strangers to me - in fact both were friends of the family. This exchange happened a couple of months ago and it still bothers me.

I don't have any background in Islam or really any knowledge apart from what I've been told by my Muslim friends, read on Muslim blogs or been taught in Religious Education. I know that neither of these women have any background in Islam either, though one of them claimed to have read the Koran (which is admittedly more than I've ever done). I imagine that from this limited comparison I would have slightly more knowledge about ordinary (mostly Western) Muslims today and the one who's actually read the Koran would have more knowledge about the actual teachings in Islam. I am not trying to set up any one of us as an expert as our knowledge is hideously bad on this subject, but I'm just trying to give a fuller picture of our respective 'knowledge' of Islam.

I have no idea how the conversation started, but it turned to a discussion about Islam; specifically women in Islam; specifically... *sigh*... the clothes. (Below I have the three definitions I work from in these discussions, but neither of the women differentiated between the burqa or the niqab, so they were effectively interchangeable in the conversation/argument)

I will state my position on the issue (with links to the definitions I am working from to avoid confusion) - I have no problem with people wearing pretty much whatever they want. Hijab(s) are fine by me, as are loose-fitting long-sleeved/legged clothes (which Wikipedia says is part of Hijab?). I am not so keen on burqas because I feel uncomfortable not being able to see someone else's face (and by extension, expressions), whether interacting with them or just seeing them on the street. Niqab is a kinda grey area for me, as seeing the eyes is a definite plus for reading emotions, but I would still feel uncomfortable interacting with someone wearing one. I can understand where all these garments would come in handy in a hotter, harsher climate (keeping sand out of your face is definitely a plus), but living in gloriously rainy Scotland I can't imagine burqas or niqab(s) are very practical here. I know that my views on this subject are definitely culturally biased, and I'll freely admit it. I know that I get into a moral grey zone when I say I don't really want people to wear the burqa or niqab, as I definitely sound like I'm trying to police peoples' dress, but I'll not make this post entirely about me and my views (let's save that for another time :P). Basically I'm not gonna prescribe clothes unless it's a uniform/work-related (eg burqa + firefighting = whole lotta fail).

Anyway, we got onto the subject of Muslim women's clothes, and I was pretty shocked when A spat out that she thought that women that wore the burqa were effectively a) stupid for being Muslims, and b) most likely forced to wear them by their male relatives, and c) the good old "well they live here NOW, so they should dress LIKE US". I attempted to argue with her, saying that obviously if someone was being forced to dress a certain way then that is oppressive, but I'm sure not all 'those' women were being forced to wear it - my guess is that many of the women who wear the burqa or niqab come from cultures/backgrounds where it is acceptable (or compulsory) dress and/or wear it as an outward indicator of faith or inkeeping with their religious beliefs on dress, in which case they will feel more comfortable wearing it and it is about choice. So in a roundabout way I was trying to hint that maybe it's not as huge an issue as she thinks it is.

This was met with derision (I should probably point out that wine had been consumed by both the women by this point, but not me), and the admission that if A ever encountered a woman wearing a burqa/niqab she would "like to trip them up"... followed by laughter.

At this point I was speechless.

What, exactly, was I supposed to say to that except "you're a bigot"? (I said something slightly milder to that effect, as it was neither the time nor place to alienate a friend of the family)

And to top it all off she then started talking about the 'opposite' problem - women/girls showing TOO MUCH FLESH (panic!). We got into a conversation about raunch culture, and I absolutely agree that there are times and places where miniskirts/visible g-strings/lingerie in place of clothes/etc aren't appropriate (e.g. at work), and that I definitely feel the pressure as a young woman to sexualise my appearance more than I'm comfortable with. Then the inevitable victim-blaming for sexual assault came up, where yet again she took the stance of policing women's clothes... to prevent rapists from raping. Oh, and she doesn't believe hijabs should be allowed in schools, worn by either students or staff. She also tried to explain why the Koran is just one long antiwoman screed (which it may be, for all I know - I haven't read it). Oh, and of course "fat women are disgusting - fat women who dress badly/in tight clothes even more so".

I just didn't know what to say to her anymore. B backed her up pretty much all the way, barely contributing to the conversation except to agree with A. There were a few condescending remarks thrown in about young women which I didn't appreciate, the implication that I "didn't understand because [I] haven't read the Koran" and all in all I felt like our ideas of feminism were wildly different.

I have thought long and hard about my reactions, and I can think of a few ways I could have argued better. Obviously a working knowledge of Islam would help. Perhaps reading some religious texts (because inevitably I'm having to argue about most major religions at some point). I need to learn to be more articulate and quick-witted in arguments, but that'll only come through practise. I guess not arguing with (even mildly) drunk people is quite a good rule of thumb. And I definitely wish we could have stuck to the one subject, but I can't remember if that was my fault or hers or just the way the conversation/argument went.

The thing is, I had no idea I was going to provoke such a response. I had honestly expected a pretty fun conversation about feminism, and it just degenerated into a shambles. I know my account of it is rubbish (memory of a sieve I'm afraid), but I was trying to get a general 'feel' of what was said by them (my opinions are already on this blog, and B may not have directly 'said' much, but she definitely actively agreed with A). So I have a couple of questions...

1. In this situation (or similar), how would you react?

2. How is it possible to demonstrate quickly and simply that the attempt to control women's sexuality is directly linked to rape and therefore controlling how women dress is never going to change the fact that rapists rape people?

3. Is there a fairly easy to understand way of explaining the whole 'fat=/=unhealthy' idea? I mean I've tried pointing out how BMI standards/categories have changed for no reason and therefore must be pretty arbitrary, but so far have only had limited success...

4. Is it possible to tell someone that they're being hideously prejudiced without causing serious offense?

5. How difficult is it to hammer home the message of people being individuals who make choices (some of which may not be the same as yours)?

And a quick point: you don't need to tell me how little I know about Islam... I already know that I know next to nothing. (Did that sentence even make sense?) Honestly I'm not that interested in it - I have pretty much zero interest in all religions and/or 'spiritual' stuff. I don't mind if people are religious/spiritual; I don't mind if they do a certain thing a certain way because of that (as long as it isn't hurting anyone); I don't mind if people of other beliefs or non-believers have to cater for their beliefs. I just don't really frame my arguments around religion, and I'm not going to argue on religious peoples' terms. I hope I don't sound aggressive here - I'm just trying to explain a little bit about why I know so little about most religions.

Today did not start well

2009-03-04T03:30:00.000-08:00

I woke up with a headache, couldn't find my dissection kit, ran out of cereal, knocked my shins off things - the whole lot. My concerns, however, are minor compared to the news today of the ways in which the recession is hitting women.

First, a report on GMTV told how a fifth of women and a quarter of men (surprise, surprise) felt that, if a business has to make some employees redundant, the the maternity-leavers and possibly the working mothers should be given the boot first. Can't be having women with children working to support their progeny, can we? Why, they may have concerns outside of making their employer rich!

With the sour taste from that little newsbit still in my mouth, I returned from classes to find this Guardian article sitting in my inbox. It's predicted that violence against women will go up as people (men) get more stressed about finances.

The attorney general, Lady Scotland, has also warned that domestic violence will rise with increased financial worries. The government booklet devotes a section to the impact of the recession on divorce, violence and family tensions.

"Economic downturns can be difficult times for family relationships. Worries about finances can create additional tension and in some cases, where couples have already decided to part, problems over selling the family home can deepen tensions," the booklet states.

It goes on to say: "Women may face threats from violent or abusive partners." Information about the state-funded services on offer for victims are set out in the leaflet, with advice about when to call for help from the police. A separate report headed "Are women bearing the brunt of the recession?" published today by the Fawcett Society echoed the government's concern, warning that "women's social and economic circumstances make them particularly vulnerable to economic downturn". The campaign group for women's rights said there had been an increase in domestic violence referrals.

Fix the economy, please. And whilst we're at it, teach those guys some better ways to manage their anger. You know, something OTHER than lashing out.

Sod today for a bundle of laughs, I'm going back to bed.

Sex =/= Rape

2009-03-03T14:10:00.000-08:00

How many times must it be repeated?

Sex is consensual, both parties are conscious and over legal age (which varies from place to place, usually hovering somewhere between 14-18 years old).

Rape is non-consensual or occurs in a situation where someone is unable to give consent (or is considered unable to give consent): anyone under legal age (a minor) is considered unable to give consent, as are people with certain learning disabilities or mental retardation (and I'm meaning that in the medical way, not meaning to cause offense). It may feature extra violence (on top of the violence of non-consensual sexual activity), or it may not.

How can anyone possibly confuse the two? You cannot 'have sex with' a four year old child. You can only rape or molest a four year old child. They are children and therefore unable to give consent. It's really not that hard to figure that one out.

I am so angry that I barely know what to say... To think that this is one incident of many (a lot of which occur in war zones) which happen EVERY DAY. It's depressing and just plain wrong. To think that the person that committed this crime is getting off with a more lenient sentence than a burglar* sickens me, and sends such a clear message about the value of women and children: "You are possessions, but even less valuable than ones of the inanimate persuasion". We might as well give up now.

UPDATE: There are no words to describe the fury I feel when I read about this.

*This is even without getting into the whole mess of issues thrown up around the motivation for most crimes involving theft - y'know, poverty. I find it more understandable and relatable that someone in the grip of poverty would turn to burglary out of desperation, but the rape of a child can never be construed as the action of the oppressed or desperate.

This belongs on Passive-Aggressive Notes

2009-03-03T13:45:00.002-08:00

Over at Good As You there is a copy of the letter sent to Jacqui Smith after the UK refused the Phelps family entry because... well I think we all know why they'd be refused entry anywhere (no I'm not linking to their site - Google them if you don't know what I'm talking about).

Just for a second I'd like to feel happy that the country I live in has done something right ^_^. Although, of course our government is still corrupt and Scotland in particular has abysmal conviction rates for rapists etc etc... Oh, all my happy feelings are disappearing pretty quickly now.

(Yeah I know this happened a while ago and I'm late to post stuff about it, but I've been busy and I still wanted to comment on it.)

Here is my attempt at embedding the code for the document up at Good As You:
20090302 Response to Jacqui Smith

Publish at Scribd or explore others: Government smith Adam Smith

A quick note

2009-02-19T19:07:00.000-08:00

As this is a group blog now, with more focus than it had before, I have decided to start posting all my opinion/frivolous stuff to a different blog: Eclectic Tastes. If you have an interest in my opinions on a wide range of subjects (music, film, books etc) then feel free to drop by. If (as I suspect) you don't, then I won't be cluttering up this blog with those kinds of posts anymore. Now begins the process of moving all the irrelevant posts from this blog to that one, or just deleting them altogether (though of course I am reluctant to after all the work I put in).

Hopefully having two separate spaces for different ideas will actually help me focus a bit more and will lead to some properly researched posts soon. Sorry for the lack of quality from me recently - I have been somewhat distracted.

A (for me) challenging read

2009-02-17T19:20:00.000-08:00

Blind Allegiance to White Women - Womanist Musings.

Not going to comment too much on it, but I have to say my initial reaction was defensiveness, going "but I don't do that" and "but I'm not like that". Evidently I still have a long way to go in learning about these issues and confronting my own privilege.

Definitely a worthwhile read.

Some stuff

2009-02-04T20:18:00.000-08:00

I sat in a room full of other aspiring medics today, attempting to take in the two-and-a-half-hour-long lesson on peak flow, the efficiency of the lungs at exchanging gases, the various methods we have to measure lung function. I understood none of it, though, as I was in the throes of a worsening headache and was feeling quite dizzy, to the point of swaying around and leaning heavily on the desk, head-in-hands. Yet, despite being surrounded by people who all wish to enter a caring profession and wishing to become a doctor myself, not only did no-one take any notice or think to ask about my behaviour, but I didn't flag my problems up and ask to take a quick break for water or air.
What separates 'alternative' models from 'mainstream' ones? Coilhouse, a blog I'd heartily recommend for those of you into your alt cultures, fashion, photography, geekery and other paraphernalia, attempts to address this question (Nudity warning). The thing I've always struggled with is brought up in the first section: the 'alternative' aspects of the model is often undermined by the cultural norms that they uphold:

1. The model who challenges society’s notions of beauty.

I love these models, but the issue here is that, while they appear to push the boundaries of beauty in some direction, they usually wind up brutally reinforcing another traditional notion in the process. For example, trans models make us rethink gender/beauty, but with their self-presentation they usually reinforce the ideal of a sleek, hairless feminine figure, thus fueling the hair-removal industry. In fact, epilator-manufacturer Philips Norelco has already found a way to to capitalize on this to great effect...

large models like Velvet D'Amour

and skinny-by-comparison but still-considered-plus-size recent ANTM winner Whitney Thompson

help to redefine weight in modeling, but what makes them “legitimately beautiful” in the eyes of the mainstream world is their “correct” bone structure, their blond hair. Without some “redeeming quality” of this sort, the world doesn’t recognize them as models, and wouldn’t even give them a shot at making a difference. Mainstream media often presents them as beautiful “in spite of,” not “because of."

Genderfork, my latest obsession after the aforementioned Coilhouse (and found through the site), is a blog that "explores androgyny and gender variance through artistic photography and other neat stuff. " Check it out.

Read This

2009-02-04T18:37:00.000-08:00

My Ecdysis: Everything in the Sink: Writing, Health, Feminism, Poetry

I may be back posting regularly soon depending on personal circumstances. If I ever needed inspiration though... that post is definitely it.

This is why American Apparel sucks...

2009-01-28T10:31:00.000-08:00

Why does the owner have to be such a misogynistic asshole?

Well I don't know, but I do know that I'm not going to buy anymore of their clothes. Aside from the advertising which I disagree with, the attitudes displayed by the owner are just a step too far for me.

I call for a boycott!

(Link is to Womanist Musings)

Legalizing Prostitution - Thinking Too Small?

2009-01-25T05:08:00.000-08:00

Reading this post about legalizing prostitution in Nevada (by Renee at Womanist Musings), I was struck as ever by the ridiculousness of the debate over whether sex work should be legal or not.

Of course it should be legal, as that enables women, men and children* working within the industry to report cases of abuse, trafficking and underage workers. Not only can they report something like that happening, something can actually be done about it as well. This is not to say that I support sex work in general - just that I don't see the point in workers being needlessly harmed and I respect the fact that some people do choose to do sex work.

But... are we thinking too small? In any talk of sex work, linked to it is usually the problem of drug abuse - people using sex work as a way to fund an existing habit, or developing the habit as a coping mechanism, or being turned onto drugs by an unscrupulous individual (eg the person that trafficked them, or their 'pimp').

So is the problem here that people are taking illegal drugs, or that the drugs are illegal?

I am of the belief that with a lot of drugs, their use in and of itself doesn't cause that many problems. What does cause problems is them being illegal, which leads to a huge black market, an explosion in crime, very dangerously cut drugs (sometimes cut with bleach, ground glass etc), and people being unable to find the help they need to get out of an expensive habit (although of course it is the fact of their illegality that makes them so pricey). It seems to me like a cycle - people turn to crime to fund a habit, not because they are just 'criminal-minded'. The people that turn to crime are often poor. How many top executives that take cocaine need to turn to crime to fund their habits?

I don't understand why drug use and sex are some huge moral debate. Yes, they can both hurt you... but so can everything else. You can die from prescription drugs, you can die from drinking too much water, you can die from walking to work. Why complicate things so much? Perhaps if (currently illegal) drugs bought from the pharmacy (once they're legal) came with information sheets warning you of possible side-effects and the best course of action should they occur, if hospitals and clinics just treated drug abuse without the moralising, if people were taught at school what a safe and unsafe amount to take would look like... Wouldn't that solve a lot of problems? Rather than being scared to call an ambulance because somebody overdosed on heroin (which incidentally is quite hard to do), it would be treated in the same way as a paracetamol overdose - stupid, but not criminal.

And then there's the social aspect - there's a huge difference between taking an illegal drug alone, and taking a legal one socially. This is why certain cafes in Amsterdam are successful, why social drinking is so prevalent, why opium cafes would be very popular if they were less stigmatised. I don't see why eating a nice meal and finishing it off with some infused cannabis leaves or a bit of opium would be such a big deal - restaurants sell alcohol don't they?

This may all be a chip on my shoulder, as I am alcohol-intolerant. I can drink very small amounts of very pure alcohol (ie vodka), but I still feel a bit sick even after my first sip, and wine... well lets just say wine and I don't get on. For me social drinking consists of me being sober (or feeling ill) surrounded by drunk people. And I find drunk people far more unpleasant than those that are stoned or on E (the only other drugs that I have been exposed to).

As regards the poverty/crime aspect of drugs - if they were available free (or at reduced price) on prescription for those on low incomes, then we could keep track of who was using them (making it a lot safer), people would not have to turn to crime to fund their habit, they could be taxed if bought full-price (like cigarettes), and we would know what was in them. If the government was in charge of growing and processing them (or developing them in a lab), it would be possible to do tests and develop the drugs even further - how about recreational drugs where it is written on the packet exactly how long the experience will last?

To me offering drugs on prescription doesn't seem like such a strange idea - in my area condoms are offered free to anyone that wants them, as are all contraceptives (though the other ones will require a consultation). Obviously not using a contraceptive can have awful life-changing consequences (an unwanted baby/abortion/STD), but if, being unable to afford the legal government-approved drugs, a person decides to instead get it cheaper from the black market... we're back to square one.

In the case of cannabis and opium you can even grow them yourself. And why not? You can already buy all the seeds you want to grow your own dope, so why not just make it legal to harvest and ingest/smoke it?

I don't think that there would suddenly be an 'epidemic' of drug use/abuse. I think that people would be likely to try drugs for the first time and decide whether they liked them. Yet again, as a personal example, I have tried three of the most widely used legal drugs (alcohol, nicotine, caffeine), and I don't like any of them. I know other people with the same opinion. Some people will do stupid things, especially young people, but they're always doing stupid things - taking illegal drugs, taking legal drugs, running across roads, getting blind drunk, having unprotected sex etc... it's just what they do.

And then there's the issue of our suppliers: most of the heroin in the country comes from Afghanistan and we can't grow the coca plant that supplies us with both cocaine and crack so it is grown in its' native South America. What is the effect on both these areas from the illegal drugs trade? Well I think the state of both of them speak for themselves - warlords, gangs, crime, trafficking, poverty, slums. If the drugs were legal and the trading transparent then people used as drug mules would not be dying from a burst container with toxic amounts of cocaine, workers could have unions and be treated like normal employees, power could be wrestled from those that have clawed their way to the top through violence and intimidation, education could be reinstated or improved for girls, boys and adults... so much good could come out of it.

I don't see sex work and drugs as separate issues - I see them as two sides of the same coin. They are often intimately connected, and very reflective of each other. I don't know that we can solve one without the other. I think that both suffer from moralising and outdated attitudes. And I think with both the government is turning people who are doing things that aren't inherently wrong into criminals despite it being none of their business. Drugs and sex work are not on a par with murder, abuse or rape, and they shouldn't be treated as such - they are things that people should be able to choose to engage in (or not), and they are things that people can stop doing. Once someone has raped they should atone - why should someone atone for their job or how they spend their leisure time?

I'm sure this is an incoherent ramble, so I will update it with references and corrections soon. I appreciate all respectful feedback on these emotive subjects though!

Disclaimer: I should probably point out that I am not meaning to imply that all or even most sex workers use drugs - just that they are often connected in peoples' perceptions.

Second Disclaimer: I am speculating on what would happen if all drugs were legalised full stop, and could be bought or precribed. Personally I would only prescribe (not sell) drugs like heroin to people who were already addicts, as this kind of program has had success in the past. And personally I would only let the milder illegal drugs be bought without some kind of documentation (eg cannabis, E).

Further Reading: Ecstasy Reconsidered, by Nicholas Saunders - I have read the first version (E for Ecstasy) and would recommend it to anyone.

*I don't believe that children can 'work' within the industry - they are being exploited, plain and simple.

FINALLY...

2009-01-20T10:13:00.000-08:00

This is the only post one needs to read on the subject.

Shakesville: 44

Obama in, Bush out.

FINALLY.

Happy New Year? + Readings...

2009-01-16T18:17:00.000-08:00

Well I'm rather late in writing a New Year's post, but I have been incredibly busy moving with a lack of access to internet. Anyways, let's hope this one is better than last one, though judging by how things are going in the world... well, I guess we'll just have to do what we can and keep hoping for the best.

Brief links for this one:

Shakesville - Guest Blogger: This Stuff Matters - Damn right it does.

Screaming Into the Void - amananta: Just exercise! *happysparklyblinking* and Enough with the Evolutionary Psychology Bullshit Already

The F-Word - Louise Livesey: Fainting, mothering and other stories...

Womanist Musings - Renee: Abortion, Femicide And Somewhere Inbetween Women's Rights

I will start posting again properly after things at home have calmed down a bit.

If You Like Anti-War Protests, You'll Love This!

2008-12-30T15:52:00.000-08:00

It seems that Israel's bombing the Palestinians again. It's retaliatory, apparently. Hamas shot first, therefore the poor little Zionists have to defend themselves.
The current death toll, according to the BBC, stands at 4 Israelis (one soldier) to over 360 Palestinians.
Um, yeah.
On top of this ever-increasing death toll, the hospitals along the Gaza strip are not only overwhelmed but are rapidly running out of supplies. Still, the bombs keep dropping, and it seems that there are no plans to stop from the Israeli leaders, with officials saying that they are prepared for weeks of action. No stopping until the Palestinian people are wiped out, it seems.

Most reasonable people would say 'I don't care who shot first, this must end NOW' and, in fact, that seems to be what everyone - EU, UN, US and Russia (the 'Quartet') - is saying. If you want to add your voice to theirs and still believe in the power of protest, Stop the War is organising a series of demonstrations across the UK (next one is on the 1st January, London, outside the Israeli Embassy, and most of the rest around the country are on the 3rd). Find out where the nearest one to you is taking place and get out there.

Merry Consumer-fest

2008-12-24T17:50:00.000-08:00

Whether you celebrate Christ's birthday, some other religious event, don't celebrate it at all, or use it as an excuse despite not being religious (like me), you can't escape the lovely festive spirit of claustrophobia and misanthropy. Hurrah.

In that vein here's a couple of things completely unrelated to Christmas:

A link

The Curvature: Yoko Ono: A Feminist Analysis - the introduction to a 5-part series, which is well worth reading.

A picture

A video

(Quick warning: You criticise Queen, you DIE, k?)

Enjoy!

Remove the Gag - Sign the petition

2008-12-20T05:42:00.000-08:00

The Global Gag Rule, implemented in 2001 when US President George W. Bush came into power, denies US funding to overseas health centres if they offer or even mention abortion, even if it's legal in that country. This means that they must stay quiet if asked, they cannot even provide basic information, and if a clinic receives funding and doesn't offer terminations but has a related clinic which does (even if that doesn't get any US money), that centre will no longer receive any money either. These centres aren't just abortion clinics, they offer basic health care, advice, family planning, maternity services. So when these clinics are forced to close due to lack of funds, entire communities are denied the basic services that they have a right to receive. Mothers are more at risk during pregnancy and childbirth. Couples receive no information on contraceptives and safe sex, leaving them more likely to contract STIs or end up with an unwanted pregnancy which, y'know, they may wish to terminate, thus driving more women to the back streets as they have no support or safer alternatives. These clinics also offer vaccinations and medicines, such as anti-malarials. Thus, the GGR has left millions of people sick and dying because of the American Religious Right's closed-minded moralistic selfishness.

There's now a petition to the President-elect, asking him to remove the GGR upon his inauguration. Sign it here.

Story via Feministing.

Oliver Postgate (1925-2008)

2008-12-09T22:36:00.000-08:00

He's died, aged 83. I don't know what to say except the world is one genius poorer now.

If you don't know who he is, perhaps you've seen some of his work:

The Clangers

Bagpuss

Noggin the Nog

Ivor the Engine

If you're of a certain generation and British you're pretty much guaranteed to be acquainted with it. If not, watch it... now. Here is the Smallfilms Treasury, where you can find out about his work with Peter Firmin. Here is the Oliver Postgate website.

His work was an integral part of my childhood, and I can't begin to describe how utterly beautiful and escapist his programmes are. Children's programmes were just better then, and all because of people like him.

He will be missed.

Why I Hate Evolutionary Psychology...

2008-12-09T20:56:00.000-08:00

A sample quote:

Many believe that men go through a midlife crisis when they are in middle age. Not quite. Many middle-aged men do go through midlife crises, but it's not because they are middle-aged. It's because their wives are.

Go on, rip it to shreds. You know you want to...

I've labelled this Hierarchy of Credibility because a lot of people believe this crap purely because of the source (someone with a PhD). I am not saying that evolutionary psychologists don't ever come up with any valid points, but I do think that they jump to conclusions far too easily and reduce people to basic desires with no compromise for rational thought or social factors. I think whatever conclusions they say should be drawn from results can be taken with a healthy dose of skepticism.

Readings...

2008-12-08T12:09:00.000-08:00

xkcd: Friends - that's now permanently on the sidebar.

Pizza Diavola: Meme: Literary Personals - I laughed ^_^.

Shakesville: War in Defense of Christmas: Day Five - it's good to see someone's taking the War on Christmas seriously.

Feministe: How Not to Have an Abortion - review of a book about self-induced abortion methods. Harrowing stuff.

Check out PostSecret before Sunday. There are some really good postcards this week, and many of them relevant to feminists (although it's hard to say what isn't relevant to feminists).

Womanist Musings:
--Gay Is The New Black - the media never ceases to amaze me.
-- WOC and The Table Scraps Of Feminism - I'm going to get working on making the blogroll and my writing more inclusive. I don't think I'm very good at it yet, but I'm trying. I hope the movement as a whole doesn't alienate potential and current feminist Women of Colour, or People of Colour in general. It would be a great loss.
-- Teaching Slavery - WTF?? Seriously what was going through that teacher's mind?

My Beautiful Cervix **Caution: Photos of Cervix** - one woman's cervix going through one menstrual cycle, documenting the changes in photos. Very educational, and fascinating. Some say it's beautiful, though personally I would disagree.

In a strange land: She'll believe what she damn well wants to believe - this may be from last month, but it put such a smile on my face I had to include it. Such a refreshing certainty of opinion.

UK viewers - check out Apparitions on the BBC iPlayer. I'm hooked! The first 4 episodes are all up, so watch them while you can. I can't get enough of Christian-themed creepiness in my viewing of choice (see: The Exorcist, The Omen etc). There's something about religious imagery that makes horror unlike any other.

After the sad ending of You Knit What??, I have recently discovered its new incarnation, You Knit What - Part 2. Finally more pictures of awful knitting with snarky comments! This is what I've been waiting for! (No, seriously I love that site) Putting it in the sidebar now...

-- Special ReBELLYon Section --

Short description of situation: Amanda Palmer's label, Roadrunner, has asked her to let them remove shots of her 'fat belly' from her latest video. She refused. Drama ensued, and so did much rallying round of supportive fans, feminists and outraged people everywhere.

Sociological Images
Shakesville: 1, 2 & 3
The F-Word
Feministing

Here's the offending video:

Oh! The FAT! It buuuuurns!

Amanda Palmer's Youtube Channel, Myspace Page and Website. Show your support there!

"Ruination to all men!"

2008-12-05T19:42:00.000-08:00

I was just watching The Avengers (1961), and it was an awesome episode entitled "How To Succeed... At Murder".

The plot:

A group of power hungry secretaries, led by a puppet called Henrietta (and her husband Henry) are killing their bosses and taking over their companies. They meet up every week at an "aerobics class" led by Henry. Their battle cry is "Ruination to all men!". Emma tries to infiltrate the group by posing as a secretary, and Steed employs another of the secretaries to see how they operate. Emma gets noticed by one of the other secretaries at work for her ambition, so is indoctrinated into the group.

Emma is (of course) discovered, and when Steed comes to rescue her he is captured too. This is all during one of the "aerobics classes" so Henry and Henrietta are also present. To cut a long story short, Steed does some talking then beats up Henry (in gentle 60s fashion) and reveals his great secret: It was Henry controlling the puppet all along!

The explanation of this is a bit long-winded and strange - turns out Henrietta was Henry's wife, who was exploited by businessmen then died (or was killed). He then decided to get together a band of women to get revenge on the evil businessmen. I think the idea behind using women/secretaries was some kind of poetic justice; letting the underdog win. The way he talks through the doll is weird - very reminiscent of Psycho - as he does seem to think it is her that's telling him what to do.

This episode is great for so many reasons:

-- The implied feminazi takeover bid.
-- "Ruination to all men!" (just try saying it out loud without smiling).
-- The way the intended feminist message got completely ruined.
-- The creepy creepy doll.
-- The fact that the secretaries couldn't think up such a complicated plan all on their own (killing your boss? Genius!).
-- The 60s fighting - Steed actually tortures one of the women by tickling her whilst she is bent over his knee. You couldn't make it up.
-- It's The Avengers. Where have you been for the last (almost) 50 years?

I cannot recommend this ridiculous episode highly enough. Every feminist should watch it.

Prop. 8: The Musical

2008-12-04T01:44:00.001-08:00

See more Jack Black videos at Funny or Die

It's being posted everywhere, and I can see why. I love love LOVE the stuff about picking and choosing from the Bible. So true.

Christmas re-post, with alterations

2008-12-03T22:27:00.000-08:00

The time has come. The Christmas season is upon us. I haven't bought a single Christmas present yet, even though it's ONLY THREE WEEKS UNTIL CHRISTMAS ZOMG! Suffice to say I've had other things to do, and I'm going to do most of my shopping online anyway.

First check out Enviroblog's "Greening Santa's Workshop" post about environmentally-friendly gifts. It has lots of useful links, especially for parents or people buying gifts for children (loads of info about safe/unsafe toy manufacturers).

Harking back to a previous post, remember to try Goodshop, which gives to charity when you shop through them. Also don't forget to check out Gooshing (The Good Shopping Guide online).

Before I re-post, I'd like to point out that I have geared this towards people in Glasgow/Scotland/Britain. Most of the links will be to UK sites, but a lot of them have a US equivalent or ship anywhere in the world. The physical shops I recommend will all be in Glasgow or London as they are the places I shop.

So, the re-posting:

Oxfam do nice gifts, and nice cards (at £2.99 for 30 cards I'm very happy). I dunno about their "unusual gifts" (i.e. things like "a goat" or "water for 20 people"), because no matter how conscientious you might be, I'm sure other people won't appreciate that kind of present. Personally, I'd rather have chocolate.

Shelter do Christmas cards, which are pretty nice, and they do sell some new stuff in their shop, but it's mostly kitchen utensils.

John Lewis cards aren't bad, and they're not too expensive either. 25% of the sale price goes to various charities as well, so you can have a little ego boost. They also have a Charity Gift section on their website, which is worth checking out.

For a foodie (in Glasgow), try shops like Peckham's, Heart Buchanan, Grass Roots etc, which all have a good selection of organic/fairtrade/locally sourced ingredients, snacks, chocolates, desserts, alcohol and more. Grass Roots also sells cosmetics, essential oils, bath soaks etc. For someone who really likes their spirits/oils/vinegars, try DemiJohn, who have lovely unusual wines, gins, liquors, olive oils and vinegars, often made by family-run small businesses and all delicious! Obviously you can never go wrong with chocolate, so try to go for fairtrade, organic and vegan chocolates if possible. Mr. Booja-Booja ones are heavenly, as are Divine chocolates.

For someone who loves makeup & cosmetics, Lily Lolo make the loveliest mineral makeup (it lasts all day, feels comfortable, is beneficial for your skin and actually protects it against the sun). Smashbox aren't too bad either, with a nice range of products. Really nice nail varnish can be bought from Zoya, all of which are formaldehyde-free. A good multi-brand website is Naturisimo which caters to both genders. For specifically men's cosmetics, you could try Male Organics, which has a range of different brands. For more expensive skincare try Origins, Liz Earle (UK) or Aveda. The best thing to do is check any brand or ingredient in the Cosmetics Safety Database.

If it's clothes you're looking for, try organic cotton, hemp, humane silk or bamboo clothing. Bamboo clothing is the best in my opinion. There are many different companies, just google them. Here's a few: 1, 2 & 3. For cotton clothes, I think Gossypium do some nice designs. I found an incredibly nice lingerie shop called Enamore, whose clothes are sold in Bolshie (Glasgow). I'd go to the Bolshie shop itself or Entrading if you don't do internet shopping. H&M and New Look do organic cotton ranges. If you're wanting to be really extravagant, try Edun (clothes) or even Beyond Skin (shoes). A good place to go for shoes, clothes, accessories and cosmetics is Bourgeois Boheme.

Onto general shops, here are some good ones:

Ecotopia
EcoCentric
Nigel's Eco Store - pretty expensive, but very stylish.
Natural Collection
Adili - do clothing (for men, women & kids), skincare and accessories.
EcoHip

Some other ideas are things like the Tefal Quickcup (flash site) and other household gadgetry. (I would probably advise against buying someone an eco-friendly iron though... that harks back to "Iron My Shirt" misogyny. Eugh.)

When wrapping your presents, why not take a tip from the Japanese and use scarves? Buy some nice ones from a second-hand shop and use them on medium-sized presents, and they provide an extra gift in themselves! Here are some instructions (also here).

Also try using or making reusable bags for the presents. The ones sold in Entrading (wrapsacks) have a unique code in them. Write it down, register the bag online, and you can watch it travel round the world. If all else fails, try reusing old wrapping paper or buy some made from recycled materials (available at Oxfam and here). Ecotopia sell reusable labels, which are good for envelopes. Also use ribbons and string to seal any paper-wrapped presents, instead of sellotape.

Christmas dinner can be made more eco-friendly by eating vegetarian/vegan or just making sure you source your meat and vegetables locally/organically from a farmer's market. For those of you living in Glasgow, information about farmer's markets can be found here.

Some vegetarian recipes can be found here, here and here. Vegan ones here, here and here. Going vegetarian/vegan is very worthwhile for you, other people and the environment. Information can be found at the Vegetarian Society and the Vegan Society if you want to read about it.

All the advice I have about Christmas crackers is - try to buy them from a charity shop, like Oxfam, an eco shop, or at least buy ones that contribute in some way to a good cause.

Another thing: the tree. It's best to buy a real one, just make sure it's local, and organic if possible. Some of the trees in that website are certified organic by the Soil Association. You must use it in compost or recycle it if you want to environmentally friendly (To find facilities, type your postcode into this website). Or you can get a reusable Eco-tree, made from cardboard. They're a lot prettier than they sound, and avaliable in white or green. Another option is a potted tree, which can be kept (alive) year after year in the pot, or planted outside, or given as a gift, or used as compost after Christmas. They're good because they won't get "tired" (I'm sure you know how annoying a carpet full of pine needles is!). In fact, why not grow your own?

To decorate it, you can try making your own decorations from card, tissue, fabric, coathangers, thread, beads... anything you can find really. Reusing old decorations is good, and exchanging your conventional fairy lights for LED ones is also good. You can learn how to make a really cool sparkly lights decoration here. Tinsel is bad, so don't buy it, but reusing it is fine. In my house we always used to have an ingenious alternative:

Buy some popcorn, and pop it using as little oil as possible. Get some thread, and a tough needle (not one you are likely to use for sewing again), and thread together a long string of popcorn. Voila, a tinsel replacement. After use you can feed it (without the thread) to birds. The same can be done with cranberries. You can even buy the popcorn version, it's called popcorn on a string (how inventive).

You can also make cool decorations from fallen pinecones and branches by spraying them gold/silver, painting them, using glitter, or leaving them natural.

Clove oranges are easy to make, smell amazing, and look really good.

Live greenery is also a good option - herbs, ivy, holly, little evergreen shrubs.

If all else fails, make sure you buy decorations that are reusable. If you can, make sure they're from a sustainable source, biodegradable and fairtrade. Nice ones can be found here, and at Oxfam. Some futuristic ones made from recycled cds and circuit boards can be found here.

Now here's my Christmas list of things that caught my eye:

John Masters Organics: Blood Orange & Vanilla Body Milk - yum! (cheaper here)
The Gamrie Goat: Goat's Milk Soap - you may think this a weird present, but check out the beautiful pressed designs and presentation.
Adili:
-- Bora Asku Pinafore Dress by People Tree (women's)
-- Playday Tunic by Frugi (kid's)
-- Creepy Crawler Double Layer by Frugi (kid's)
-- Sam Ubhi Leaf Pendant by People Tree (necklace)
Ecotopia:
-- Pinhole Photography Kit
-- Firewinder - check out this wind-powered light, it's awesome!
EcoCentric:
-- Grow Your Own (silver birch) Tree - my favourite kind of tree.
-- Pure Silk Blanket - very expensive, but worth it.
-- Organic Dinner Candles - mundane perhaps, but plant-based candles just burn so much cleaner. Not so much a gift suggestion as a decoration. (for more plant-based candles, try here)
-- Bamboo towels - yeah I know, I go on and on about bamboo. So sue me :P
Nigel's Eco Store:
-- Recycled Circuit Board Cufflinks - does it make me a geek to think these are great?
-- Paper Potter - makes little biodegradable seedling pots from old newspaper. Genius!
Natural Collection:
-- Essential Eco Bike Maintenance Kit and Green Clean - if you cycle, then you're already green. Why not green it up even more?
-- Handmade Stoneware Tea Infuser - for loose leaves, flowers, herbs etc.
Bam Bamboo Clothing:
-- Men's socks - I thought I'd just fit one of the presents into that age-old cliche. If you're going to give socks at least make sure they're present-worthy!
-- Men's T-shirt - I love the colours, especially Pewter (what can I say? I love grey!).
-- Women's EVERYTHING - I'm sorry. I just can't choose one item. I love them all!

Sleep... Or not?

2008-12-01T18:37:00.000-08:00

Was recently diagnosed with Insomnia (yet another one to add to the ever-growing catalogue of ailments in my life) and it was such a relief! Yes I did say relief!

To have someone explain why you don't sleep and why something that should be so simple - 'cause lets face it requires bugger all effort on our part whatsoever - is suddenly like Ben Nevis. You lie in bed, toss and turn and no matter what you are gonna end up staring up at that one patch of the ceiling right above your head. You've already counted the number of thumb prints left on the coven and are seriously realising how disgusting a yellow ceiling is (don't ask, young and dumb I guess).

I was lucky enough to be sent to a psychologist for a completely different matter (ME) and happened to stumble across the subject of sleep, or lack of it. He listened and blatantly told me what I already knew - insomnia. He suggested some ideas on how to make evenings easier for me:

1) Have a set routine. For example: wash, brush hair, take medication, brush teeth then get into bed.

2) If after 15 minutes in bed you find that one spot of the ceiling and yourself are becoming well acquainted - GET UP! You don't want to put yourself through any unecessary stress or discomfort.

3) Try to relax - reading is good for this.

4) If you ever have a panic attack because you can't sleep get out of your bed and go into another room for at least 15 minutes.

5) Try not to have TVs in your room. In an ideal world this would be easy but in reality we don't all have a room to our own, be it sharing with siblings, partners etc. A good way is to try and compromise - ask for the TV not to be on in the room before you go to bed - works for me (and he loves the TV)!

6) For me the most important of all! Never feel guilty if you can't sleep.

Wishing a merry night to all, be it sleepful or not :P

Because vampires are awesome, and everyone else seems to be talking about it...

2008-11-30T20:29:00.001-08:00

Yeah I'm talking about Twilight. Might even go see it, despite its awful unfeminist plot/undertones/female protagonist/yawn. I really couldn't care less - I don't go to see vampire films for the plot. They're far too awesome for that.

Does nobody else hear this quote in their head every time they see a picture of Robert Pattinson?

"Have you ever wondered if there was more to life, other than being really, really, ridiculously good looking?"

(I swear, he's doing the look!)

And let's not forget Sarah Haskins' take on vampire lust:

Check out all her videos in one post here, or go to the Current tv website (though it is harder to find her videos at the site for some weird reason).

EDIT: I have now seen Twilight, and let me tell you it was hilarious! The highlight of the whole experience was, after three 14-year old girls had cried through the entire movie, we asked them why they were crying. Their answer:

"Because he's just so hot!"

Classic. See this film, preferably surrounded by hilarious teenagers.

The Onion's Nice Guys

2008-11-27T16:59:00.000-08:00

Attractive Girls Union Refuses To Enter Into Talks With Mike Greenman

I saw this video at The Onion and immediately thought of Jeff Fecke's post about Nice Guys. And, would you believe it, someone else had the exact same idea. Spooky. The blog I found it at is called Bligbi, and it seems enjoyable. I haven't read enough of it yet to fully judge though.

Perhaps it's a case of great minds thinking alike... (Let's hope!)

THE GAYS ARE OUT TO GET YOU!!!

2008-11-21T17:54:00.000-08:00

This is too funny...

Right after I post about that Onion article, comes the real deal: "They're Coming To Your Town" (Feministing).

Who, you may (but probably won't) ask?

The GAYS.

Yup. Nothing funny about that... Excuse me while I snigger into my sleeve...

The Homosexual Agenda

2008-11-19T18:55:00.000-08:00

I know this is an old article, but I only just found it: '98 Homosexual-Recruitment Drive Nearing Goal - from The Onion.

My favourite bit:

"If we are to insidiously penetrate American society, as we constantly do each other's orifices, we need more money and resources. Without such help, this country will remain the domain of decent, moral, God-fearing Christians. And that would be a sin."

I kinda wish the 'radical gay agenda' was taught in schools.

*sigh*

Hierarchy of Credibility

2008-11-18T10:12:00.000-08:00

In sociology we are currently studying deviance. This would be defined in sociology as "any social behaviour which departs from that regarded as 'normal' or socially acceptable within a society or social context".

By that definition of course we are all deviants at some point in our lives. Anytime you break a social rule or the law you are deviating from the norm and socially acceptable behaviour.

Anyway, we started learning about a classic study: Rosenhan's "On Being Sane In Insane Places". In this study some participants (pseudo-patients) pretended to be mentally ill - faking symptoms of schizophrenia. They were all admitted to psychiatric wards, where they then stopped faking their illness and acted completely normal. The doctors interpreted the perfectly normal behaviour they exhibited as evidence of the illness, and when they were finally discharged, it was with schizophrenia "in remission".

During the course of the experiment, the other patients in the psychiatric ward were very suspicious of the pseudo-patients, and in many cases accused them of spying on the real patients.

What's interesting about this for me is that their perfectly normal behaviour was labelled deviant by an authority figure (doctors) and the norm by people with the same status (real patients). What is and isn't deviant behaviour is defined by the people in a position of power, not by other deviants.

I really liked this quote:

"If powerful institutions and powerful office holders define situations as real they are more likely to be real in their consequences."

*cough* Terrorism? *cough*

Anyway, onto this hierarchy. There are two versions:

-- Michel Foucault's --

1. Claim to knowledge is a claim to power.
2. Claims to power depend upon particular types of knowledge.
3. In modern society powerful knowledge is expert knowledge.

-- Peter Berger's --

1. The credibility of a statement depends on the social status of the speaker.
2. The higher the status of the speaker, the more credible the statement.
3. Hence credibility is hierarchically distributed.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Doesn't this sound familiar? "Credibility is hierarchically distributed"... hmmm... Makes me think of rape/DV/abuse victims, and the awful process they are put through.

"Powerful knowledge is expert knowledge"... hmmm... Definitely makes me think of the obsesity 'crisis' idea put forward by many prominent experts.

I have only given two examples, but I believe that I can apply this principle to plenty more, and I am going to do so. I am going to try starting a series of posts which I'll update when I can (be bothered). They will all be labelled "Hierarchy of Credibility" and will all link back here. Let's see how these high-status experts' views hold up to scrutiny.

Remember, there's no idea so big, no reputation so towering, no person so threatening that the truth can't be found somehow. It just requires a bit of digging and some fact-checking. We can do it!

Anti-Abortion Sites

2008-11-14T18:12:00.000-08:00

Firstly I am pro choice. Please don't judge me on the title. I believe that everyone has the right to choose what happens to her body and shouldn't be forced into decisions by anyone!

But what really pisses me off is when you're online checking your emails and a pop up comes up of a cute little baby. You have to scroll your mouse over it to close the irritating thing and then suddenly a picture of a dead foetus. What idiot thought of advertising pro-life views by making a pop up? My God, what next live executions pop ups?

The pop up sent me to a database of many pro life sites and I found www.antiabortionsigns.com to be the most horrible. I felt angry at the way women were perceived to be murderers and evil.

I'm not going to say anymore or I'll be ranting.

BACK OFF HOLLYWOOD! + Readings

2008-11-11T16:59:00.000-08:00

Please don't do it Hollywood. Please don't remake Oldboy, one of my favourite films and by one of my favourite directors (Park Chan Wook). Just... leave it alone. Please. Just leave me ONE foreign film that you haven't remade. Hasn't the past taught you anything? Ring? Dark Water? The Grudge? Do they ring any bells? Are you going to ruin the entire Vengeance Trilogy? (Note: Someone in comments said they've already bought the rights to Lady Vengeance, so I guess they're well on their way)

And just when you thought it couldn't get any worse, they're casting Will Smith in the leading role.

Will Smith.

*shakes head*

I made this shocking discovery at Racialicious.

In other blogs...

Shakesville: Stephen Lewis on violence against women - *Trigger Warning*

Feministing: Why I'm Finally Crying

Here is the video linked to in the Feministing post:

The F-Word: Birth: everyone's got an opinion - I like the entry, but I like the comment thread even more. The discussion about breastfeeding is fascinating. I do think people should have a choice, but they should also be informed and formula milk should not be advertised to them or pushed on them as it is only a serviceable, not equivalent, substitute.

Pam's House Blend: Protect your keyboards before you start this GodTube video - Oh yeah, dance the gay away. Also follow the link to the blog it was found on. The author is "an 11 on the manly scale of absolute gender" apparently. *laughs into sleeve*

A website I found through various blog recommendations: adipositivity

And in that Fat Acceptance vein, Shapely Prose: Read 'Em - A bunch of links, all of which are interesting. Seriously though, people need to be told that fat people "may" have sex and therefore need telling about risks like pregnancy and STIs? Wow.

Kinda like the way that people with disabilities don't have sex too? And definitely aren't ever kinky? Hmm...

OBAMA FOR PRESIDENT!

2008-11-04T20:05:00.000-08:00

I have stayed up until past 4am, and I'm so glad I did.

They've just announced on the BBC news that Obama is going to be the new president of the USA.

I'm just so happy. I don't know what to say.

Reading...

2008-11-04T11:43:00.001-08:00

Well, there are lots of interesting things up at The F-Word today. Go take a look. These include articles about hysterectomy, Stonewall's research on lesbians/bisexual women in the workplace, and this piece of news:

"Convicted rapist Bilal Skaf [...] is asking the NSW Court of Criminal Appeal to reduce his sentence, saying his victim - who was held at gunpoint and raped by up to 14 men - suffered no significant harm."

I am absolutely speechless. If this had happened to a man would that argument even be used? Of course not.

Meanwhile at Feministing there is a very emotional video of San Diego Mayor Jerry Sanders talking about why he has changed his views on Prop 8 [wiki].

At Pam's House Blend, there are quite a few pieces:"Bible Spice on Diversity" - has to be seen to be believed. An odd religious gathering to support "Yes on Prop 8". Ahh... those wacky fundies. Also...

On Obama's grandmother Madelyn Dunham, and her recent passing.

RIP Madelyn Dunham [1922-2008]

Kate Harding over at Shapely Prose has posted the most awesome picture of Obama at the bottom of this post, which makes me feel kinda hopeful but can't take away all the nervousness.

Racialicious: "What's the Deal with the Green Party?" - Who? Oh yeah, that's right... there aren't only 2 parties running in this election. As someone not very well-versed in American politics, I actually didn't know until a few weeks ago that there were more than 3 possibilities (Dems, GOP and whatever craaazy independent attempts to run).

Junkfood Science: "Clueless parents? Not necessarily..." - An interesting look at perceptions of children's weights. Turns out a lot of parents of underweight children think that these children are of normal weight. Is this because of the media bias towards being thin? I wonder...

And another Junkfood Science one debunking the 'calories in, calories out' school of thinking. Seriously, go read that.

Election results handy map

2008-11-03T16:15:00.001-08:00

Awesome widget stolen from Feministe (yes I stole this widget on the day before they posted it - I'm magic!).

Check out Shakesville, Pam's House Blend and Feministing for some awesome election coverage, and some slightly blub-worthy voting stories.

I'm so excited!

I feel crap

2008-11-03T03:23:00.000-08:00

All nighters are not a good idea FYI. Now I don't want to become "the one who always posts funny/cute images instead of actually writing anything" but by God I need something cute to cheer me up, and I'd be cruel if I didn't try and spread the good feeling around a wee bit, eh?

What's wrong with this statement?

2008-11-03T02:22:00.000-08:00

"All over the world, farmed animals are kept in the most appalling conditions and exploited to the limits of their endurance. Deprived of their basic freedoms, separated from their children, closely confined, forced to undergo stressful and often painful procedures, neglected, abused, ignored."

- from the Vegan Society

Not noticed yet?

Could it possibly be the bit about animals being "separated from their children"?

Reality check please. Check out these definitions of 'child'. Children are humans, not animals. Animals have young or offspring, not children.

Kind of reminds me of that whole "meat is murder thing"... yeah, maybe if the meat was human. Murder kinda has a legal definition, and it only happens between a human and another human.

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for compassion for animals. But I don't like creepy anthropomorphisms. Animals =/= humans. Not by a long shot.

Let's all laugh at the Republicans

2008-11-02T15:43:00.001-08:00

Writing about the U.S election as a U.K resident is kind of like trying to enjoy a film you can't afford to see by just listening to other people talk about it. Sure, I feel as though I'm probably missing something by not actually living over there and obsessively attending every Obama rally I can make it to, but the U.S.A's a topsy turvy nuthouse anyway, so maybe I'm better off where I am. Anyway! Enjoying the spectacle that is the 08 presidential election, we can find endless source of amusement in what lengths the candidates will go to to get media exposure, the bordering-on-bullshit facts they come up with to gain an advantage over their rival, and the "whacky" (read: scary) American public who make such a nuisance of themselves at events up and down the country.

But, for me, by far the most laughable aspect of the election has been the Republican dream team of McCain and Palin. I've been wondering if their campaign hasn't just been some brilliantly deep joke by a group of Democrat's that have secretly worked their way to the top of the Republican party. Palin was just caught out by a prank phone call from a Canadian radio presenter pretending to be French president Nicolas Sarkozy (See over there, radio prank calls don't have to be perverted and mysogynistic to be considered funny enough to broadcast).

Hell, even McCain has decided to take the piss out of himself on Saturday Night Live, ground that Palin herself already covered a couple of weeks ago. This appearance, hilarious as it is (doesn't he sound a lot like George W. Bush in that clip?) doesn't really seem to serve any beneficial purpose. Sure he's on TV, getting exposure, but it doesn't really strike me as a good idea to make observational jokes about oneself a couple of days before hoping to be elected into (supposedly) the most powerful position of authority on Earth.

I'd have preferred it if he abruptly stopped laughing and said "But seriously folks; a vote for Obama is a vote for terrorists, baby killers, faggots, communists, feminists, higher taxes, no more guns, no more fast food, ethnic power, illegal immigrants, witches, Satan, anarchy; fire and brimstone coming down from the skies! Rivers and seas boiling! Forty years of darkness! Earthquakes, volcanoes... The dead rising from the grave! Human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together... mass hysteria! Vote McCain." Or something to that effect. At least it would appease the hardcore Republican base.

Anyway, I'm hoping beyond hope that the U.S wakes up and laughs these two morons out of the race on Tuesday. We'll be in for a few laughs if they win it somehow, but then again we'll also probably be dead within 8 years (or 3 if Palin pours poison in McCain's ear, and leans on the red button.)

P.S, this:

ill doctrine: A Poem for The Young Voter

2008-11-01T15:28:00.000-07:00

I really hope American (Democratic) voters don't get complacent, because McCain winning would be a disaster of epic proportions.

Check out ill doctrine for more of this kind of video blogging. Jay Smooth makes his videos accessible and interesting, and personally I love watching them.

Dismissive doctors are dangerous!!

2008-10-31T17:37:00.000-07:00

I recently had the unfortunate pleasure of spending a week in two of Glasgow's finest hospitals: the Southern General and the Victoria Infirmary. I would love to be able to say that the staff were sensitive my disability (ME), but sadly this is not the case. There were a few nurses who made the effort to make me as comfortable as possible, but the majority of the staff didn't seem to care that a young girl was in unexplainable pain.

The gynecologists checked me out, and in due form found no cause for the pain so they sent me home in pyjamas with a rather large bag of pain killers and a note saying PLEASE DON'T SEND HER BACK!! I couldn't help but wonder why. Was it that I actually needed help doing tasks like getting to the bathroom, getting in and out of bed and showering when most women in the ward didn't?

Two days later the pain was getting worse. After collapsing in the bathroom, my mother decided enough was enough. A quick call to NHS24 and a helpful GP told us I most likely had appendicitis. Left sitting in A&E for hours I was finally given a bed. I relaxed and was reassured things would get better in the morning. By God, that was a massive heap of donkey shit! The doctor was the most patronising, ignorant monkey I've ever had the displeasure of meeting. He didn't have the good grace to speak to me, he had the firm belief that speaking to me through his med students was acceptable. Thanks to this man I was left on morphine for three days being told I was suffering from extreme period pain. Now come ladies, you know what periods are like and we know when something ain't a fucking period!

The pain continued to get worse and the doctor continued to palm me off with excuses despite an ultra-sound showing my appendix was inflamed on my first day in hospital. "It's your coil!" "You're ovulating!" "You're constipated!" (with the squits for 3 days i don't think so!)
No-one believed me! I saw a doctor once a day and was left in pain all day! Finally they decided to operate and discovered my appendix had ruptured. It was a miracle that I survived the operation.

On the two days recovering I met a young guy - around the same age as me - who had the same operation. He had the same pain, same place and his charts when admitted were the same as mine QUERIED APPENDIX! My question was why was he more of a priority?

Because he had a penis?
Because he could walk?
Or because the surgeon liked him more?

Whatever way you look at it the doctor was unprofessional and the result being my life was put on the line. An operation that should have been an hour was nearly 4.

I have had many positive experiences from medical staff, but negative ones too. Ask questions! If you are not sure, do not accept being told that a nurse will explain it to you later! Simply tell the doctor that you would like him to tell you!

And finally - COMPLAIN! The only way changes will be made in the NHS, which is a fantastic service, (I want to make it clear I am not complaining about the NHS - but the doctors and consultants who are unprofessional!) but incidents like these and others mentioned in the previous posts must be reported!

Dismissive Doctors, part II.

2008-10-31T10:02:00.000-07:00

Before I start off with my own wee stories, here's an article from Feministing. Basically, when men and women went to their doctors presenting with the same symptoms, women were more likely to be misdiagnosed as merely 'stressed', whilst men were sent to a cardiologist are given prescriptions for heart disease. Heart problems are a BIG KILLER, and the fact that women are more likely to suffer because of a pervasive attitude that we're all hysterical hypochondriacs is horrifying.

---

Okay, recently I registered with a new GP, following my father's recommendation. My first impressions are very positive indeed. He was patient, listened to my concerns and didn't wait for me to mention that I was a medical student before taking me seriously. He took two blood samples to run several tests.
The reason for my switching was due my experience at my previous GP's practise. I made an appointment after suffering a rather nasty cold and coughing up a lot of solid stuff for months after I'd been treated for tonsillitis.
The GP who saw me wasted no time in reminding me that he had house visits to make whilst I was going over my symptoms - you know, the important things which can indicate what might be wrong with you? He was a busy man, and I was clearly wasting his time. I didn't have a history of going to the doctor for every little thing - in fact, before my tonsillitis, the last time I'd received any medical treatment had been when I'd broken my arm, oh... 9, 10 years ago? I'm generally a healthy person, getting perhaps one cold a year and shaking it off in a week, so coughing up thick sputum for 3 months was concerning for me. The GP who saw me for the tonsillitis is also a busy woman with a waiting list the length of my arm due to her popularity, and she was still able to sit down and listen for 5 minutes. But nope, brushed off. 'Have you been sleeping (no, I've been coughing my lungs up), have you tried getting into a routine, hot milk, reading, (for goodness' sake, yes, I always go to the doctor as a LAST RESORT!) and you say you're tired all the time... well, I guess I should look at your blood, you look a bit pale, breath into this now, move along dear, I think you're fine'.
I was told to come back at the end of March if I was still ill because then it might not be a viral cough. Needless to say, I did not want to see this man again, so I didn't go back and got better around August, having been constantly ill for 9 months. So I've been completely well for 2 months this year. When I got ill again (see here) I stuck it out for as long as possible, then went to see my father's GP.
Someone else I know, another medical student in Aberdeen, went to see her doctor after months of problems. She was told it's probably just stress, lots of you girls get hormonal and stressed like this.
Well, maybe, but she's a) a MEDICAL STUDENT who knows what's normal for herself and what isn't, and b) when you're having problems for months at a time, perhaps you could do with a bit of help because it's clearly not just 'a phase'.

Rant rant rant. The GP should be someone you feel will help you when you're sick, who can maybe explain to you what could be wrong and, if medication isn't required, to give you a few options on how to cope. They have a duty of care. They shouldn't just brush people off, and when all the people I know who have had such negative experiences with their GPs have been WOMEN, well, colour me concerned. This has to stop.

Q: Doctors being dismissive because of gender?

2008-10-29T13:35:00.001-07:00

Because I felt I had a bit to say about doctors being dismissive of certain symptoms especially with women, I thought I would pose a question (or two) to allow others to share their experiences:

Have you ever experienced what you felt to be sub-par treatment because of your gender?

Have you ever felt the doctor was very dismissive of problems which were important to you and affecting your day to day quality of living?

Have you ever had particular problems (esp. of female 'parts' or more 'feminine' illnesses such as cystitis etc.) that you felt were dismissed because they were "Women's Problems"?

------------------------------------

I know that I have encountered very unhelpful attitudes in health professionals when it comes to problems like cystitis and thrush. As someone with a rather crappy immune system (long story - basically too many unfinished courses of antibiotics in childhood), and prone to low-level illness, I have experienced both a LOT, and have been reduced to tears by the effect on my day to day life (yeah, painkillers don't work on cystitis). I feel like the doctors did not take me seriously at all, and seemed to doubt my account of my own symptoms. When really pushed, they would prescribe me medicines which I could have just bought myself at the pharmacy without their help.

Getting the medicines free was nice, but I would have appreciated something stronger and less of the patronising attitude towards the steps I'd taken myself:

Yes, I had been drinking vast amounts of water per day.
Yes, I had tried drinking cranberry juice (sweetened and then unsweetened once I'd found some) and taking cranberry pills.
Yes, I had tried taking painkillers, different types and strengths.
Yes, I take a probiotic supplement and eat probiotic yoghurt.
Yes, I've taken a huge dose of Vitamin C in the hopes that it might do something.
Yes, I'm avoiding sugar, caffeine (can't tolerate) and alcohol (can't really tolerate) - I do that pretty much all the time anyway.
Yes, I have tried not having sex, but honestly I would rather not stop and instead want this cured as soon as possible!

It may sound like they were just being considerate, but to contrast here is the basis exchange between my dad (I don't speak German) and a pharmacist in Switzerland when I had acute cystitis:

"How painful?"
*Dad points at me crying*
"How long has she had this?"
*Dad asks me and translates*
"Take these pills 3 times a day, drink this tea 5 times a day and aim for 2 litres of water a day."
*Sells us pills and tea quickly*

How efficient and painless was that? Not only did they give me the most effective medicine I've ever taken, but they didn't ask me bullshit questions about drinking cranberry juice, because clearly I wouldn't be going to a professional if I could cure it myself.

So that's my rant over. I'm curious to know other peoples' experiences, and I'm sure some of the other contributors to this blog have some stories to tell *HINT HINT*.

"Let's face it, women looove abortions..." + other reading

2008-10-29T12:07:00.000-07:00

Check out this clip on Feministing. It's the Daily Show, with Sam Bee totally ripping apart John McCain's "women's health" air quotes.

My favourite quote:

"'Haemorrhages,' severe 'uterine infections,' 'dying,' blah, blah, blah, blah, blah."

'Tis funny.

Other things I've been looking at recently:

The Rotund: A lovesong to my stretchmarks.

Susie Bright's Journal: The Internal Clitoris— What a Woman's Cock Really Looks Like. --- I would seriously recommend this to anyone who's still confused about the G-Spot debate or any other aspect of female sexual anatomy.

Shakesville: Ice, Ice Baby. --- Seeing McCain and Palin attempting to smile at one another? Absolutely priceless.

Feministing: Women's heart disease misdiagnosed as stress? --- This is something I have a real issue with, because I have been (mis?)diagnosed with stress many a time, and the doctor has recommended various useless things like "try going for brisk walks" or "take relaxing hot baths" when what I had were problems with a physical basis and a simple cure (like chronic cystitis - how long do I have to have it before they will prescribe me antibiotics or refer me to a specialist?). The stress stems from the fact that I have/had problems that they are/were ignoring!

Like Flight of the Conchords? Then check out Ronald Chevalier, the newest creation from Jemaine Clement.

Also my new favourite video from The Onion:

Cindy McCain Claims Sheâ��s â��Just Like Any Other Female Humanâ��

When she says that bit about John McCain's outer shell having "not yet calcified" I couldn't suppress a "Hah!".

'I'm totally supportive of disabled people, but research that may help them is frivolous.'

2008-10-27T14:55:00.000-07:00

'Sarah Palin' and 'science' rarely share a room together in a positive fashion, and now is no exception. Check this out.

TRANSCRIPT:
"This is a matter of how we prioritise the money that we spend, the public dollars that we already have and are spending - this is a matter of re-prioritising. We've got a $3 trillion budget in this country and Congress earmarks $18 billion for their pet political projects and that, right there, is more than the shortfall to fully fund IDEA. Where does a lot of that earmarked money and up, anyway? You guys have heard some of the examples of where those dollars go, you've heard about the bridges, you've heard about, um, these-some of these pet projects, they really don't make a whole lot of sense and... and sometimes these dollars go to projects that have little or nothing to do with the public good... things like fruit-fly research in Paris, France - I kid you not! *smirks*"

Oh, my! Those crazy academics and scientists with their jars of flies, they're just so removed from the realities and interests of the public! We're getting ill, and poor, and you guys are living it up with the cheese-eating surrender-monkeys watching insects and ignoring us!

Unfortunately for Palin, this is possibly the worst example she could have chosen - because fruit-fly research, far from being 'frivolous', has yielded some of the most important scientific findings relating to genetics. Drosophila melanogaster is easily bred and cross bred, has a short, easily-observed lifespan, shows a good range of mutations and was the creature employed by Nobel-prize-winning Thomas Hunt Morgan to demonstrate the way genes are passed on in our chromosomes. Scientists are currently using fruit flies in autism research - something that Palin says she will make every effort to help with. It is also very important to know how best to deal with fruit flies in agriculture, considering how much harm they can do. Cut funding of these 'frivolous' things and you impair medical research into conditions which affect millions of people and make things harder for farmers, which in turn will impact upon the public as their food becomes more expensive, scarce, or of poorer quality. GO YOU!

I learned about fruit flies in Standard Grade Biology - in high school, around the age of 15. It's a really basic, really important creature. Now, either Palin has been so staunchly anti-science all her life that she has somehow failed to ever find out the importance of Drosophila (and didn't bother checking her facts before her speech) or she genuinely believes that genetic research is unimportant. You decide. If she DOES know how important it is scientifically, she clearly hope the US public will NOT know and will just blindly hop on the old 'anti-elitist' bandwagon that is currently hounding academics everywhere. I'm pretty sure there are smart non-scientists across the pond who know how insulting this is.

The Republican candidates seem to get ever more horrifying with each successive election.

Fun: '08 Presidential Election Simulator

2008-10-23T16:10:00.000-07:00

Check it out.

You can run it again and again, with different results each time. Funny thing is, all the times I've run it Obama has won.

Hurrah!

Sarah Haskins

2008-10-13T20:11:00.000-07:00

I haven't been all that quick to post videos of Sarah Haskins doing Target Women, not because I don't like it, but because everyone else already posts it so I didn't see the point. But now I'm going to post all of the videos up to and including the most recent one. Because even if no one else does, I want to be able to find them in one place.

I'm reading... [2]

2008-10-11T16:57:00.000-07:00

Because I'm starting to get into the groove of 'serious' blogging again, and just in case you're interested, here's my current pick of the articles I've been reading. Not all of them are new, but they're all interesting (to me at least):

"Obama Talks Tough About Afghanistan; Here's What He's Really in For" on Alternet - It's just awful what's happened and is happening in Afghanistan. My heart goes out to the people there, it really does.

A film I'd recommend watching about the Taliban in Afghanistan is Kandahar (IMDb). It was made in 2001, and is a partially-true story of an Afghan-Canadian woman returning to Afghanistan to find it overrun by the Taliban. It's slow-moving, but unforgettable.

Spraying an irritant into the midst of Islamic women and children in a mosque is apparently "No[t] evidence of hate crime". - Yeah, right. Via Muslimah Media Watch.

The same story as above, but via Racialicious. - Offers more opinions and links on the story.

"Thankyou, Feminism" from Me and My Army - Perhaps an unusual post, thanking feminism for the ability to say 'no' and not be pressured into sex before you're ready. Absolutely true though, and I'd say it's important reading if you equate feminism and sexual liberation with sex being the only option.

"Distance Isn't Merely Miles" from Shakesville. - An article by a sociologist (yay!) about LGBTQI homeless youth, pointing out that they make up 20-40% of all homeless youth.

"Everyone's an expert, and nobody's right" from Shapely Prose. - Just the revolutionary idea that perhaps one person or group of people don't actually know what's best for everyone; dietary requirements, exercise, weight etc etc. I do believe they're onto a winner there. I must admit I do find it hard to not tell other people how to live their lives, and I don't know if it's a result of being socialised into that, or just being particularly pompous. This has strengthened my resolve to stop doing that though.

And the website that I'm now addicted to: The Straight Dope. If you read New Scientist, it's like the Last Word column. It's humorous, informative and I can't stop clicking on 'random article'. Ask them a question about pretty much anything, and they'll try to answer it.

Special section on the American election

Shakesville: L'état, c'est moi - Sarah Palin's deception and nepotism.

Pam's House Blend: Palin Unlawfully Abused Power, Obama: Why won't McCain bring up Ayers to my face?, "That one." - Yeah, there's quite a few articles from their blog, but it's a good one and always makes valid points.

Feministing: The VP Debate in Ten Easy Minutes - Slightly terrifying. Is Palin for real?

I think if I hear the words "maverick", "nuculer", "Joe Sixpack" or "hockey mom" again I'm going to scream. It doesn't answer the question! I don't care how 'ordinary' you consider yourself to be (despite being rich and white and a politician). I don't want my (or other countries') politicians to be 'ordinary' - I want them to be exceptional! I want them to be far more intelligent and perceptive than me or most of the population.

Awesome: Make your own moisturiser

2008-10-09T19:52:00.001-07:00

I just read this article, which tells you how to make a really simple moisturiser that can be customised to fit. Seems like a great idea to me. I think I'm going to try it.

Ingredients are olive oil, water and emulsifying wax, at a ratio of 1:5:1.

Just boil the water, melt the oil and wax in a bain-marie (or equivalent), and mix them together thoroughly. Then pour into your container of choice and allow to cool with the lid off, though occasionally stick it back on a shake it to keep it mixed as it cools.

Voila!

Your own moisturiser. I have to try this. Looks like it could save me money, be really eco-friendly, and allow me to custom-design my own moisturisers. After trying the basic recipe I'm planning on customising it with:

-- Argan oil
-- Glycerin for extra humectant properties
-- Essential oils (surprise! I'm going to see if I can get away with trying it, anyway... it will probably bring me up in a rash, but here's hoping!)
-- [EDIT: Don't even think about trying hemp oil - it smells revolting!]
-- Evening primrose/Starflower oil
-- Squalane (plant-derived) for added awesomeness. Our natural sebum is said to contain squalene (squalane is hydrogenated squalene).

I'll probably end up with a combination of all of them, with only 1 or 2 drops of essential oil. I'm really looking forward to trying it, as it sounds really simple and I've been looking for a body moisturiser but just haven't managed to find one I like.

Oh, and one last thing: I bet it would make a great baby moisturiser. Just sayin'.

Wildlife Photography in Europe

2008-10-09T19:43:00.000-07:00

There's a new media initiative trying to show how much beautiful wildlife there is in Europe. If you're anything like me, you grew up watching documentaries depicting all sorts of gorgeous, fascinating creatures from Africa, China, Malaysia, South America, the Arctic Circle etc etc... but never really thinking about the variety of wildlife in your native continent.

The photographs are beautiful, the aims of the initiative are great. Check it out: Wild Wonders of Europe.

Late birthday present!

2008-05-24T05:33:00.000-07:00

I thought my neighbours had forgotten all about my birthday, but it turns out they hadn't. They got me the coolest present!

Code Green: Experiences of a Lifetime (Lonely Planet)

It's about eco-holidays - volunteer work, preserving places through tourism, low-impact travelling etc etc. I have already picked out my favourite destinations from the selection. Want to know what they are? Probably not, but here they are anyways:

- Iriomote, Japan (the "Japanese Galapagos" full of mangrove swamps and stuff)
- Waipoua, New Zealand (really really old forest, with night-tours and KIWIS!!!)
- Oulanka National Park, Finland (complete wilderness, with free huts which anyone can stay in. Not everyone's cup of tea, but definitely mine!)
- Vava'u, Tonga (swimming with whales! By doing so you conserve them as well ^_^)
- Ranomafana National Park, Madagascar (lemurs... what more can I say?)

So those are my top 5 choices in no particular order. I'm looking forward to saving up and getting to at least one of them! I can't choose a favourite, but I do know that Finland is the most practical, cheapest and definitely the most environmentally friendly. I could even go there via Europe, using public transport, if I had the nerve.

It's a great book, and I'd highly recommend it.

Women: Pee standing up

2008-05-21T12:21:00.000-07:00

The summer's coming up, which means holidays, sun, festivals and the great outdoors. One thing which really struck a chord with me when reading was the need to urinate standing up because of unsanitary toilets or complete lack of toilets (or the desire to avoid the vulnerability which comes with squatting/sitting). Sometimes standing is the best option. Here are the best Female Urination Devices I found:

Shewee - £6-10 depending on colour
- "liquid-repellent" recyclable polypropylene
- available in different colours/styles
- machine washable up to 120 degrees

Whiz - £8.50
- soft+bendy antibacterial hydrophobic biodegradable elastomer
- white or purple
- machine washable up to 40 degrees
- available on the NHS

NOTE: Both are reusable, as I think that's more environmentally friendly. Urine is sterile when it leaves the body, so don't worry about reusing it. It's not as gross as you think.

Also I have read on the sites that these devices are really useful for pregnant women, women with joint problems, incontinence and certain disabilities. Good for getting urine samples too... in fact there's one designed to do just that.

Love baseball boots?

2008-05-20T19:08:00.000-07:00

Love being ethical?

Don't buy Converse then (here is why). Here are some alternatives:

Ethletic
No Sweat
Underground England (not as ethical as the other two, but better than Converse)

Ta-daa!

Easy solution.

Picture: No Sweat Classic Black High-Top

A happy post

2008-05-20T16:43:00.000-07:00

So I'm happy because MPs have voted against reducing the abortion time limit in the UK. Hurrah! Let's celebrate with some happy links:

Shakesville: Name That Cult Movie

And in that vein, a great video of clips from Vegas in Space:

[linky]

Retrojunk (Hey, I remember that!)

Apostrophe Protection Society

Currently my favourite webcomic: xkcd

A new shop to add to my favourites: Love Those Shoes

("Which ones do you have?" I hear you cry... silently. Well, the lovely friend who introduced me to them also bought me a pair of sandals off there today! They should arrive in a couple of days, and I can't wait. They are "Lili Black" by Redfoot. I love them. I shall fold them, keep them in my bag and cherish them.)

Dante Bucci playing the hang:

[linky]

My new favourite band (Scanch) and song (Letterman), at least for this week:

[linky]

And possibly the cutest video/song of all time ("Button" by Shugo Tokumaru):

[linky]

I'm reading...

2008-05-18T06:36:00.000-07:00

Blogs/internet:

"The Tyranny of Tolerance" at The Burning Times

"Osama bin Laden threatened us! Why aren't we freaking out!!" at Shakesville [NOTE: Probably because he's been dead for years.]

Ninjabi (really cool Muslim Manga comic, which I found here)

"Sexual Negotiation for the Long Haul" at Scarleteen

Books:

"Why I am not a Christian: And Other Essays on Religion and Related Subjects" by Bertrand Russell (not the 'Kindle' edition) [NOTE: The essay "Why I am not a Christian" can be read for free here.] I would highly recommend it to anyone.

"Gridlock" by Ben Elton. I'm afraid I can't get enough of reading Ben Elton's stuff. It's incredibly witty, fast-paced, he's obviously very intelligent and it's just so easy to read. He may be flippant and occasionally *slightly* arrogant (ahem), but it's too enjoyable to not read.

"Irreligion: A Mathematician Explains Why the Arguments for God Just Don't Add Up" by John Allen Paulos (can you detect a slight theme in my current books?)

Right now I'm interested in philosophy. Probably something to do with my partner studying it at university. At first I slightly ridiculed him for picking (what I thought was) such a useless subject, but the more I learn about it the more I enjoy it and see how it contributes so much to our lives and society. I'm very interested in arguments for why God doesn't exist because I've become quite tired of randoms in the street trying to convert me, and so I thought I'd read up on it and destroy their arguments in one fell swoop. As a life-long agnostic I find the whole thing quite tiresome. I don't feel any need to develop a moral code based around any kind of religion, I think it's perfectly easy to live without it. If I had to align myself with a group it would probably be Humanists.

Anyways I thought I might make this a fairly regular update because it's good to share stuff like this - books, blogs of interest, thoughts and the like.

Hurrah, a petition.

2008-05-17T13:49:00.001-07:00

Well I haven't linked to petitions for a while, so here's a good one:

Petition to set up a 24hr national (UK) helpline for victims of rape/sexual assault.

Please sign it, it only takes a couple of minutes and then you can go about your day. They only need 200 signatures for the government to respond, and as I type they're up to 161.

Oh, and some other ones in case you're interested:

Cut VAT on smoothies to encourage five a day. (I've linked to a similar one in my 'petitions' sidebar thingy.)

Stop seeking to further extend pre-charge detention. (Yet again, I have linked before in sidebar.)

No more changing the clocks! (An issue close to my heart... seriously, what is the point? Japan manages fine without it, as do most other countries. Why are we so silly?)

Anyways go look for some other petitions to sign if you can be bothered - you do have to sift through a lot of ill-informed rubbish, but it can be worth it. Sometimes.

Enjoy (hopefully) making a difference!

Awesome

2008-05-09T04:23:00.000-07:00

Here's some really nice 40s/50s style underwear, hosiery, swimwear and corsets:

WhatKatieDid.com

Ah, in case you were wondering I absolutely adore corsets and fashion from the 20s through to about the 60s. Also burlesque stuff. I don't know if perhaps I'm being a 'bad feminist' but it's mostly an aesthetic thing...

Ahh, my kind of swimsuit:

P.S. Also try Dolly Dagger for dresses if you have similar taste to me. Some of their stuff is... um... not so great, but the dresses are lovely! And Stop Staring! has outstanding retro dresses. Absolutely gorgeous.

Chanel make me laugh

2008-05-05T07:43:00.001-07:00

Here's a quote taken from their sensitive skin line (emphasis mine):

"Heat, cold, sun, wind, pollution, hair removal, harsh physical and mental factors – women’s skin is like women themselves: sensitive."

I was about to write a gushing post about their factor 50+ facial sunscreen, but this just caught my eye and I couldn't help but laugh. If you're still interested in the sunscreen, it's called UV ESSENTIEL, and it's soothing, non-greasy, doesn't leave white marks and absorbs into the skin perfectly. It uses mineral-based sunblocks, and it's made specially for sensitive skin. It costs..... erm.... a lot (£50 for 30ml!!!).

You can get free samples at outlets though. I got a teensy little free sample from John Lewis, and it's enough for maybe 3 facial applications. Very cute.

Gaming For Charity

2008-04-27T05:40:00.000-07:00

Just discovered this cool website where you play free flash arcade games and it donates money to charity. Simple as that. The linky graphics for this are too big to fit in my sidebar, so don't forget to bookmark them!

I'm not into games, but it looks pretty fun to me. Hopefully some gamers can shed some light on the quality of the games offered.

Oh, and if you like that, then there's also Free Rice (in which you play word games to give rice to starving people), and then there's The Hunger Site, in which you just click to give free food, or go to the tabs at the top of the page and choose your cause (Breast Cancer, Literacy, Rainforest etc). I have tried to put a little linky graphic in my "Things" section in the sidebar, but it won't work for some reason. Until I can get it to work, there is only this one link, so bookmark it!

The free rice game is addictive, so be careful when and where you start playing!

Population Problem

2008-04-18T12:47:00.000-07:00

We all know about climate change, mass starvation, AIDS etc etc... but one of the core problems facing us today is that of uncontrolled population growth.

I just discovered the Optimum Population Trust, which has some very interesting graphs, statistics, links, petitions and general information on this subject.

So the only real solution to overpopulation is imposing a limit on the amount of children people can have, right? It would certainly beat dying of starvation and famine.

Reading about this is kinda depressing, but it does raise a couple of (in my opinion) funny questions:

- What were those arguments for abstinence-only sex education again?
- Why shouldn't gay people adopt?
- What, exactly is wrong with abortions?

It also makes me think that all contraception everywhere in the world should be free, especially in third world countries, where most of the population growth is occurring. Although, of course it really should be free anyway, just like menstrual products should (though that probably needs a post of its' own).

So I guess to be really 'green' it's best to just adopt. Or kill yourself (joke!).

Quote of the day

2008-03-18T17:42:00.000-07:00

"Feminism is a way of looking at sex that, unlike any other philosophy, assumes that there is much importance to be found in the sex act, and the sexual separation of human beings. To defend the idea of prostitution by lowering our views of intercourse to the point where it can be happily bought and sold is to also accept just as happily the idea that a woman is an object.

I don’t understand why it’s OK for men to objectify and use a woman as long as he pays for it. It should never be OK." - a comment on I Blame The Patriarchy.

Damn right. I can't stress how much I agree with this. The more I read about prostitution and pornography the less I accept them, and the more I absolutely hate the whole idea.

"Corrective rape"

2008-03-12T15:46:00.000-07:00

This makes me feel sick, it really does. Male pupils are raping lesbian pupils to "make them heterosexual". Disgusting.

Ukuleles are made of win

2008-03-10T17:26:00.000-07:00

Observe:

Not to mention that Bret McKenzie of Flight of the Conchords fame plays one...

Don't you just love them?

Some happy stuff

2008-02-20T14:58:00.000-08:00

So I was reading Positive News today, kinda in need of a lift. I found out about this project, which is to plant Kiri trees in Texas to take out the pollution in the soil and make it habitable again (it's like a desert in some places - an artificially induced one).

Also I found these guys, who are amazing. I can't get enough of good percussion.

Then I watched Skins on youtube, which was actually good quality (for once), and made my day.

Also I read this. Also this. Let's all laugh at Rumsfeld and the fundies.

I'm in such a good mood now ^_^.

More craftiness

2008-02-17T06:38:00.000-08:00

This is a very tiny update, but I just found two of the coolest resources for crafty things.

The first one is Threadbanger. Their charming tagline is "DIY OR DIE!". It certainly made me laugh, and is pretty motivating too. They show you how to make things you'd actually WANT, which is refreshing. They're also on YouTube.

For the more Gothic DIYer, there's Antimony & Lace.

I'll keep updating as I find more resources and interesting information. Go get crafty!

Drugs Drugs Drugs

2008-02-11T02:07:00.000-08:00

Did anyone else watch "Britain's Most Dangerous Drug" (a Horizon programme for BBC)?

It was fascinating. Didn't really make me rethink a lot of my opinions, as I knew a lot of the stuff on it already. I'll give some highlights though:

"Smoking kills more [UK citizens] than drugs, alcohol, HIV, suicide, car crashes and homocide combined."

"Alcohol kills more than all illegal drugs combined."

"Ecstasy was patented to control bleeding from wounds."

"LSD was developed to help schizophrenics."

"Nicotine could be more addictive than heroin."

Here's the final order given for drugs, judged on addictiveness, physical danger and social consequences (1 being most dangerous):

1. Heroin
2. Cocaine (inc. crack)
3. Barbiturates
4. Street Methadone (heroin replacement)
5. Alcohol
6. Ketamine (horse tranquilisers)
7. Benzodiazepine/Diazepam (Valium)
8. Amphetamines
9. Tobacco
10. Buprenorphine (opioid/heroin replacement)
11. Cannabis
12. Solvents (glue, aerosols etc)
13. 4MTA (ecstasy-like replacement, aka "Liquid Ecstasy")
14. LSD (acid)
15. Methylphenidate (Ritalin)
16. Anabolic steroids
17 GHB (date rape drug)
18. Ecstasy (MDMA)
19. Alkyl Nitrite (Poppers)
20. Khat (Somalian plant)

Wow. So the figures for deaths from smoking (tobacco) and alcohol are:

Smoking = 114,000 UK deaths per year.
Alcohol = 40,000 UK deaths per year.

Let's put this in perspective then. Smoking kills the equivalent of the population of Cambridge every year. That's quite a lot. Alcohol may not kill as much, but is responsible for 180,000+ UK hospital admissions per year.

Other known deaths per year (UK):

Heroin = 700+
Cocaine = 214
Barbiturates = 20
Street Methadone = 295
Ketamine = 1
Benzodiazepine = 406
Amphetamines = 35
Buprenorphine = 2
Cannabis = 1
Solvents = 50-60
GHB = 3
Ecstasy = 27

Kinda puts it all in perspective doesn't it? I know that alcohol and tobacco are much more widely used than most of these, but still... I think a lot more should be done about those deaths since they make up such a large proportion of the population (comparatively speaking). I would like to add that, despite Ecstasy having 27 UK deaths per year, those deaths will not be directly from the drug itself - either they die from dehydration or from it being cut with something toxic. I have read plenty of reputable sources on this (ask for references if needed).

Anyways, any thoughts on the "drug problem"/"drug epidemic"?

Violence Against Women - Not a Problem?

2008-02-03T19:36:00.000-08:00

Amnesty International begs to differ.

As does this blog.

And this blog.

And this website.

Oh, the list could go on and fucking on. Here's how to help:

Click this link, which takes you to the Fawcett Society. Join Amnesty International. Find yourself a petition or create one that you think will make a difference here.

Don't ever rape or assault a woman. Don't ever let one of your friends get away with it. Always report violence, whoever the perpetrator is, and whoever the victim is.

Masculinity

2008-02-02T17:32:00.000-08:00

I have just read the most thought-provoking essay by Robert Jensen (associate professor of journalism at the University of Texas in Austin), entitled "Sexuality, masculinity and men's choices". Another article I read (though not as long), was "Wake-Up Time" over at the always interesting Shakesville. Oh, and I'll throw in this extra one about WWE and the media's effect on perceptions of masculinity.

Have you read them yet? I hope you have. There's no point in me going on if you don't bother to read the texts that make my brain start actually thinking a bit harder than normal (it got me out of the usual scanning-induced stupor that I go into from reading too many blogs).

Anyways, they are both in their own way concerned with masculinity - the first with masculinity, sexual violence, porn culture and the negative impact it has on both genders; the second with dissecting a strange argument about how feminists have made boys/men lazy and unmotivated.

They got me to thinking about the nature of masculinity, and the way it constricts men's actions. Say some of the ideas you associate with masculinity or manliness, and you'll probably come up with things like: strong, tough, independent, athletic, dominant, efficient, firm, controlled, good with his hands, rugged... the list could go on. I feel that the definition of masculinity in most peoples' minds is just to narrow-minded to incorporate the full spectrum of what it means to be a man. I know I can't talk from experience here (for obvious reasons), but I do think when it comes to stereotyping people forget that it cuts both ways and BOTH are detrimental to everyone.

In the second article (Wake-Up Time), the author (Jeff Fecke) talks about men being perceived as immature and emotionally stunted. I think he's onto something there, because although there are exceptions, the general feeling I get from the media is this idea of men only forming relationships with women for sex/offspring, and falling neatly into categories like "family man", "lazy bum" or "overly-sensitive [insert feminine insult]". Boys are sent such conflicting messages about their identity that I'm surprised when they don't settle into some sort of "safe" stereotyped idea of masculinity. To challenge what masculinity means to yourself means enduring ridicule and uncertainty.

Another point he raises is about the "man-child" idea - that is, men who don't develop emotionally, and/or don't bother learning certain lifeskills (cooking, cleaning etc). He argues that this is because from an early age we are socialised into believing that women will do it for men. There is also this idea that men "only want to have fun", so women become this kind of parent figure to their own partners! It's ridiculous that this should ever happen, but the author himself admits to treating his ex-wife as such, and I've certainly observed it myself in relationships around me. Men are perceived as being practical (eg DIY, cars, engineering), yet useless when it comes to simple tasks like cooking themselves a meal or cleaning the bathroom. I don't know if this portrayal is very representative of most men, but I certainly find it strange, and were I a man I would find it restrictive and offensive!

Back to this idea of men wanting to just have fun, and we get to consoles, sports, WWE, computer games etc. I'm not saying that these things are inherently bad in and of themselves (I'll save judgement of them for another, better informed time), I'm just wondering what it is that makes these things generally speaking considered "masculine" pursuits. Is it the violence? Is it the competitiveness? Is it the aggression? Is it the dominance?

Well yes. It is.

But why? Why should violence be such a masculine trait? Personally I would not want to identify myself with any description which includes violence, but by trying to live up to this unattainable ideal of masculinity as portrayed in the media all around us, people end up actually committing violent acts - assault, homocide, rape, domestic abuse. Is it any wonder so many of the perpetrators are male?

But how can there be these opposing views of masculinity? Somehow a man should be independent, dominant and autonomous, and yet dependent on his partner for such basic needs? How does not being able to cook or sew make one a man? Doesn't that just make one lazy and ineffective? These skills aren't hard, just like DIY is mainly not difficult to understand, but somehow one is acceptable and the other not. As Jeff Fecke points out, women are taught from an early age that things will not come easy to them - that the world is not going to treat them kindly, and they'll have to work hard to get to where men are. There have now been a few generations of feminists that have ingrained this work ethic in women, but no one new to teach men to work hard and learn to do everything alone the hard way.

As many, many people have stated before: feminism works for both genders. By aiming for gender equality and trying to redefine traditional gender roles, it benefits both genders (not forgetting the transsexual and intersex community) of all sexualities. Progressive attempts to redefine gender roles aren't trying to destroy what makes a man a man, and a woman a woman - it's an attempt to free ourselves from these narrow concepts, these boxes we've built ourselves into through fear.

Robert Jensen says near the end of his essay that what we need is not a redefining of the concept of masculinity, but a cessation of "masculinity" and "femininity", as they only lead to this idea of one working in opposition to the other. How can one be manly when there is no woman to compare to? And how does one define femininity with no masculinity to compare to? There's this idea of them having separate values, which ends up confining us to this rigid idea of our "gender identity".

I absolutely agree with Robert Jensen, as having this idea of two opposites is just damaging to society. Men and women are mostly alike - even our DNA only has one chromosome of difference. Neither gender should be aspiring to an ideal that can never be reached - the ultimate in masculinity ends up being so violent and horrifying that mental damage would probably ensue and he'd end up in prison or dead. The ultimate in femininity is so hard to define that I'm not going to go into it at this moment (this is about masculinity, not femininity). If there is nothing there to be compared with, each gender construct becomes meaningless.

The best thing that could come out of this destruction of gender constructs would be a new criteria for judgement - based on being a "good" human being, on displaying traits that are humanising (I know, stating the obvious). A great deal of this idea of masculinity is dehumanising. Men are not controlled by their hormones, drives or some sort of desire for dominance. I don't believe that any man unless under extreme conditions, is unable to control himself.

We are not exactly the same, but there is nothing inherent in either gender that could render them inhuman. I know this is just so obvious, but it's so easy to fall into this trap of labelling people and conveniently "forgetting" about their humanity - men, women, gays, black people, disabled people - it's all essentially the same thing. We should be judged by our actions, not by things beyond our control. As soon as we dehumanise a population of society we excuse their actions and the actions of those persecuting them (see: rape, pornography), and say things like "well boys will be boys", "girls are sluts", "men can't control themselves", "men are like animals", "women are irrational"... I think you get the picture.

I guess this has turned into a long incoherent ramble, but it's not an essay, it's just some of my ideas down "on paper" as it were. Constructive criticism is appreciated.

Drunk women rape themselves.

2008-01-20T07:31:00.000-08:00

I just read another article from The Burning Times, and felt the need to write about that as well. What a plagiarist I am. And here is another, different, take on this story: Know Your Limit... For Rape?

Anyways, there's a new campaign from the Home Office to warn women about the dangers of getting drunk. Apparently "1 in 3 reported rapes happens when the victim has been drinking" (download poster here). There are, obviously, a number of problems with this campaign:

1. One third is a minority.
2. "Reported rapes" is a very strange choice of words. Don't they mean all rapes? Probably not, considering how women are scared to report rape as often it's "their fault".
3. What about the rapists? How many rapists have been drinking?
4. Yet again, what about the rapists? Rapes just "happen" then, do they? No input from a rapist? They are not in fact the deciding factor in rape?
5. "Victims"? Your poster has a picture of a woman on it, and the vast majority of these "victims" are female. Just come out and say it: Women should not DARE to get drunk. Ever.
6. "Has been drinking" - does that mean drunk? No. That means that they are possibly drunk, as they have drunk some alcoholic beverages.

I'd forgotten how easy it was for a woman to "get herself raped". It would appear that drunk women all over the country are just "raping themselves". The fact that the majority of reported rapes are happening to sober women doesn't seem to get much press coverage or thought. Perhaps... perhaps being drunk actually has nothing to do with it. Perhaps the decision of the rapists to rape the women had a bit more bearing on the events?

I don't know about you, but I've noticed that rapists do in fact, rape anyone: Male/female, young/old, gay/straight, drunk/sober, slut/prude, "whores"/"humans", disabled/not disabled, friend/lover/stranger/employee/boss/classmate... the list goes on. There is no common feature in the victims, but there is in the presence of a rapist.

Also, a person is not a rapist until they rape. That probably contributes to the problem of distinguishing between the rapists and the non-rapists. If you're going to follow the argument of "well women shouldn't put themselves in situations where they can get raped" then here are the rules you'll have to enforce:

1. A woman should not leave nor stay in her house (as both lead to rape).
2. A woman should not have a relationship with any man, be it friendship, partners, colleagues or family members (as she could get herself raped by any of them).
3. A woman should never be in the same room as a man.
4. A woman should never show or not show any flesh, as both can lead to rape.
5. A woman should never get drunk or be sober, as both can lead to her getting herself raped.

And the final, most obvious new rule would be:

A woman should never refuse sex, as that would lead to rape.

Just thought I'd try to demonstrate how ridiculous it is to try and place all the responsibility for rape prevention in the woman's hands. I know it has been said time and time again, but it bears repeating: RAPISTS SHOULD NOT RAPE PEOPLE. Rape is wrong. It is always the rapist who is in the wrong, and the victim should not have to suffer more than they already have by being effectively told that it's their fault and they should have "been more careful". This kind of mindset discourages women from reporting rapes when they should always be reported.

Boyfriends/husbands that rape their partners are rapists, and also domestic abusers to boot. This is extremely common, and is often repeated, so if it happens once don't just forget about it.

If you are raped, do not tidy up, do not wash, do not change your clothes. They are needed for evidence. Get in touch with Rape Crisis (or Rape Crisis Scotland) and tell them what happened. Take their advice. Check the websites for more details. They both have pages that tell you how to delete all evidence of having visited them, so no one needs to know.

Appalling. Obviously prostitute = sub-human.

2008-01-20T06:45:00.000-08:00

I know I'm a wee bit late with this (a couple of days), but I only just read about it. Five women were murdered in the Ipswich area a few years ago, and now the man who (probably) murdered them is on trial. The five women were working as prostitutes, which should have no bearing on anything: They were human beings first and foremost, and murdering them was a heinous crime. Here is an article about their lives.

According to Richard Littlejohn of the Daily Mail, they are "no great loss" because of their profession. I could go on and dissect the story one painstaking sentence at a time, but someone already did it better than I ever could, over at The Burning Times.

I'll just try to sum up what I feel he tries to say in this hideously unsympathetic, biased, misogynistic article:

"Five whores were killed. Big deal. They chose their profession to fuel their drug habit, and strangulation is an occupational hazard in prostitution. Society as a whole is not guilty in any way - it was entirely their fault. The reason they walked the streets was that they just weren't good enough for the massage parlours. Their line of "work" doesn't even deserve to be taken seriously - it gets inverted commas to show how trivial it is. As do their "babies", as obviously the babies of a whore are not real babies. The demand for whores is only there because of the whores themselves. The minute's silence at the Ipswich football game was just a case of people going along with it for the sake of correctness, not out of any sympathy. Their friends and families were only grieving because that's the 'done thing'."

I need to make it clear here that this is not at all my view of the murders. I am merely trying to convey what he's trying to say without long tedious quotes. My opinions of this whole business are hard to express, as I am so angry I can barely think straight. Who is he to giveth or taketh away humanity? Certainly he is nowhere near a good enough journalist to be giving his opinions... he should just stick to the facts, or perhaps go shoot himself in the face?

I'll have a go at summing up how I feel. These statements aren't in any particular order:

1. Calling a woman a "whore" doesn't make her less human.
2. A profession can't make a person less human.
3. Without the demand of men, there would be no prostitution (not the other way round).
4. Society should shoulder a lot of the blame. Arresting the men who buy prostitutes' services, and changing drug laws to help users would help.
5. Of course people were feeling real grief when these women were murdered. Probably because the people feeling grief had the ability to experience real emotions and sympathy, and weren't afraid to grieve for a "whore".
6. "Death by strangulation" is not an "occupational hazard". It is abuse.
7. "In the scheme of things" their deaths are a bigger loss than his could ever be.
8. These women didn't "want" to be prostitutes. They looked at their limited options and made the only choice they felt they could. I can't imagine they thought to themselves: "suffering sexual, physical and emotional abuse every day while I work sounds like a good option to me". Addiction is a powerful influence on decisions, and doesn't tend to facilitate good ones.

Well, I can't think of anything else to say that hasn't been said already. I'm just going to sit here, fuming.

... What?

2008-01-18T18:52:00.000-08:00

A quote from a Men's Rights Activism (MRA) website:

"We believe that one of the misperceptions that is currently harming equality and men's rights is the myth that women are less violent than men. Although pointing readers to examples of women's violence is one way to help break down this myth, we do not wish to attack women merely for the sake of "exposing women's faults" - after all, the media is currently too eager to portray men as abusers, murderers and rapists."

- Mensactivism.org

Excuse me, but... what? That is such bullshit. Here are some facts:

1. Most crimes (all categories) are committed by men (4 out of 5 offenders are male).
2. Most rapists are male (99%).
3. Most domestic abusers are male (88% in the UK).
4. Most domestic abuse is committed against women (85% in UK).
5. Most violent crimes are committed against men, by men (source).
6. Most rapes are committed against women (91%).
7. Most child abuse is committed by men (see NSPCC data).

And here are some sources: 1 2 3

And a some quotes showing how "equally violent" we are:

"Research conducted with male respondents to the Scottish Crime Survey 2000 found that men were less likely to have been repeat victims of domestic assault, less likely to be seriously injured and less likely to report feeling fearful in their own homes. The survey retraced men who were counted as victims in the Scottish Crime Survey and found that a majority of the men who said that they were victims of domestic violence, were also perpetrators of violence (13 of 22). A significant number of the men re- interviewed (13 out of 46) later said they had actually never experienced any form of domestic abuse (Scottish Executive Central Research Unit, 2002)."

- "Who are the victims?", Women's Aid (FAQ pdf)

"93% of women and 86% of men who were raped and/or physically assaulted since the age of 18 were assaulted by a male. (National Violence Against Women Survey, 1998)"

- UCSC Rape Prevention

"The Day to Count census research on 28 September 2000 found that 81% of reported domestic violence cases, were of female victims attacked by male perpetrators; 8% were male victims attacked by female perpetrators; 4% were female victims attacked by female perpetrators and 7% were male victims attacked by male perpetrators (Stanko, 2000)."

- "Who are the abusers?", Women's Aid

"Contested custody, about 10 percent of break-ups, clogs courts. In these disputes, some studies show, a mildly abusive, or brutally battering or seriously molesting parent lurks in three fourths of cases. It can be a mother, but mostly it tends to be a father, and recent studies show fathers winning these battles 2-1."

- Stop Family Violence

(a) "Eighty-two per cent of the children who called about sexual abuse specified the gender of their abuser. Of this group, 85% said the abuser was male. When the victim was female, the abuser was male in 95% of cases where a gender was specified. Male victims cited male abusers in 56% of cases, and female abusers in 44%.

For both boys and girls, fathers were the most commonly cited perpetrators, accounting for 22% of all calls about sexual abuse."

(b) "In the vast majority of cases involving sexual abuse by an acquaintance, the abuser was male: female acquaintances were the perpetrators in only 1% of calls to Childline about sexual abuse."

- Both from "Calls to Childline about sexual abuse",
NSPCC (pdf)

The "media" are not portraying all men as "abusers, murderers and rapists" - they're trying to, y'know, report things like serious assaults... If there weren't so many abusers, murderers and rapists doing this kind of thing then it wouldn't be reported.

I am not actually trying to demonise men either to be honest. It just annoys me that they're trying to argue that women are as violent as men when it's blatantly not true. I know that most men aren't like this, as most men are able to control themselves (funnily enough). Somehow my male friends manage to restrain themselves and not go around raping or assaulting their friends, family or total strangers (note the sarcasm please). Of the men that I've talked to about this, none of them feel demonised just because a bunch of assholes are doing that kind of thing - the people that do that are criminals, and don't reflect the average man/woman (IMO).

Anyways, I must go to bed for it is very late/early and I'm supposed to be awake tomorrow... *dies*

Now Read This!

2008-01-16T14:00:00.000-08:00

Are you interested in feminism? If not, why not? It's beneficial to all (but don't go spewing that crap about "feminazis" as it's offensive and inaccurate).

Anyways, here is a good feminist blog written by one of my friends. Her research is accurate, her opinions balanced, and she's always ready to engage in discussions (even when she feels really strongly one way), which is a very admirable quality.

I have also put up a link in the "Blogs/Info/Other" side bar which will be more permanently accessible. It's called "Me And My Army", and I recommend you read it.

Anyways, now I have my revenge for that diabolical referencing debacle I think I shall finish my blueberry-maple-syrup porridge, watching Withnail & I and reading this. I multi-task a bit too much.

Fair trade condoms?

2008-01-12T20:16:00.000-08:00

Just thought I'd put up a wee post about these incredibly stylish, new, UK-made condoms from the "French Letter Condom Company".

Just to illustrate how refreshingly stylish they are, here's a pic:

And just in case you hadn't made your mind up, here's a wee quote from their website:

"by purchasing French Letter condoms consumers are guaranteeing higher wages and better living and working conditions for rubber tappers in South Asia"

What are you waiting for? (Well in my case I'm waiting for them to set up the online store - I'll keep you posted!)

Quote of the day

2008-01-12T18:03:00.000-08:00

"I think that philosophy is harmful to society at large." - Peter Sprigg (Family Research Council, USA).

Ha. Ha. Ha.

Found here.

Osama Bin Laden Died In 2001

2008-01-08T07:48:00.000-08:00

Well there seems to be a lot of evidence to support that idea. Check this link, and watch the Zeitgeist Movie. There is plenty of compelling evidence to suggest that the 9/11 myth/"conspiracy" is just that, and that the war was based on a lie.

Anyways, before you contradict me, watch The Zeitgeist Movie (see links on right hand side of page), and that interview with Benazir Bhutto.

Merry Christmas?

2007-12-21T03:46:00.000-08:00

Report: Nationâ��s Wealthy Cruelly Deprived Of True Meaning Of Christmas

Sorry about the advertising, I can't do anything about it. I think it's worth it for their humour though ^_^. If you can't see the video, then here's a link.

UNsubscribe From Human Rights Abuses

2007-12-20T05:56:00.000-08:00

I think this kind of thing is wrong, and should be stopped. Sign up on the website to help stop it. It's part of Amnesty International. There is a link in my "Campaigns/Causes" sidebar, and also with this video.

Rape - a message to rapists.

2007-12-16T13:01:00.000-08:00

I found this here, after I read about it here, and the article that kicked it off is here.

Anyways, I think the message is loud and clear: Victims do not cause rape, RAPISTS DO.

Only Rapists Can Prevent Rape

A lot has been said about how to prevent rape. Women should learn self-defense. Women should lock themselves in their houses after dark. Women shouldn't have long hair and women shouldn't wear short skirts. Women shouldn't leave drinks unattended. Hell, they shouldn't dare to get drunk at all. Instead of that bullshit, how about:

If a woman is drunk, don't rape her.
If a woman is walking alone at night, don't rape her.
If a woman is drugged and unconscious, don't rape her.
If a woman is wearing a short skirt, don't rape her.
If a woman is jogging in a park at 5 am, don't rape her.
If a woman looks like your ex-girlfriend you're still hung up on, don't rape her.
If a woman is asleep in her bed, don't rape her.
If a woman is asleep in your bed, don't rape her.
If a woman is doing her laundry, don't rape her.
If a woman is in a coma, don't rape her.
If a woman changes her mind in the middle of or about a particular activity, don't rape her.
If a woman has repeatedly refused a certain activity, don't rape her.
If a woman is not yet a woman, but a child, don't rape her.
If your girlfriend or wife is not in the mood, don't rape her.
If your step-daughter is watching TV, don't rape her.
If you break into a house and find a woman there, don't rape her.
If your friend thinks it's okay to rape someone, tell him it's not, and that he's not your friend.
If your "friend" tells you he raped someone, report him to the police.
If your frat-brother or another guy at the party tells you there's an unconscious woman upstairs and it's your turn, don't rape her, call the police and tell the guy he's a rapist.
Tell your sons, god-sons, nephews, grandsons, sons of friends it's not okay to rape someone.
Don't tell your women friends how to be safe and avoid rape.
Don't imply that she could have avoided it if she'd only done/not done x.
Don't imply that it's in any way her fault.
Don't let silence imply agreement when someone tells you he "got some" with the drunk girl.
Don't perpetuate a culture that tells you that you have no control over or responsibility for your actions. You can, too, help yourself.

If you agree, re-post it. It's that important.

Note: This goes for any gendered rape, male on female or female on male or female on female or FTM on MTF or non gendered to dual gendered and so on and so forth....
-author unknown

George Carlin = Funny

2007-12-14T10:46:00.000-08:00

I found it here.

People Trafficking

2007-12-12T11:07:00.000-08:00

Found this video. Warning: It's quite shocking.

Made me very upset. Prostitution and people trafficking is not right. Not right at all.

The Beginning...

2007-08-10T06:46:00.000-07:00

Right, I've decided to change even this post, as Sophie can no longer post on this blog, and the ideas behind it have changed.

So this blog was set up to laugh and bitch and talk politics, fashion, art, music, celebrities, food - whatever the hell we felt like. It still is, but I'm putting a different slant on it. Now I am researching things that I'm interested in, alerting people to petitions/causes/campaigns that I think are worthwhile. I'm going to write about products, but with a more eco-friendly slant, and a more broad focus - on the materials, the growing methods, the manufacturing, the people behind them, the brands etc etc. Also the impact on us - our bodies, our health, our world.

I'll lay out some of my beliefs here, as they don't fit in the "about me" section. First, some things that I believe and am for:

I believe in equal rights, regardless of religion, gender, sexuality or (dis)ability.
I am a liberal feminist, because I believe in equal rights for all genders.
I am absolutely pro-choice - whether a woman decides to keep a baby or terminate the pregnancy is entirely her choice.
I believe what we put into/onto our body affects it, and we need to be informed enough to make the right choices.
I believe that global warming exists and we have to reduce our impact to avert/delay disaster.
I am pro gay adoption and civil partnership.
I am an (apathetic) atheist, but not totally anti-religion.
I believe in free basic healthcare for all.
I think organic food IS the way forward - for people and the environment.
I believe everyone should have access to contraceptive methods, abortion and the information to facilitate an informed choice.
I believe renewables are a viable source of power for entire communities, and infinitely preferable to nuclear power stations.
I believe that what we buy and how we live our lives affects those around us and the world we live in, so making as little impact as possible and small changes to our buying habits are good ways of changing the world.
I believe in the impact of one individual; after all, if you get a lot of these 'individuals' together you've got yourself a movement.
I believe that the ability to make rational decisions based on evidence and thought sets us apart from animals.
I believe in choice - the choice to be religious or not, the choice to have an abortion or not, the choice to eat organic or not, choice in healthcare, choice over our bodies etc.

Here are some of the things I am against:

- Liars and fools.
- Ignorance.
- Xenophobia (irrational fear of anything 'alien' - cultures, people etc).
- Any form of abuse - emotional or physical.
- Jargon - Esp. in advertising and science.
- Advertising - especially misleading adverts/claims.
- Pornography & Prostitution (see link in Campaigns/Causes and read up about it yourself to find out why).
- ID Cards - I can see the pros and the cons, but I think they are mostly pointless and a depressing concept.
- Nuclear weapons.
- Nuclear power.
- Oil and oil-based industries.
- Cheap meat and dairy products - animals are expensive, time-consuming and wasteful to rear, and people should have to pay that price when they buy their products.
- Antibiotics in livestock - a stupid idea.
- Misuse of antibiotics - they become ineffective if you use them wrong. How many times do we need to tell people?
- War in general.
- Weapons.
- Pointless waste - so much of our food is grown and shipped just to be thrown out, so many resources wasted just so we can rip off the packaging and throw it in a landfill. How could that appeal to anyone?