Linky Love - Volume 21

Standard intro - Linky Love is basically a cobbling together of posts I've noticed around the traps that have set off little tiny sparkles inside my head, and which I would possibly write about or comment on if I didn't need to sleep, eat, work, that kind of stuff. I usually put Linky Love volumes up weekly. I hope you like it.

As always if you have a post of your own, or some else's, that you'd like to highlight, please feel free to add it in comments, or to discuss the above posts, or indeed most anything else.

Anarchia - A lack of language, an abundance of masks - Asher writes about mental illness and the difficulty of communicating about it with friends to get the support he needs.

Auckland's Burning - Photos from tent embassy - John has pics of the protest aimed at visiting Australian Foreign Minister, Alexander Downer, underway in Auckland.

Born on State Highway One - Chomsky Lite, with a Scottish accent - Ryan looks at the background to George Galloway's visit to our little nation, and comments on the Voices of Peace forum Galloway spoke at recently.

Capitalism Bad; Tree Pretty - Stand Down Margaret - Maia writes eloquently about how Margaret Thatcher still influences her nightmares, and the negative effect she had on hundreds of thousands of lives.

Contradiction - Actions and moral concepts - George reflects on how politicians seem to make their moral decisions.

eggs benedict and two flat whites - Reasons why it's good to live in NZ - Sandy asks for your top five reasons.

Feministe - The Disney Princess Industrial Complex is coming for your soul! - Vanessa writes about the heavy gendering of children's toys, from the perspective of a mother with a toddler-age daughter.

The House of Ghetsuhm - In ur internet, bringing u weird shit - Ghet has a truly absurd picture that I heart.

LAANTA - More and Better Aid - Terence provides his speech notes from a debate on whether the 0.7% Overseas Development Aid target will actually help.

The Legal Soapbox - Portrayal of the accused and the law - Legal Eagle writes about newspaper sketches of defendants and how they might influence public opinion of the merits of their case, against the background of the Haneef case in Australia.

Roger Nome's Progressive Politics - RN has a series of posts on why NZ needs its unions back, 1, 2 and 3.

Women's Space/The Margins - What Have You Done For a Girl, a Woman, a Female Person? - Heart asks her readers to share their stories of what they have done, as radical feminists, for other women. Comment thread at 52 and counting.

Previous volumes of Linky Love (1 - 20) can be found over here.

(Pic Via)

Linky Love - Volume 20

Standard intro - Linky Love is basically a cobbling together of posts I've noticed around the traps that have set off little tiny sparkles inside my head, and which I would possibly write about or comment on if I didn't need to sleep, eat, work, that kind of stuff. I usually put Linky Love volumes up weekly. I hope you like it.

As always if you have a post of your own, or some else's, that you'd like to highlight, please feel free to add it in comments, or to discuss the above posts, or indeed most anything else.

Alas, a blog - Helix SF Magazine published all-female authored issue - Mandolin looks at wot it says in the title, and the reactions that resulted.

DagCentral - Healthcare in America, Pt 1. - dc talks about the American system, from the point of view of a patient and a nurse.

Feministe - Monday Afternoon at the Welfare Office - kactus shares what it's like to be an American on welfare.

Feministe - Liberated - Jill has a very interesting graph and post on the US Government's attitude to Iraqis seeking to resettle in the Land of the Free.

Feministing - Bush's EEOC nominee "undermined" employment rights - Ann brings us another I Can't Believe This Is Happening Moment, courtesy of the Bush Administration.

The Legal Soapbox - Feelin' blue about blogging - Legal Eagle is actually writing about housing affordability in Australia, reminding us Kiwis that we aren't the only ones with ridiculous house prices.

Make Tea Not War - Film Festival: Part One - MTNW gives us her short reviews of the four films she has seen so far.

Scratch & Sniff - Whodathunk it? actually, plenty of us - Cheezy points out the fallacy in the recent right-wing argument No One Foresaw Iraq Turning Out Like This.

stanselen - No More Rape - jo writes about the Christchurch protest in support of the case against John Dewar.

Take Back the News - A positive example - Anna deconstructs a news story about crime and shows how it is possible to report on rape (and indeed other crime) without stuffing up your use of allegeds.

Previous volumes of Linky Love (1 - 19) can be found over here.

(Pic Via)

Blah Blah Budget

Well I didn't really write anything about the Budget. To be honest I found it all a bit blah.

Again with the not doing anything to reverse the 1991 benefit cuts, again with the not really doing anything except tinkering with funding in education and health. Four percent for school operation grants was a slap in the face, although it's been trumpeted by some as one of the significant parts of Michael Cullen's presentation - they seem ignorant of the fact that costs are running at higher than 4%, and support staff wages are so pitiful that even adding the full 4% on to their existing pay rates isn't going to give them the increases they deserve. I know I know, it's Better Than National, but it's not exactly vision stuff.

Maybe Kiwisaver is a bit of a Grand Scheme, but I have a sneaking suspicion it's just going to get wound up or fully privatised by a future National Government - particularly if they come in next year when it hasn't been aroundlong enough for people to feel attached to it. We do need to do something about our savings culture, but I'm not sure that a scheme that can be so easily converted to privatising superannuation is such a smart idea.

I heard John Tamihere talking on the radio the other day about the similar Super scheme that the 1972-1975 Labour Govt brought in - it was only in a short time before Muldoon was elected and scrapped it, giving people a one-off refund of their balance in the next tax year or something. I have no idea if that's true, and I'm too lazy to do any research (isn't that what readers are for? ;-) ) but given the way the polls are trending and the rhetoric from the Right about Kiwisaver, it seems like history may repeat itself.

I'm quite gloomy about the polls. I know it's not too late, and part of me would like to see Labour get a good kicking. But given that the boot would be on the end of John Key's leg, well that makes me not so keen.

Humph.

(Pic Via)

Stop. Go. Stop.

I did not know, until just this minute, that today is International CFS Awareness Day. Thanks to tigtog at Larvatus Prodeo for blogging about it, otherwise no doubt I'd still be none the wiser.

CFS, aka Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, aka Myalgic Encephlaitis (sp?), aka "yuppie flue" or "tapanui flu," basically ruled my life for over three years and still plays a bit part in proceedings. I had it relatively mildly but the combination of the symptoms of the illness and the depression which resulted meant I couldn't work, often couldn't drive or socialise, and generally had to live like a particularly lazy cat (except for the washing in your own spit bit). At times I couldn't read, watch tv, talk on the telephone, or even clear the mail. Once when my car was towed from a clearway outside my house I couldn't pick it up from the tow yard for three days - I hadn't got out of bed, except for the essentials, since the previous week.

There are many theories about what causes CFS and I've been very interested in one which has recently come to light in Australia. The idea is that some sufferers may have had Glandular Fever before developing CFS (tick), and if they did not take sufficient time off to fully recover from the mononucleosis (tick) then they may end up with a particular brain injury. This damage has the effect of telling your immune system that you are sick when you are not, meaning that it often feels like your body is fighting something off even when you are perfectly well.

This fits not only my experience when I was really ill, but also some of the odd things that have happened to my health since, for example when the Greeks thought I had bird flu last year. My body tends to fever at the drop of a hat, and from my biological anthro papers I know that this is because it has detected infection and is raising the body temperature to kill it off. What the Greeks didn't know (and I didn't suspect at the time) was that because of my CFS history my body will give me a really high temperature just to kill a sinus infection that is already on its last legs anyway. I'm not about to die of something really nasty, my body is just being incredibly over efficient at cleaning house. These reactions are getting more mild as time goes by and maybe one day I'll get sick like a normal person does.

When I was first diagnosed there was a sense of relief at knowing what was wrong, but then horror when I realised that there is no pill you can take, no treatment you can undergo. It's a matter of trial and error, and above all waiting. I had a lot of advantages in my recovery which I credit with both the mildness and the relative shortness of my really bad patch. But it still hangs there in the background - if I overdo it again, as I did in my student days, then my body might force me to hibernate for a year or two.

There aren't a lot of NZ resources out there on CFS, but one excellent book is Understanding Chronic Fatigue Syndrome by Dr Alastair Jackson. I quickly discovered that a lot of the internet resources out there weren't necessarily accurate and some of the books were downright scary. One American tome told me I would start to lose my fingerprints - it's an incredibly creepy thought to imagine your fingertips slowly smoothing, your identity disappearing. It wasn't true, but it took me quite a while to find that out.

Now that I'm well again I can do most things other people can do. I'm never going to be able to get by on five hours sleep and little food, do no exercise and tax my mental and emotional state beyond belief, and fill every hour with work, study and politics, as I did before I got sick. That's not really a bad thing, but it's hard sometimes to slow down when you have so much you want to get done and feel like time is slipping away from you - especially after wasting three years doing Not Much, there is a drive to catch up that is hard to resist at times.

Today is a timely reminder to me that I'll get nothing done at all if I get sick again.

(Pic Via)

At least

It seems to me, as a NZ leftie, that really there aren't a lot of choices for me at the moment. Or perhaps it would be more accurate to say that there aren't a lot of options I like, politically.

On the right hand I have National, Act, and the general Forces of Darkness who throng around concepts I find anathema. Ideas like low (or no) taxation, privatising state services, selling assets, cutting benefits, and generally advantaging the rich (and priviledged) over all others.

The left palm displays the Labour-led Government, which doesn't exactly set my leftie heart aflame with passion for their policies, or even their principles, but is better than National.

And that seems to be all there is. As far as Government leadership goes there's only National or Marginally Better Than National.

On international relations, I can wicker all I want about Helen Clark's senseless lunch attempt to get a free trade deal with George W* whilst delicately not mentioning the USA's human rights abuses. But I know that John Key and his ilk would probably lick the POTUSA's boots clean after the soup and enthusiastically ask him where he got all those fab ideas for dealing with prisoners by the time the entree was on the table. At least Clark didn't commit us to a stupid war in Iraq.**

On education, I can express my extreme frustration with Labour's approaches to tertiary, secondary, primary and early childhood, but at least I know they are not going to set up direct competition between state schools and encourage the profit motive ahead of all else. There is still a pretence (and possibly in some of the Labour caucus a genuine belief) that education shouldn't be about making money. Unlike another party I could name. At least Labour has significantly increased funding in this Vote and brought special education and kindergarten back into the state sector.

On health, I could vent my spleen about the way Labour-led administrations rely heavily on
the goodwill of those working in the system, but I know they won't gut the public provision of healthcare like National would. And they have given the nurses pay parity, which is A Good Thing, and one that National would certainly not have done.


On the parlous state of our police force, in particular it's attitude to women, the Labour-led government certainly hasn't been as fulsome in its condemnation as I would like, but at least Clark has actually said some critical things. What's the National view on the police? Judging by their membership in the blogosphere the general view in that party might be that this was all about a few rotten eggs and not systematic at all, no siree.

I could go on and on with examples, but you get the drift.***

What this situation means is that Clark and co can rest on their laurels to a certain extent. They know that whatever they do it is unlikely to be as bad as what National would do in the same situation, from the point of view of their supporters and those further to the left. Why bother trying when you've already got a substantial number of votes sewn up, purely because the other option is worse?

(I did warn you I was a bit grumpy and bitter at the moment.)

So what's a leftie to do?



* If Sheriff Howard got a bum deal then what chance have we got? Less chance than a koala in a forest fire methinks.
** Maybe our troops in Afghanistan, that forgotten war, put her off?
***Besides, it's quite hard to pin National down on their exact intentions in government because they so rarely communicate any actual policy. I can only judge them on past performance and general principles, neither of which are in their favour from my point of view.

Linky Love - Volume 9

It's Friday morning (already!), so it must be time for the next volume of Linky Love.

Standard intro - if you have a post of your own, or some else's, that you'd like to highlight please feel free to add it in comments, or to discuss the above posts, or indeed most anything else.

Celsias - Supermarket Secrets - Craig Mackintosh has the BBC documentaries which cover the supermarket supply chain practices that are questionable for not only the environment but also human health.

Columbia Journalism Review - The Opt-Out Myth - EJ Graff writes powerfully dis-proving the idea that smart, educated women are choosing not to pursue corporate careers. And here's further comment on this article, and the opt-out myth, from Amanda Marcotte of Pandagon. Plus, Make Tea Not War posts briefly on this article at What We Said, and gets some interesting comments out of the bargain.

DagCentral - John Howard: Patriot. Statesman. Dumbass - dagcentral takes on John Howard's ridiculousness about Obama, Al Qaeda and the 2008 US presidential race.

Feministe - Legal Abortion = Lives Saved - Jill (I so heart Jill!) looks at the drop in deaths from illegal abortions, and the hypocrisy of the Catholic Church.

Frogblog - Welfare for Australian Banks - Russel Norman looks critically at the Government proposal to cut company tax, through the example of what could happen for Australian banks operating in NZ.

Joe Hendren - Iraq can be a St Paddy's Day issue - Joe examines the parallels between English imperialism in Ireland and US imperialism in Iraq.

Just Left - Four years of blood on their hands - Jordan Carter gives his thoughts about the fourth anniversary of the Iraq War.

The Legal Soapbox - Follow the leader - Legal Eagle examines our lack of tolerance for dissent, and what we will do to avoid being in the ostracised minority.

Mainly Politics - Measuring public sector performance - Chris Hipkins writes about Phil "ex-National staffer" Rennie's "independent" report on where all the money has gone under recent Labour-led Governments.

No Right Turn - Misplaced priorities - Idiot/Savant has the skinny on where our research funds have been directed in regards to energy. And it's not where Al Gore would like.

Pandagon - The cost of the system - Sheelzebub eloquently expands on the theme that sweating (as happens in sweatshops) is an intrinsic part of our economic system.

And don't forget, previous volumes of Linky Love can be found in their own shiny category.

Union Myths #5 - Shortland Street tells it like it is

Readers may not have noticed, but there is a bit of a union-centred storyline running on Shortie St at the moment, irritating me no end with its inaccuracies*.

The premise is that Toni (head nurse) is the goodie just trying to manage her nurses as best she can and Brenda (who wants Toni's job) is the baddie backed by the union to unfairly make the boss's wife** hell.

The union in this case is called the "Nurses Association". There is no such union - and they were wise to not refer to the NZNO (known as the Nurses Organisation) by name as the portrayal of their role is rather a long way from what might happen in a real situation of this nature.

To start with, there is allegedly one "woman from the union" involved, and she is clearly on Brenda's side and offering nothing but criticism to Toni. In actual fact in a member versus member situation you will often have two union officials involved, one supporting and representing each side. Certainly as the union official there is a certain amount of sensitivity required when you are dealing with conflict between members, and I would expect the union character to be more circumspect in her actions, and in her comments to both Toni and Brenda.

Although in this case Toni is (partly) acting with her employer hat on, and as such would not usually turn to the union for help but instead to the DHB's HR department. But this is telly and apparently the mythical DHB and Shortland St hospital don't employ anyone in Human Resources, so Toni is facing this crisis alone as the union has abandoned her. The union official is certainly not normally in the situation of judge in these matters, but she is being cast that way (and as a biased decision-maker) on this occasion.

Furthermore, Brenda is throwing around threats of strike. There are only two situations in which union members can strike legally, under the current law:

1. During bargaining for a new collective agreement (does not appear to be the case, there's been no reference to it); or
2. In a health and safety situation where labour is withdrawn due to the risk (this could be the case here, I haven't been watching closely enough, but it's very very rare in real life. If anyone can think of an example in recent years of a strike for this reason then I'd love to hear about it in comments).

Union members only strike after a vote to do so. I've yet to see the nurses on Shortland St doing anything like voting, instead the plot is focused on Brenda as the baddie who they all blindly follow, and Toni as the martyr. My experience of union members is that they are not easily persuaded to strike and in fact want to avoid it for as long as possible. Particularly those whose jobs are vocational and involve looking after other people.

So in summary: Shortland Street - wrong about unions since at least 2007.

*And here's the index to the rest of the union myths series to date (can't believe I haven't written one since 2005!)
** For those not in the know, which I think I can safely assume is most of my readership, Toni is married to Chris who is the CEO of Shortland St Hospital. The other aspect at play here is that Chris has been having an affair (now ended) with another doctor who is encouraging Brenda in her anti-Toni crusade, in order to exact revenge on her former lover and blackmail him into giving her the Head of Surgery job.

Damien O'Connor - from the horse's mouth

When I was on holiday recently I read a Perspectives article in the Herald about Damien O'Connor.

Yes you read that right - not only did I read a whole article in the Herald (and a reasonably long one at that!), but also I voluntarily read something about Damien O'Connor. Wonders will never cease.

Anyway, it's all about his experiences as Minister of Corrections, and it's a very interesting read. It paints a picture of O'Connor that I admit surprised me considerably.

He talks about the struggles he has trying to get some Vote Health money carved off for mental health issues in prison, and the strong focus on rehabilitation that he feels is needed. O'Connor also has some telling remarks to make about the Sensible Sentencing Trust, in particular the agreement he thought they had reached about rehabilitation being A Good Thing, which Garth McVicar and his associates then flip-flopped on.

Well worth a read, imho.

Inconceivable

Over at Red in Roskill I've been having a little argument with my old foe AJ Chesswas.* What started out as a post by Michael Wood about progressive christianity has ended up with AJ and I slugging it out in the comments, arguing about sex.

AJ's position as he puts it himself:

Sex = pleasure, intimacy, commitment and procreation. We dissect this at our
peril.

What he means is that sex should always be about conceiving.** AJ further holds that there is an obligation on the married to reproduce, and:

A world that considers a union that is unable to result in the miracle of
life as equal to one that does cannot be seriously considered to be just.

When I pointed out that there is no such commandment about sprogging on the marriage licence AJ counters with the authority of the Anglican prayerbook.

Not surprisingly, I find this ridiculous. To me it seems to be a point of view that not only fails to reflect the reality of sexual practice throughout human history, it is also a sneakily sexist position to hold.

Consider the consequences of a view of sex that sees it as always about conceiving:

1. Should only have sex when you intend to conceive.
2. Should only have sex when both partners are provably fertile (depending on the woman and how you would measure, maybe up to a week a month).
3. No sex (or legal commitments) between partners of the same sex (as can't possibly conceive).
4. No use of contraception allowed, ever.
5. Infertile people never allowed to have sex.
6. Infertile people not allowed to marry.
7. Masturbation assumedly a no-go also?

We know what a world without contraception is like. Many people still live in that world. It is a place where women's roles are limited by frequent pregnancies and obligations to put childcare and home-making above any other ambitions. I am lucky I don't have to live in that world, and I wish no one did.

I'd really like to know what is actually sinful or wrong about having sex for pleasure alone?

Whether you are heterosexual or not, sex seems to me to be about the four things AJ lists above ("pleasure, intimacy, commitment, procreation" to remind the reader and save you scrolling) but it doesn't have to be about all four all the time.

Update, 19th Feb. 1.41pm: Ok, if you have read this far then you also ought to go read this over at Feministe. It's Jill's response to a Christian man who feels contraception is a sin, but is now in an invidious situation himself, where the only solution seems to be to go down that path.


* Yes he's real.
**I don't think he would disagree with this, but I couldn't find a short quote in comments that reflected this, please AJ do let me know if I've got the wrong end of the stick and I will correct it.

Linky Love - Volume 3

Again, if you have a post of your own, or some else's, that you'd like to highlight please feel free to add it in comments, or to discuss the above posts, or indeed most anything else.

Also, I am still looking for new blogs to add to my Bloglines - particulary foreign leftie and/or feminist links - suggestions welcome in comments or by email. Thank you for the links offered last time.

Alas (a blog) - Silly - poor people don't get choices - Maia writes about the conflict between choice and access in Texas, where the governor has decided to make the HPV vaccine compulsory for all girls before they can start school.

Alas (a blog) - Lactivist blogger attacked by National Pork Board - Rachel highlights the lawsuit an American blogger who promotes breast-feeding rights faced as the result of a funny t-shirt slogan.

Auckland's Burning - ROI and Activism - A post on the assessments activists need to make when organising their campaigns, namely will there be sufficient Return On Investment, by John.

Feministe - Dates with Daddy - Jill has an icky article on fathers swearing to protect their daughters' chastity in the USA. Warning: you may need a bucket handy.

Feministe - The Limits of Political Strategy - piny gives her thoughts on whether (and how) straight marrieds can contribute to the fight for queer marriage rights.

Just Left - Waitangi Day - Jordan Carter reveals his thoughts on our national day, and then posts further in response to many of the comments his original article attracted.

The Legal Soapbox - Feminism and having babies - Legal Eagle writes about her feminism and how it has evolved, particularly since becoming a mother. Also, a follow-up post by the same author, Motherhood and career - what is the answer?

No Right Turn - Typicalling misleading - Idiot/Savant takes DPF to task over his dodgy graph on government revenue (DPF also responds in comments).

Public Address - The thing you can't stand on - Tze Ming Mok has another killer post, this time ostensibly about the kerfuffle rippling outward from a request to fly the Tino Rangatiratanga flag on the Harbour Bridge on Waitangi Day.

Red in Roskill - Maori Party and Maori Political Power - Michael Wood gives his thoughts on the newest party in our parliament, and what its advent bodes for our political system, particularly for those on the Left.

Single Malt Social Democrat - In her Majesty's Service - Carl writes about the tensions of being a civil servant, and the extra scrutiny the public service faces from all and sundry.

Sir Humphrey's - Those dirty stinkin' capitalists! - Pyscho Milt writes in response to Maia's post at Alas (a blog) about clothes, sizes, etc, which I linked to in the last Linky Love.

Women of Color Blog - The Coward speaks - brownfemipower's brief post sums up my thoughts about the furore in the US that has resulted in a leading feminist blogger resigning from the John Edwards' campaign team after pressure from some religious lobbyists. While I understand and support Amanda Marcotte's decision to stand down* it makes me very sad and I wish we lived in a world, and operated in a political system, where it wan't necessary for The Game.

Previous Editions:
Linky Love - Vol. 2 (4th Feb. 2007)
Linky Love - Vol 1. (23rd Jan. 2007)


* Pandagon is currently down due to a DOS attack, which is unfortunately not surprising given all the effort some on the US right have been putting in to attacking one of it's authors for daring to have a personal opinion, expressed on her personal blog, about issues they don't like, and criticising them for their stances. GRRRRR! When it comes back up I will put in a link to Amanda's post about her decision to resign. Update, 15th Feb 2007 9.41am - Pandagon is now back up and I have put in the link.

And in the Blue Corner

And so the debate about the make-up of the Labour caucus continues - Carl has posted about the shock news that there are some unionists amongst the Labour MPs, while Insolent Prick has analysed the Red Team to portray it at (what he considers) its worst. You'd never guess he has strong associations with National.

But let's turn the tables a little here - let's look at National for just a few moments. I know that in general people don't like to overly scrutinize National MPs, goodness knows why, but perhaps they deserve a little bit of our attention.

In comments to my post refuting Fran O'Sullivan's attack on the make-up of the Labour caucus, Psycho Milt postulated that a change of Government probably wouldn't see that journalist similarly writing about the lack of "union activists, teachers, lecturers, community workers and nurses" the National caucus has.

So just how many does it have? I live but to serve...

Nurse aide, community worker ("welfare representative") - Paula Bennett
Secondary teacher - Gerry Brownlee
Primary and secondary teacher - Brian Connell
Nurse - Jo Goodhew
Community worker ("youth education coordinator") and union member (4 years in the Clerical Workers Union* in the mid 80s) - Tau Henare
Legal academic - Wayne Mapp
Secondary teacher - Allan Peachey
"Junior lecturer" - Lockwood Smith
Physics teacher (secondary) - Maurice Williamson

As with the Labour MPs, I've looked only at their bios on the Parliamentary website, for consistency's sake. Feel free to make additions/subtractions in comments.

I'd note that "community worker" is about as hard to pin down as "business person" and "entrepreneur" were for the Labour list. Further I haven't included Nick Smith, as he was a tutor at university, not a lecturer, or Nicky Wagner (a lecturer, but at a polytechnic which doesn't quite fit the Labour stereotype) but I'm willing to argue the toss on whether they count or not.

The above is a considerably shorter list than that produced by applying O'Sullivan's list ("Business people, successful entrepreneurs, military men, scientists, accountants, farmers, diplomats and even a few lawyers") to Labour MPs.

Psycho Milt's list works out at:
Union activists - maybe one**
Teachers - four
Lecturers - two (four if you include Smith [N] and Wagner)
Community workers - two
Nurses - one (and one nurse aide)

So what we can conclude here is that the stereotypes applied to Labour MPs apply even less to the National caucus than the reverse.

Newsflash indeed!



* The Clerical Workers Union amalgamated with what is now the Service and Food Workers Union during the 1990s.
** Despite David Farrar's pronouncement in comments over on a post about this at Just Left that many National MPs would have been union members over the years only one listed it. And I note that the one who did is an import from another party.

Linky Love - Volume 1

I've been quite inspired by the link farming work that Ampersand does over at Alas, and have decided to do a bit of it myself, although no doubt on a much smaller scale.

My intention is to semi-regularly put together a post that links to a whole lot of posts that I've noticed and got something out of in recent times. Mainly these are going to be from NZ pol blogs, because that's often what I read, but also feminist blogs. They'll be the posts that I probably haven't written about but wanted to. Sort of like a recommended reading list, but I'm not vain enough to think that anyone will follow my recommendation. More like an acknowledgement to the author that I appreciated their post even if I didn't comment or write my own post on the subject.

I've decided not to call it a link farm though, as Wikipedia tells me that has pejorative connotations as it is a spammer tool. "Linky Love" seems to more reflect what my sentiment is, so I'll see how that goes as a name.

So here is my first go at it. Hopefully it won't be the last!

Anarchia - Mental Illness: My Struggle - thought-provoking post from Asher about responses to disclosure of mental illness

Put Up Thy Sword! - Repentant Kiwi Bloke - don't agree with everything AJ says (no surprises there) but this is a revealing and interesting (if somewhat paternalistic) piece about rape and the responsibility men take (or don't) for sexual violence.

Capitalism Bad: Tree Pretty - Hating your body is for losers - Maia writes about feminism and body image, wondering what we can do collectively to stop the hate.

Hard News - Appeasing Osama - Russell Brown has covered the outbursts from Dinesh D'Souza, blaming the left for 9/11 because of our support for liberalism (in the sense of homosexual rights, feminism, etc). An interesting discussion has ensued in the forum thread.

Inside Higher Ed - Against Phalloblogcentrism - Article by Scott McLemee about the perception that political blogging is dominated by men, and how that culture may be maintained. (Hat tip to Make Tea Not War's post at What We Said, where there is also some discussion in comments of this notion) (Apologies to MTNW for not adding the hyperlink, fixed 24th Jan)

I See Red - Minimum Wage 1980 - 2007 - Tony Milne has done a very helpful graph of the level of the legal minimum wage year by year since 1980, thus under both National and Labour-led governments, plus an additional graph showing it in today's dollars. While the evidence is not surprising it is certainly good to have.

Long Ago and Not True Anyway - "Post Abortion Syndrome" - Terence succintly sums up the wrongness of anti-abortionists arguing on the basis of protecting women's mental health.

NZ Human Rights Lawyer - Mad Bad and Unparoleable - given all the recent reactionary palaver about parole, Mark Lillico's contribution is refreshing, imho.

Ranting on the ROK - Vanity Size Me - a post by Stef about the irritation and impracticality of the practice of labelling a size 12 as a 10 (etc) that seems to be infesting women's clothing.

Red in Roskill - As the Bishop Said to the Editor - Michael Wood returns to blogging with a piece about (Anglican) Bishop Randerson's comments about faith, inciting what must be the longest non-spam comment I have ever seen.

Ok that'll do to start with.

If you have a post of your own, or some else's, that you'd like to highlight please feel free to add it in comments, or to discuss the above posts, or indeed most anything else. In particular I'd appreciate some feedback on this concept, good or bad.

Radiating that happy feeling

Because the radiation therapists have reached an agreement* with the DHBs, phew.

This strike (or rather series of strikes) has been very tense. On the one side you have workers who really deserve more recognition (pay and otherwise); a mainly female workforce who perform vital health tasks and are in demand here and overseas, facing great financial temptation to flee NZ. On the other side there are the DHBs, who are not exactly known for their friendly attitude towards their workers, but are elected boards running our health systems, and as such at arms length from the Government itself.

And then in the middle are the patients and their families. People who are in a bad state, going through the worst part of their lives in some cases, and already facing considerable uncertainty about their health anyway.

But all the radiation therapists have had to bargain with, ultimately, has been their labour, or rather its absence.

Like Maria Von Trapp I thought Bishop Randerson was quite wrong with his call for the radiation therapists to return to work for the good of their patients. These are people who have studied for some years, at considerable personal cost, and who do a difficult and highly skilled job, not for the money but because they care. Radiation therapy is not a profession you go into for the dosh - but it is not unreasonable for those working in it to expect fair remuneration.

Everyone, actually, is entitled to be paid at a rate they deserve. In our economic system what you deserve is not possible - instead you get what you can negotiate, and sometimes part of negotiation is taking industrial action, including striking.

I'd also note that a lot of people, including Randerson, have been calling for some kind of arbitration to break these deadlocks. Funny thing is that we already have a form of this, brought in with the 2004 amendments to the ERA (I think) and now called facilitation.** It's for exactly this kind of situation, where bargaining has been protracted and the relationship is fractured. I don't understand why the parties haven't gone there with this dispute, although it does require the consent of both sides, so I'm assuming one or tuther didn't agree. Either that or they did seek it but just continued to refer to it as "mediation" publicly.

Left Reckoner though had it right - the dispute had got to the point where the public relations battle was being won by the DHBs and time was running out for the radiation therapists.

It always strikes (hah hah) me as somewhat ironic that the very people we trust to care for us, or our loved ones, are the same people we, the public, often demand ignore the needs of their own families to serve us. It's a false dichotomy - radiation therapists are part of the public too, they have needs as well, and I know that they will have tried everything they possibly could before striking.

What stinks here is how the DHBs are getting off the hook. They have run the line, successfully, that it was the radiation therapists holding the patients to ransom. But who actually has the purse-strings here? Who was in fact holding out? The DHBs. Remember that the radiation therapists were in fact losing money whenever they went on strike, as they wouldn't be paid whenever they were taking industrial action. Some might say that not having to pay the strikers would have been saving the DHBs money, possibly even enough money to fund the extra pay claimed, but I don't have that kind of inside information. Would be interesting to do the figures though.

While this dispute sounds like it is at an end, this could be quite a big industrial year.*** And much of that will depend on what the Government decides to do with the contents of its coffers, and how hands-off Clark, Cullen et al decide to be.

* I'm assuming they are now going to have to seek member ratification, which actually means it isn't totally over yet, but I suspect that the union involved wouldn't have withdrawn the strike notices unless the agreement was within parameters members had previously indicated were ok.

** And it has been used - I can remember three cases off the top of my head where facilitation has been applied for, although only one of those actually ended up being facilitated I think.

*** In addition to what is happening in the medical sector, there is a great deal on the negotiating table this year in education, and no doubt in the broader public service. I note that the police will not be in talks though, as they settled late last year.

An Nouncements

Well it's been a few days since I last posted, but I just don't feel like there's much political to write about, and I can only go so far with memes and self-indulgent photo posts.

Jordan's indicated that he too feels there is Not Much going on*, but that "there'll be an announcement, soon."

So I've decided to make up some political news upon which to blog. Some announcements I'd like to hear, no less:

A Veritable Tsunami of Funding For Public Services - Clark and Cullen announce (in dubious taste) the Labour-led Government's grand plans to pump meaningful injections into the budgets of schools, universities, polytechnics, hospitals, and other public institutions.

Bush: "We Will Fight Them On The Beaches" - George W finally admits that climate change is a) real and b) not so good, and decides to launch a comprehensive War on Carbon Emissions, starting with fuel efficiency standards in line with China.

Real Issues About National's Conduct - The Herald's editorial reversing their naive dismissal of the concerns raised in The Hollow Men, and signalling the beginning of their own media campaign to root out and expose corrupt behaviour in all political parties.

International Year of Being Nice To Each Other Begins Well - Headline of article covering the launch of 2007 as International YoBNtEO, for politicians, bloggers, and all the people of the world. Blogs across the nation suddenly seem bereft of trollish comments and senseless barbs, while politicians agree that actually there's quite a bit they can develop across party lines without compromising their principles, so let's stop slagging each other in public.

Ok, that's enough to be going on with then.

* Although I'd note that Jordan has managed to write several posts since his Not Much, which suggests that there is more going on than perhaps he initially thought! I however am not motivated enough to write about climate change or Fiji (especially when No Right Turn has been doing such a sterling job).**
**Can I still call it a digression when it's at the end of the post?

Being bothered

Well the problem is that I'm not really. Bothered that is. There's a few things I'd like to post about, but haven't been able to find the time in a very busy work schedule and I seem to be currently un-afflicted by the usual compulsion to blog, as my job is taking all of my mental energy.

What I would have written about if both factors were present might have included:

• The possible (probable?) Key leadership challenge on the back of the TV3 TNS poll - actually I've recently been thinking that Brash has held on a lot longer than I'd thought he would.
• The Sunday programme on the meningitis vaccine tonight - there may be a case to make for the vaccination programme being a mistake, but the standards of journalism in that show really let their side down. I've had ME (Chronic Fatigue Syndrome) - no one knows what causes it, although there are various theories. Sunday failed to really show causal links, and they certainly didn't show that the NZ authorities were aware of the cases from Norway that the telly went on about. At one point they said that 33 people had been paid out compensation in NZ for side effects, when in fact we know from earlier media coverage as a result of Tony Ryall's questions to the Minister that these were almost all reactions to having an injection (any injection). I'm reasonably sure that it wasn't so much that people were being paid compensation as they were having their medical costs covered under the ACC scheme, as they should be. Anyway, I'm not an expert, and it would have been nice to see some NZ expert comment in the doco. (No I do not count Sue Kedgeley as an expert.)
• Jordan's recent post defending himself against the trolls (yet again) and encouraging others to keep blogging. I really have reached the conclusion that many of those who comment on various blogs just wish those of us in the minority here in the 'sphere (that would be those of the left leaning inclination) would migrate to Mars at the earliest possible opportunity. Thanks to Jordan for the much-needed bolster.
• And a surprising bouquet for Xtra. Yes, don't fall off your chair and rip your pjs, those letters were X, T, R and A. I'm very sceptical about the upgrading of their broadband speeds, as we got a letter from them a few months back saying that our line couldn't go as fast as our plan allowed at that time, so assumedly we haven't seen any improvement now. But a very very welcome side-effect seems to be that they have finally addressed the spam problem. Instead of getting 150-200 spams a day now I'm now getting one or two. Single figures! The spam filter was my main reason for shifting to Xtra in the first place and I'm finally seeing the benefit - hurrah!

Hmm, that's a bit longer than you'd expect from someone who can't be bothered...

W.W.N.D?

I'm a little perturbed at politics and political coverage lately. I haven't written about the pledge card and associated election spending shendengle because I've largely agreed with Idiot/Savant and when I've had time I've indulged myself, in the form of a scattering of comments, over on No Right Turn.*

But it seems that National is unable to get out of Attack Attack Attack mode. Russell Brown has written today about two recent beat-ups by Nat MPs, Simon Power and Tony Ryall (aka Secret Smile), and I suspect that these will continue. National has had a great opportunity to score points against Labour in recent months (two actually, if you count the Taito Phillip Field saga as well) and has certainly fulfilled part of the role of the Opposition; to hold the Government accountable. In the last Parliament it often felt that this vital function was left to Act.

But there's another, very important role, that the Opposition should play, and that National needs to remind itself about; putting up an alternative. With many of the issues that National is raising it's unclear to me what a National-led government would change or manage differently.

It's disappointing also that many of the media don't seem to be asking that simple question: What Would National Do?

One of the reasons I like National Radio so much, is that the interviewers (eg Sean Plunkett, Mary Wilson, Kathryn Ryan) do tend to pose this query, and the answer is often very revealing. For example, Plunkett asked Ryall this morning if he would still have chosen to give his child the meningitis vaccine if he had known about the ACC claims beforehand. Ryall said yes he would (although he then went on to say "because the risks outweigh the benefits", which I'm assuming was just a mistake because otherwise he makes no sense!)

So it seems we are still waiting for the National-led policy debate that Don Brash promised over a month ago in the heat of the revelations about his private life. I'm starting to wonder - why don't National want to talk about their ideas?



* To sum up my thoughts:
1. I believe that the parties whose spending was found unlawful genuinely thought it was inside the rules at the time.
2. It seems to me that the Auditor General has changed the established custom and practice, if not the letter of the law.
3. National is using this as an opportunity to foment public opposition to any public funding of political process beyond the actual mechanics of the vote itself. This is a great danger to our democracy.

The problem with the profit motive

Now there has been a lot of criticism, and rightly so, of China's use of organs from executed prisoners.

But yesterday I heard on Nat Rad about a massive scandal in the USA, where a New Jersey company that trades in human tissue, in particular bone marrow, has been found to be illegally sourcing some of its wares from funeral homes. Those who run the homes have acted to increase their own profits with little thought for the families of the corpses they have raided, or the dignity of those who have died. In fact they haven't even considered the safety of what they are doing - the radio story mentioned that the cause of death has been changed on some of the death certificates, so that the human tissue is more likely to be accepted as useable (and thus more money is made).

This is what happens when people put profit and greed first. And what does capitalism do? Encourages it.

Under pressure - the flipside

In my post Under pressure I wrote about the pressures I face to have a child, asap. That pressure hasn't really lifted.*

But anyway this post is not about that. This post is about the flipside of the pressure I face to have children. It's about the judgement many women face when they do get pregnant and some people judge it to be a Bad Thing.**

Cactus Kate has blogged in defence of Keisha Castle-Hughes who has announced she is pregnant and has been attacked from various quarters for daring to get with child. Notable with her criticism, in the article linked to above, is National MP Paula Bennett, who goes around the country telling teens not to get pregnant.

I have also been thinking about what happened around the tragic deaths of the Kahui twins. There were many comments swirling around calling for restrictions on beneficiaries fertility (to put it nicely), not to mention thinly veiled claims that Maori are genetically programmed to abuse their children.

I wonder if there isn't a race element to some of this. I note that in both of the above cases I mention the women are not white.

What also bugs me is the ownership this shows. Ownership of women's bodies by Other People (including other women). I've noticed that there are many situations in which women are judged as Wrong for getting pregnant, including:

• when under an arbitrary age (I can't work out what the current moral number is - 20?)
• when over an arbitrary age (40?)
• when they already have Too Many kids (again, no specific number identified, and there does appear to be a racial aspect to this too imho)
• when they are single
• when they are not married
• when they are lesbian, whether they are in a relationship or not
• when they are intending to be a working mum (or this is assumed)
• when they are poor
• when they are a beneficiary
• when there is a chance the child could have a genetic disease

She's pregnant, let's get over it and get on with supporting her. Yes it will be hard, becoming a parent is always hard and there are often other factors operating in a person's life that make impending parenthood harder for that individual or family. Rather than lamenting the pregnancy itself, how about focusing on making it a positive experience and thus helping the parent(s) to feel supported and loved?

Update, same day 8.49pm: And gosh, I'm stunned, there are commenters judging Castle-Hughes at Kiwiblog within hours of the announcement! Who would ever have thought?

Update, Oct 10th 4.02pm: Maia has also posted on this over at Capitalism Bad; Tree Pretty, writing about the element of "choice" and the impact the capitalist structure of our society has on it.

*In particular I have a friend who every time we interact raises it. She always asks "if" I am going to have children, almost as if we haven't had this conversation before (many many times). Although I like her very much I dread those words coming out of her mouth, but they do every time we are together, if not to me directly then to my partner. I haven't yet found a polite way to say "actually this is not really any of your business", and I'm worried that I'll find an impolite way instead...
**I'm struck by the impression that many of those who make these pronouncements are also people who would similarly judge harshly if a woman chose an abortion instead.

Is Brash out on his own?

I'm starting to wonder if Don Brash is operating without safety nets at the moment - according to Matthew Hooton on Nat Rad (and I saw him make similar comments on Breakfast last week) Brash has isolated himself from traditional advisors, including other National MPs. The Herald's business gossip column on Monday this week indicated that Bryan Sinclair was no longer giving Brash the benefit of his wisdom either.

Brash has had his several of his own senior MPs publicly exhibit the miles between him and them over the Exclusive Brethren issue (before Brash took the rather belated step of announcing actually he didn't want anything more to do with them). He also doesn't seem to have had a lot of backing over blood quantum argument (and there's a good opinion piece in the Herald this morning refuting Don's point about Maori health outcomes and choice*). Now he's launched into the police in a way that has many squirming at the thought that Brash is putting political pressure on the operational decisions of the police, which is generally considered rather unwise. And he refuses to retire that inaccurate line that Labour "stole the election".

I'm starting to think that there are some within National who don't particularly want Don to step back from the brink, to start talking policy (what happened to Brash's plan to do this?) and start looking like a possible Prime Minister rather than a grumpy old man.**

How long until Key (or English, or even Brownlee who has actually been looking remarkably statesman-like lately) makes a move?


* Unfortunately behind the Premium Content wall, or there would be a link here.
** Perhaps Brash should have put his recent polemic about Maori into Gizgoole as Russell Brown suggests? Nah, even that wouldn't have made it ok.

Selfish reasons to be left

Maia's got a post up about our generation and activism. One of the things that struck me about her post was something I'd never really thought all that much about before, not consciously anyway:

I think individual action is a useless form of protest, because it's only through collectivity that we have any power. But that's not the only problem - not buying clothes made in China, or buying fair trade whatever isn't just uselss - it also frames political action as something you do for other people. I actually ended up agreeing with one of the apathetic people they interviewed when he said - I might get involved if I thought there was something in it for me. If people believe that the only reason you paticipate in poltical protests is personal goodness then we're all screwed.

I'd often thought, in my secret socialist heart, that I was somehow a Bad Leftie for being able to find the selfish angle in most political causes I've ever felt inclined to support. Now I know that I'm not the only one, and that in fact it's probably a necessary part of my motivation.

Here's a few of my more self-serving reasons for supporting various things:

• Free education* - I hope it'll mean less crime (less likelihood that my stuff will get nicked) more educated professionals for me to access (particularly in the health and education sectors), more skilled tradespeople (so I can finally find a plumber), and a more democratic society (so all my blog whinges aren't totally in vain).
• Free healthcare - I'll get sick less often with Other People's Germs, because other people will be sick less as they'll actually go to the doctor, or fill their prescription, or whatever. Also if, Deity Of Your Choice Forbid, I need medical care I'll be able to get it even if I'm down to my last shiny new 5c piece.
• A comprehensive and fair social welfare system - Because one day I could be the person who gets made redundant in a shrinking industry, or finds herself with children and no means to support them, or needs to get away from the bullying boss who makes my life a total misery, or has an illness that just won't go away (oh wait, that last one already happened, nevermind). And because if other people can access this same system then they might be less likely to nick my stuff to get by. (Always this obsession with possessions, my precioussssss, ahem)
• Justice (and thus peace) in the Middle East - Well if nothing else it'll bring the price of the petrol I need down, plus it'll mean that the media can't get away with filling up all their papers and bulletins with foreign footage and actually focus on some local news, and hopefully even some actual political analysis, which I'd really quite like to watch.
• Fair trade - The economy's global and I'd like it immensely if the promotion of fair trade helps to maintain and protect my own wages and conditions. Pretty please.

Ok that's enough selfishness for one post. Must be my purple robot genes in control again.**


* Regarding the "free" part of free education. For future reference, whenever I write the words "free education" you can pretty much guarantee that it's shorthand for the following:
"A fully publically controlled, publically funded and publically owned education system, from early childhood to tertiary and everything in between. Oh and tertiary doesn't just mean university or polytech either."

** Is anybody out there getting my robot gene jokes? Anyone? Where's Xavier when you need him. (Mind you he'd probably tell me they're just not funny). Can you tell I'm on a low sugar diet and starting to go a bit manic. Bah, nevermind.