Lilbil

Todays joke 23-04-2010 02:00

A superior Cleric in Iran said yesterday that earthquakes are caused by promiscuous behaviour among women.

Spot on! shake it baby

wearing a suit 09-04-2010 05:33

Wearing a suit.

got a new job

new title to boot

newfound respect

from the man who sells fruit

in my new suit

i can write a report

in my new suit

ill make a witty retort

in my new suit

I'll come across as respectable

in my new suit

ill use words like 'delectable'

im a grown up now

earning real loot

my parents are proud

of my new suit

Ill pay taxes now

in my new suit

have a mid life crisis

in my new suit

i can fix prices

in my new suit

get a fast car

I know i'll go far

Cause I'm wearing a suit

thats right

not a law suit

a real pinstripe suit

yeah

Sensitive new age bullshit 31-03-2010 01:55

I was over at a friends house the other day, chatting with two guy friends of mine. The conversation somehow took a turn towards womens lib. My (white, middle class, educated, progressive) male friend was telling a story of a greek guy he knew in high school (lets call him chris).

He met up with chris a couple of years after high school, had dinner with him and both their girlfriends. He told us with a mixture of horrified amusement and wry cynicism about how when chris' girlfriend reached for some butter, chris slapped her on the thigh and hissed at her 'you'll get fat'. My other (white, middle class, educated, progressive) friend and I responded with the appropriate amount of head shaking and ironic laughter or outraged comments. We then compared a couple of stories on other moments of blatant sexism that we had been exposed to (for me) or witnessed (for them). As all three of us were raised in multicultural areas of sydney around immigrant groups famous for both food and repression of their womenfolk, most of these stories involved men and women who weren't white, educated, middle class and progressive.

At some point during the middle of this conversation, a thought struck me like lightening. Here were two men who I am friends with who share my feminist progressive values. Both were capable of self reflection and awareness, and both were nice people too who were generally considerate of other humans. And yet, the thought occurred to me with a sudden downturn in my forehead, i know for a fact that neither of these men proactively engage in housekeeping; both of them leaving it through laziness for the women of the house to do. Although their situations are different (the woman of the house for one is a partner, whereas for the other it's the housemates), the end result is exactly the same.

Here were two intelligent, progressive, self aware, nice men, who had enough gender consciousness to be aware of sexism when they witnessed other men engaging in it. But neither of these men were capable of identifying their own sexism. And to make it even worse, knowing that they were both being totally hypocritical, I didn't actually voice it. Partially because I wasn't supposed to know about one of them being house lazy, but also partially because i was outnumbered and didn't want to start making personal attacks and creating an argument. This part is even worse, and it happens alot; women avoid confrontation with sexism within peer groups because they don't want to 'start something'. in hind sight, i could have made a general comment about how women still do 80% of housework in australia.

We seem to feel that sexism is something that happens in other cultures among conservative people who have right wing values; we don't do it. Well in my opinion it is this sort of new age sensitive hypocritical bullshit that has killed off serious discussions of feminism among progressive groups of people, and within western societies generally. This culture of 'us and them' neccessarily lets progressive or just western men off the hook; all they have to do is talk the talk, and they can leave the dishes to the women.

I have seen this bullshit time and time again within some of my progressive community circles. In the hippie community there is this weird kindof goddess worship that can sometimes be feminist but sometimes just reinforces this ideal woman who swans around in a haze of patchouli being soft spoken, beautiful in an earthy way and generally stays quiet and demure while you admire her from a distance. Rather than making women proud of not fitting traditional expectations, it is just an imposition of another standard that women are expected to live up to. It reminds me of something I read once about the socialist/feminist movement of the 70s in america. A baby boomer feminst reflected on her relationships with men during those times, wryly commenting that 'all her male comrades were passionate supporters of women's lib, contraception and free love: but in the latter days of those radical times, they all ended up marrying housewives who reminded them of their mothers. In the end they didn't want women who could hold their own in intelligent conversation'.

At bush parties and in groups who organise warehouse parties and community events, almost all of the organisers, Djs, tech, lighting and sound people are men, with a couple of exceptions. Women typically do get really involved with organisation but ending up more in logistics, decor, food etc, taking orders rather than making them and getting less credit for what they do: djs and musicians are at the top of the recognition heirarchy because they are performing directly for an audience: and they are almost exclusively men. The reasons for all of this are highly complex and to be honest i'm still trying to figure them out (if anyone can help me out here, let me know). Everyone seems to support the idea of more female involvement, but it rarely seems to happen. And it's true that there are simply more men who are interested in djing and learning sound technology, but that doesn't explain why these are more respected occupations than cooking, which also requires alot of skill.

Like organisers of parties who don't put women on the lineup, my friends who don't do housework just don't think about it. This is the real problem for modern day feminists. It's not that there is a whole lot of overt sexism going on such as women not being let into places, etc. Its more that there are these subtle imbalances in the division of labour and in attitudes that favour men; doing less housework, gaining social credit for djing. The 1969 feminist slogan started by Carol Hanisch as the title for her essay, 'the personal is political' still holds as much relevance today as it did then. We have dealt with some imbalances in public and economic life, but personal relationships (where sexism is hardest to pinpoint and confront) still generally ignore gender imbalances. We get upset about how unfair it is that he doesnt help out enough around the house (or doesn't think to put women on the lineup), but in the end: we accept it as part of the natural order of things: that's how it is.

Well i say thats a whole lot of the same old bullshit dressed up in black stovepipe jeans and a fair trade hand printed t-shirt. I've had enough of the way these imbalances are ignored. I will never let any man of mine get away with doing less than 50% of the housework, and I will keep plugging away within my own communities. I owe it to myself and to all women to not stay silent for the sake of avoiding confrontation: that's how people get away with this stuff for so long. 

 

     

A community health warning 22-03-2010 12:31

There is a scientific study being conducted Into an alarming phenomenon Afflicting only men Surveys have found a recent rise In cases of random, unintelligible nonsense Being yelled from car windows Sometimes by the passenger Most often by the driver Always without sense or prior warning A condition akin to tourettes Which happens only in cars With the window down When men who suffer this condition Step out onto the street It disappears! They do not shout obscenities, studies find, At passing pedestrians When walking to a bus Something from the fumes of gasoline? A reaction to bacteria released In the air conditioning? All the wonders of modern science Cannot fail to soon Find a cure In the meantime authorities advise Caution, when driving Or travelling in cars

Society is a broken escalator 10-03-2010 11:34

I was on my way to work this morning when an obstacle was thrown in my path. It was a broken escalator. Seeing as most people are completely capable of walking at an average speed of a couple of kilometres per hour even up stairs, this shouldn't be a dramatic impediment to my anti social mad rush to work. And yet things are never quite that simple.

Everyone wants to move fairly quickly. They have somewhere that they want to be. Although for all of us that may ultimately be a different place; for some a cafe where they will make coffees for the suits, for some it's the office from which they can escape to go and buy coffee; but, at that moment in time the key aim of everyone in that space was to reach the top of the broken escalator in a swift, efficient and orderly manner. However, we found ourselves shuffling up the escalator at a ridiculously slow pace. It was a pace which would barely have been able to outstrip an aging sloth with one arm tied to a sack of potatoes. It was both irritating and comical, particularly because there was no apparent reason for the glacial nature of our movement.

I leant to the right of the escalator, extending my neck like a waterbird, as I struggled to determine the culprit. Was there some unfit sluggard holding the rest of us up? Perhaps someone leading the pack with a zimmer frame? There had to be some explanation.

My investigation fruitless, I had to reassess the situation. The answer came to me in a flash of inspiration. One person on their own may well be capable of bounding up a broken escalator two steps at a time, reaching the top in triumphant record timing. But get a whole trainload of people trying to reach the top together, and the whole ant trail slows down significantly. Everyone is required to travel slower than the slowest person, but more than that: there is s flow on effect over time. If one person, at say, 9 am walks at 1km per hour, then everyone who follows will have to walk at that speed for as long as there remains a constant flow, even though the original 1km PH person has long since gone: theyset the pace of the flow. To add even more time consumption to the mix, people constantly try to balance moving along with maintaining barriers of personal space and politeness. The net effect of these factors is that getting up the broken escalator took far, far longer than it had to because that is the nature of human self organisation. It is just messy.




So the point of this story is that this ridiculous morning trip to work provided me with the understanding that social change is like people trying to get up a broken escalator. As individuals, people are capable of making leaps and bounds which propel their development forward at a phenomenal pace. If they happen to be influential or in positions of power, they can lead the flow and create a faster pace for the whole of humanity for a while. But for the most part, as all these individuals get together and try and move forward collectively, it can only push forward as fast as the slowest can move; and the slowest may even have already set the pace in the past. Studying political science, we were told this was the 'lowest common denominator' effect in terms of international relations. In negotiations, you can only achieve as much as the most stubborn and change resistant party will let you achieve. It's frustrating and a little comical, but no-one in particular seems to be to blame. If we were all a little more conscious of our speed, we might collectively be able to change our pace; but that's another story.

What does it mean to be alive? 09-03-2010 12:56

Some philosophers say that to be alive is to have consciousness. According to biologists living organisms are characterized by seven "signs of life": 1) living things have highly organized, complex structures; 2) living things maintain a chemical composition that is quite different from their surroundings; 3) living things have the capacity to take in, transform, and use energy from the environment; 4) living things can respond to stimuli; 5) living things have the capacity to reproduce themselves; 6) living things grow and develop; and 7) living things are well-suited to their environment.( I'm not sure about that: I'm sure some people neither grow nor develop or respond to stimuli). Some people might think that to be alive is to suffer in the eyes of God. To some people, being alive is about making a success of yourself by becoming rich and reputable. To many, being alive is simply about staying alive. What does being alive mean to you? Some people feel most alive when they are close to death. Is it possible that people can be more or less alive than other people, or that at different moments you can be more alive than at others? ? ?

The thing I love most about travelling by yourself to a new place is that in that moment when you get off the plane at two in the morning and it's dark and the airport is empty and your cash card doesnt work and you begin to contemplate sleeping on the floor... you feel truly alive. Your senses are sharp, your ears tingle, you breathe the air deeply and your stomach flutters. Your mind races with all the possibilities of the next minute or hour or week. You don't know where you are or what you will do and it's amazing. 

Experiencing desire, frustration, elation or any intense emotion also makes you feel more alive. You twist and turn in the python grip of your own humanity, unable to escape the coiling conclusion that because you feel therefore you are. In contrast, people who experience depression often refer to it as feeling 'dead' on the inside. You are unable to emotionally engage with other people and the world, and you experience life as though from the outside of a window on a winters day.

Sometimes I get this feeling which I have decided at some point in the past to call the inner tiger. It lies dormant in your stomach, sleeping until it is denied for too long. Then it becomes restless, lifts it's big paws, shakes it's head and begins to pace impatiently. The more you suppress it, the more irate it becomes and the faster it paces, growling and tossing it's great head, flashing it's yellow eyes. It can't be ignored. It is a wild desire to live. Usually I experience it when I am held back from experiencing what I want to experience by some obligation. Being stuck in a library in Sweden completing an assignment instead of travelling scandinavia comes to mind. It is an intense feeling of sickening impatience and almost lustful anticipation, so powerful it would keep me awake at night with my heart racing and my fingers coiled like claws. In these moments, I feel totally alive.

I read a story recently by a young Polish man about his escape with seven others from a Gulag in Siberia in 1943. He and his compatriots walked for a year to get from Russia to India, so that they could live. Half of them died in the attempt. They had decided that living in a Gulag for the rest of their young lives was not living at all, and they risked death in order to really live. They ate what they could scavenge, obsessed with food, they crossed the Gobi desert with no water stored and walked over the Himalayas completely dependant on the charity of villagers for survival. When they finally reached British controlled India, the young Polish man collapsed and spent a month in hospital, screaming in his sleep and trying to escape from the Gulag all over again. The book concluded with a tragic statement. When the time finally came for the four remaining men to part ways, the Polish man wrote that after this moment he would never be totally happy again. These men had spent a year depending on each other for survival, and the experience had brought them so close together that this year would eclipse the rest of their relatively normal lives, lived within the constraints of regular social interaction and the polite distance of middle class Europe in the 1950s. They had run from the Gulag in order to live, had spent a year stuggling to survive, and would spend the rest of their lives in nostalgia for that time when their existence was defined by a sharpened awareness of being alive, while in truth they were half starved and close to death.

I know people who like security, who want to live in safety. People who will abstain from experiences which could be amazing, because of a fear of the unknown. Are they missing out on life? Maybe it's arrogant to assume that other people can get the same enjoyment as me from the things I value. It's entirely true that you can enjoy life in simple ways from the comfort of your own neighborhood. But for me.. I have always thought that as the most privileged young people in the world (we who come from the top 5% of the world in terms of income, education and oppportunity) we have an obligation to those who are less privileged on two levels. Firstly, we have a responsibility to try and change the fact that we are privileged while they are not. Two, we have a responsibility to enjoy life as much as possible simply because we are able to. Life ought to be celebrated with luminescence and vibrance, with a shout and a flash of colour and a head turned skyward. We ought to be exuberant, to dance and to love and ask questions and find out answers, simply because we can. Life should be cherished because it is precious and there is so much suffering, and you could die at any moment.

Maybe that's what it is to be truly alive: to be aware of your own mortality and to live in the moment. To be able to break down the barriers of your own socialisation and enjoy the experience of being alive for what it is, without prejudice or judgement. If that's actually possible, (I'm not sure that it is).

All I know is that it's important to ask yourself if you feel as though you are alive. What is your life, and what does it mean? Are you in control of it? What are you doing with it? Does it have meaning? ?We all have our own little Gulags to break out of every so often, it is a constant struggle to pursue the experience of really living. That is, to pursue the awareness of being alive and what that means to you. And to feel gratitude for the amazing chain of coincidences and events that meant that all your ancestors managed to survive and continue reproducing until they created you. What an incredible thing that is. Perhaps one day I will have the opportunity to join them again and thank them for the experience of living that they gave to me through their dogged persistance at surviving. One day, I'll be someone's ancestor too.

Ah the tele! 04-02-2010 12:15

Abbot's climate change policy was released today. I read several articles about it in the herald online which featured commentary by scientists, analysis of the structure, comparison to existing schemes and, of course, some snide derision of Tony 'budgie smuggler' Abbot. It struck me, as usual, that the Fairfax papers are not representative of majority opinion, so I thought I would visit the Telegraph.

Now, I am not naive about the function of the Tele: it is a commercial Tabloid which espouses sensationalist, conservative opinions. I have always been puzzled by the conservative bent of commercial news, but perhaps it simply reflects what the majority of people want to buy. Being conservative obviously makes money. But puzzlement aside, I was actually shocked that in the National section, there was not a single article on Abbot's fresh from the oven climate scheme. In fact, the only article in there about politics at all was an article entitled 'Our 795 Days of Empty Promises': referring to Australia under Rudd.

In fact, the article (which made personal attacks on Rudd without actually talking about politics at all really) even included a quote from Abbot, who to be honest quite accurately pointed out that "I think people will be pretty cynical when he says that he's going to do things in his second term that he said he was going to do in his first term and didn't,". I whipped out my magnifying glass and scoured the article for some mention of the new climate change scheme. I finally found a sentence, squeezed in after a link to Blog with Malcolm Farr - what else haven't they (Labor) done?

The only mention of Abbots scheme in the entire newspaper reads thus: Opposition LeaderTony Abbott spent Tuesday's first sitting day marking climate change the opening battle front.  His colleagues are certain to use each broken promise to exploit cynicism in the electorate.

Ok, so I take the telegraph with a grain of salt. I know that like a pearl earringed North Shore trophy wife, the tele doesn't 'do' in depth political analysis, preffering to leave it to the masculine world of broadsheet. But for Gods sake, not even one article on something so important to the public, whether they are deeply conservative or howling lefties? How can the public possibly make informed decisions come election time, when they are not even given information? The fact that people lack information makes them no less vocal or opinionated, because lacking understanding will result in feeling even more politically disenfranchised. The online article featured no less that 72 comments all generally of the same level of balanced analysis as 'Kevin Rudd thinks hes a rockstar'.

  It seems to me that like most other industries, the world of commercial news has forgotten that it is embedded within society and has a social responsibility, not separate from it. Perhaps one of the greatest challenges for the C21st will be to reinstate the social (and environmental) responsibilities of business. Which is one of the primary goals of an ETS.

So when you look at it like that, alot of problems such as pollution and a lack of quality public information have the same root cause: the perception that private enterprises do not shoulder responsibility  for anything except making a profit, and that their only obligations are to their shareholders. This attitude has recently been thust into the dark chambers of the brother inquisators 'the global financial crisis' and 'climate change' to be subject to further questioning. I wonder if this heralds a shift in thinking? Keeping in mind that the labour movement has spent the last two centuries trying to remind business of their social obligations, I won't hold my breath. But I still remain hopeful, because over the last thirty years the Corporate Social Responsibility sector has been steadily expanding, and ethical business is becoming increasingly fashionable. Maybe this 'ethics as the new black' will trickle down to the tele one day. In the meantime, a bit more information from the government couldn't hurt.  

Taking a Moment 15-01-2010 11:16

OK so this weeks entry will be brief, because I am in an internet cafe in Cobram.

Have decided to take a few weeks out of the city, rent out my room, and do a little fruit picking. I am 'taking a moment'. I would like to spend this blog talking about the benefits of taking a moment.

When i got back from living overseas and graduated from my degree, I had a strange time trying to figure things out. what do do in life, who am i, all of that. My parents take the view that the best way to move forward is to act: explore your possibilities, try things out, and for god's sake get a real job.

I agree to an extent: but I also think that sometimes, its neccessary to 'take a moment' away from your familiar environment, out in nature, to reflect on the beauty of living things and the small miracles of our earth, and put things into perspective. I believe that this helps us to discover who we are and what we want. I am camped at the moment on the banks of the Murry, shaded by red gums, soothed by the air on my skin and entertained daily by the chorus of cockatoos and antics of insects around me. At first I was bored and jumpy, looking for activity, thoughts racing through my head. But after some time I find my thoughts becoming clear, both empty and full. I think this is what my friend who practises Zen Buddhism refers to as meditation.

Coincidentally, I am reading a book by a man called Adam Kahane, called 'Solving Tough Problems: An Open Way of Talking, Listening, and Creating New Realities'.  Kahane works as a facilitator, attempting to create communication between people on different sides of conflicts, in addition to generating new ways of thinking among business and NGOs. He describes in the book exactly what I am talking about. As part of his practise, he gets people to walk for hours in a forest by themselves, or to spend one night on a mountain, in order to reflect and allow their conscious mind to be guided by their subconscious, pushed into reflectiveness by the sentient wisdom of the living, natural world. As a result, participants in his workshops come back more honest, and willing to listen.  

I am on my second day in the bush, and keen to see how I will feel and think after a few more. Wish me luck.

Its the silly season. 08-01-2010 01:14

So its summer and its beach and it's party party party.
It's called the silly season, but is it actually silly?

I am going to talk about the politics of the party. Groan! no  believe me this is actually really important to think about, because partying is something we can too easily pass off as somehow 'naughty', 'dysfunctional' or just superficial. It's about having a good time. But what does that actually mean? And why is it so important?

I just got back from a three day festival for new years near Melbourne called tribeadelic. When I arrived back in sydney, I felt somehow refreshed, grounded. My body was tired from dancing, but in a satisfied way. My head buzzed with reflection on all the people I had met, trying to understand their experiences of the world. I had spent three days around people who were always smiling and laughing, who would offer me some food or a drink, who were curious about who I was just like I was about them. We danced together communally, exchanged laughs and maybe even had a sing.

Mainstream urban Australian culture is fairly devoid of traditional communal activities. We work in teams in order to make a living, but we don't neccessarily feel a bond to those we work with. The alienation of people from one another in a society so based around individualism affects us far more than we know.

We have friends, but we may have many friends who are not aware of each others existence. We may  even have a group of friends who all know each other, which is a community of sorts. But how often do you get to see everyone in the same place?

There is alot to be said for a good old night out. George Orwell has long claimed the local pub as a great cultural center of British society. Partying with a group of people has become the modern day version of a village feast, where a community comes together to celebrate life in it's various forms. Whether you realise it or not, you are actively engaging with your culture, and establishing a temporary community of people bound together by that night or weekend. The atmosphere of celebration makes it easier to talk to people you wouldn't normally, and to accept what they have to say. (ok and the acohol usually helps)  And, if you are involved in a certain musical scene or you frequent a particular pub, you even get to see some of the same people every weekend or so, further developing a sense of community.

It's important to think about, because you want to come away from your party with some positive feeling, not just a hangover. Getting trashed and throwing up on someone who might otherwise have been your new friend puts a wall between you and your experience of community. And, it's important to find a party that has a sense of community in the first place: Some places can be so bogged down with insecurities that people are there primarily to get one up on each other.  It took me a long time to find a musical community where I feel nourished and whole every time I party, but I think that there is something out there for everyone, and it is absolutely fundamental to find it.  Be aware of how you spend your leisure time. are you having fun? why or why not? be honest with yourself and the rest will follow.

Go forth and party.....

Whats going on with the Labour government and climate change? 25-12-2009 10:12

Merry christmas actnow kids.

I had a bunch of mates around for a christmas dinner on tuesday night, which was lovely. We were discussing the recent climate change rally  and the emissions trading scheme, and a couple of my friends came out with statements that i have been hearing alot of lately and doubtless will hear even more in times to come. First of all, they weren't totally convinced that climate change is happening, and second of all, they said that an ETS is just the 'government charging people more taxes to make more money'

Well, on the first point, they are in the minority. It is clear from the last election results and a series of polls that not only do most people believe in climate change, they want strong action on it. So whether or not members of the government (or the opposition) personally 'believe' in climate change (as though it is the tooth fairy), they still have a mandate to do something about it. But this is where it will get interesting.

No-one knows much about an ETS, and still less are convinced that its the way to go. Attacked by lefties for being too weak, attacked by righties for being an unnecessary new tax, the ETS is falling over before it even learned to walk.


According to world leader in climate change economics Nicholas Stern, an ETS is the cheapest and most efficient way of reducing carbon emissions, by factoring in the cost of emissions, charging the cost of reduction to the biggest polluters, and creating incentives for people to invest in sustainable energy.

So if the labour government wants to pass it, I find myself asking, why don't they publicise some information about it? Why are most people in the dark about what it would actually mean? I recall the Howard governments massive advertising campaign when introducing the GST: a huge effort at swaying public opinion in favour of an odious and significant tax with no apparent benefits. Why isn't labour selling this thing?


I ummed and ahhed about it. Surely they have thought of this? Or are they so wrapped up in their own behind the scenes deal making that they have forgotten the importance of public opinion?
On monday the 4th of january, I will write a letter to climate change minister Penny Wong, telling her A) to set more ambitious targets and B) inform the australian public about what it actually means.
Of course, im sure she will listen to me.

Let you know how it goes, but don't hold your breath..