Ugh. June is the month of sickness apparently

Hi all. Last week I did lots of fun and busy things, so no blog posts.

I’d hoped to remedy that this week, but woke up crook with some sort of gastro thing on Monday. I thought it had gone away by the end of Tuesday, but it reappeared yesterday. Yuck.

So I’m on the couch today with only podcasts and hydrolyte solution for company. (I’d like to do more, but anything that makes my eyes focus for too long isn’t helpful to recovery.)

Maybe after the GP visit today I’ll go back to bed. I slept through the afternoon on Monday.

*sigh* why did this had to hit the last week of term instead of the first school holiday week? idk. I wanted to do fun end-of-term stuff with the students…

In the meantime, I’m listening to a podcast that I’d saved from last year about the idea of a universal basic income and other so-called radical ideas. Fascinating stuff. I must remember to get the book they’re talking about, “Utopia for realists”. Sounds interesting.

podcasts.apple.com/au/podcast/conversations/id94688506

Feminism…

I had hoped to write a bit more this week but haven’t. Today, I feel like sharing a couple of articles from Clementine Ford, Melbourne-based feminist and writer. Please read and consider them.

Men Continue to Show Themselves to be Uninterested in Women’s Lives

Clementine Ford on How Men Are Harmed by Toxic Masculinity 

Edited to add: read that reddit thread mentioned in the second article. It drives the point home very strongly. Stupid patriarchy. -_-

Here’s a picture of a kookaburra from a few weeks ago, because I feel like it.

Finally! Rental reforms introduced to Vic Parliament

These reforms were announced last year. Now, after months of consultation, whatever that means in this instance, they are finally ready to be introduced to Parliament.

Here’s hoping there are no delays – the Government’s lack of majority in the Upper House, and the tight timeframe (this is the fourth-last Parliamentary sitting week for the year) – notwithstanding.

These reforms mean a number of good things for renters – new protections for people escaping family violence, new protections about pet ownership, new rights about minor modifications, and other reforms. See the announcement here if you want more details. See here and here for news media about it.

Yay!

 

 

 

Critical situation on Manus Island

I shared the following on my personal Facebook page on Tuesday.

“An urgent message from #Manus (Please share widely):

Please, if you are reading this, tell the Australian Government that we need urgent medical care for our Brother Abdi. 

Abdi, a Somalian man, was playing soccer on the ELRTC soccer field at 6:00pm on Friday, 27/7/18, when he collided with another man. Nothing has been done to help fix Abdi’s broken knee because there are not proper medical facilities to treat us. He can’t sleep, can’t sit well, and no staff care about him. 

Because the accident was late & the hospital has no doctor at night and because the PIH clinic is closed then too, he could not have any treatment on Friday night.
PIH clinic in the Lorengau camp is closed on the weekend. So, on Saturday, he went to Lorengau Hospital. He waited in the waiting area for 4 hours and nobody could give him any treatment. Abdi then asked for painkillers and they gave him an injection and they told him to come back on Monday for an X-ray. They said nothing can be done until Monday and that he should go back to camp. 

He came back to East Lorengau camp. He was in bad pain all night Saturday, all day Sunday and now still in terrible pain and cannot sleep.
Nothing happened to help him on Sunday.

On Monday (30/7/18) PIH said he must have an X-ray at the hospital and come back and see PIH doctor. PIH they told him, “We can’t help you until we get X-ray. Your problem is serious, but we can’t help u without X-ray” 

Abdi did go again to the hospital to ask for an X-ray but the hospital told him the X-ray machine is broken. There is nobody on Manus to fix the machine. He went back to camp, and his leg is in very terrible pain and this travelling is making it much worse. Abdi was really suffering by the time he arrived at the PIH clinic in the camp.

The doctor at PIH told him that there is nothing he can do for Abdi unless he has an X-ray. He told the doctor, “I will stay here until you solve the problem.” The doctor told the Security Guard to force Abdi to leave and to lock the door and to not let Abdi in. After guard used forceful words, Abdi went outside and the guard locked him out. 

Abdi cannot get any treatment from PIH until he has an X-ray. He cannot have an X-ray because X-ray machine is broken. There is nobody to fix the X-ray machine on Manus. We think maybe X-ray machine has been broken for a very long time. The only treatment he has been given is 20 Panadol tablets and 10 Naproxen tablets and bandage for leg. These are not helping him. See the photos to see how badly his knee is broken*.

To conclude the case for Abdi there is no sleep, no rest, no walking, no shower, hard to go toilet. He must also cook his own food because there are no food services in East Lorengau Refugee Processing Centre (ELRTC). Everything here is self-service.
Abdi needs urgent medical care.

This is very serious and urgent. We think it will take a very long time before PIH or ABF or Lorengau Hospital will help him, Maybe they will not ever help him.
Please help our friend Abdi who is in very terrible pain. Please do what you can to get him treatment. We are worried he will lose the use of his leg and never be able to walk again.

@ManusAlert.”

* = I’ve included one photo below from that post, you can see more here if you wish.

The situation hasn’t changed. I re-shared a post on my personal Facebook last night:

“No medical person has come to try to help Abdi. His knee is broken and now he suffered for six days with no treatment. Still no sleep, too much pain. We are very worried for him that he might lose his leg or maybe die. Please, people reading this, try to get some help for our brother Abdi who broke his knee last Friday. PIH doctors refuse to treat him because XRay machine is broken. He needs to be on medevac flight to hospital today. Please please please help him before it is too late.
@ManusAlert“

See this Guardian article about the medical situation on Manus here: Manus medical neglect scandalous, doctors say

The entire Manus and Nauru situation pisses me off. I’ve written quite a lot about my feelings about it and how I think there’s a better way.

Currently, I’m pissed off about this specific situation in a number of different ways. I can’t help but remember when I dislocated my kneecap two and a half years ago. I was able to get very effective, fast treatment, with appropriate pain medication and health support, and was back to my usual activities very soon after the accident. Heck, my blog post about it was even titled, Ouch! We’re lucky to have a good health system…..“, for crying out loud!

Abdi has been in pain with a suspected broken femur for a week without treatment! How long is it going to continue?? I have serious concerns about his welfare. He needs assistance now!

In the past five years that the refugees and asylum seekers have been on Manus and Nauru, there have been several deaths due to negligence and outright brutality by the Australian government.

A government that is deliberately causing harm to people that it should be helping. Their actions are despicable.

Photo of Abdi’s leg:

Reblog: IWD

After I published yesterday’s post, I realised that I could have posted something a bit more directly relevant to March 8th, International Women’s Day.

My day consisted of doing placement duties driving around and sitting in offices, as well as a gym session followed by dinner with friends. In the car when we were driving around, I made sure the radio was tuned to Triple J. Every year they celebrate International Women’s Day by having “Girls to the Front”, highlighting female artists and presenters all day. 😊

I also read this piece by Carly Findlay, appearance diversity activist and friend, highlighting eight disabled women (and one non-binary person) to follow on social media.

http://carlyfindlay.com.au/2018/03/08/eight-disabled-women-and-one-non-binary-person-you-should-know-this-international-womens-day/

Quote from Carly, introducing the piece: “Happy International Women’s Day!

May your mental load be reduced, manteruptions be kept to a minimum and your voices be heard.

This year’s themes are “No Woman Left Behind” and “Press For Progress“. Disabled women are often forgotten in discussions about diversity and violence and media and women in general. So I’m going to let you know of a few who you need to follow.”

[reblog] It’s Not Over Yet

Bah humbug, of course Turnbull did.

Tosser.

Give Alistair Lawrie’s blog post a read then head over to http://equalmeansequal-justequal.nationbuilder.com/ and make sure your MP does their job in voting for what we asked for – a Marriage Act that doesn’t discriminate. Religious celebrants are already allowed to refuse service if it goes against their religious beliefs or the laws of their religion. that’s why there is a difference between religious celebrants and civil ones! Grrrr.

Bloody politicians – please get it done next week with no stupid amendments! *grumbles*

via It’s Not Over Yet

Oh, and btw, please stay safe this weekend Victorians. It looks like we’re in for a wild ride (that’ll have already begun in some parts when this post goes live). Batten down the hatches if you can – or else (if you’re like me and have pre-arranged plans) be very, very careful.

Orange Sky charity for homelessness

Got plenty of things to say, but in the meantime (because I ran out of time today), here’s something I’ve wanted to post about for a while.

See, a couple of weeks ago, I went to a fancy dinner to celebrate the year. It was organised through uni. At the dinner, between main course and dessert, we heard a talk from Nic and Lucas, the guys behind Orange Sky Laundry.

It’s a pretty awesome story about community and people helping people. As Nic and Lucas told it, they had an idea, to wash the clothes of homeless people using a mobile laundry service in the back of a van. They had a few setbacks in starting up, but now they’ve got services in different places across Australia. They’ve also started up a mobile shower service that accompanies the laundry.

Here’s a screenshot of the front page of their website, for some visuals. The real thing can be found by clicking here: http://www.orangeskylaundry.com.au/

The laundry service fills a physical need. It also fills social and emotional ones. It creates community.

 

The way they told the story got me thinking.

It reminded me of the connection I made for a little while with a homeless woman, who used to beg on Londsdale Street near Parliament Station. I think her name was Sally. The first time I met her, I was walking quickly towards the station from the bus stop, on my way back home. It was 2015 I think. I remember, the fact that made me pause was that she had a dog. An old corgie if I recall correctly. As I paused I listened to her telling her story to another person. Over time, through more stops, I’d hear more of it.

She was homeless due to domestic violence. She had had a pretty rough life. It seemed like life had dealt her a series of blows – her own child died young, for example. She lived for her dog; the money she got was first spent on dog-food, then on accommodation for the night, then food for herself.

She had cancer too and had been told she only had a year to live, which dwindled away as I visited.

How do I know she was telling the truth?

I don’t. Not really. But her eyes – the pain in them – I saw that. It felt real to me.

 

I don’t see her anymore. I haven’t done since about this time last year. I think she’s passed on.

I wonder what happened to her dog? That was her biggest fear.

#PostYourYes

Aussies, have you sent back your survey yet? 

Times are pretty tough for LGBTIQA+ people right now. There’ve been quite a few nasty attacks. This whole survey is in a way an attack because why should everyone have the right to decide on the validity of the relationships of a few? … If you were inconvenienced by a text message on the weekend, maybe have a think about that, ey? 

Anyway, here’s a brilliant (polite) video, directed at those who are considering voting no. If you are one of those, please watch and think before you do. 

Also, see this: http://www.theage.com.au/comment/logically-theres-only-one-good-reason-for-voting-no-20170922-gymr7n.html 

Just… think about it, please? 

I – and my funky-toe socks – am a yes. I posted my yes within 12 hours of collecting the survey (filled it out minutes after receiving). Go do that.  

Then watch this: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3FkwaMGpnrg

So proud of all of those who made it!  Beautiful. ❤ 

Marriage Equality Survey Starts being Mailed Today

Key Dates for the Marriage Equality Postal Survey:

I’ll be voting yes. I hope you will too.

I’m voting yes for my friends and family and those who want to get married but can’t. I’m voting yes because as a progressive Catholic agnostic woman, I think that love is love, fairness is fairness, and those who rush to judge should take a look in their own eye for the plank of wood before hunting out a supposed speck in someone else’s.

I’m also voting yes because I feel that the arguments of the no side – the most strident, loudest arguments particularly – don’t hold water. They’re obfuscations and distractions. Often they’re downright homophobic and transphobic too. Read my marriage equality essay if you haven’t already – I pull things apart a bit more clearly there.

Tbh, I would have much preferred a free vote in Parliament. Human rights shouldn’t have to be decided by popular vote. But since it’s going to happen…. may love win.I welcome discussion, provided it’s not based on bigotry, on the blog.

Return your form on the day you receive it. This matters. At the end of the day, it’s about celebrating love and commitment.

Marriage Equality Essay

Last year (in 2016) I took a subject as an elective called Sex, Gender, Identity. It was an introductory subject that encouraged us to explore different aspects of those three things and how “the personal is political” (original quote author unknown). The final assignment for the subject was an essay which we could choose the topic from a list. I chose to examine marriage – the feminist critiques and marriage equality movement. The resulting essay gained me the highest mark I’ve ever received on an assignment. But more importantly, the research I did educated me about the topics and reaffirmed my stance on the issue. Below is an edited version of that essay. Please read.

I’ll note that I’m in a privileged position in writing this article. I’ve been raised in a heteronormative environment, I’m cisgender and in an opposite-sex relationship. These are my opinions backed by evidence collected from academic sources as well as personal ones.

---

Marriage: an institution which involves formal recognition of the union of two people, conferring legitimacy on an intimate relationship ⁽³⁾. This formal recognition usually grants a range of social, religious and legal benefits, rights and responsibilities ⁽³⁾ and has existed in some form for centuries ⁽¹⁴⁾. At the moment, the most easily-recognised and legitimised marriage is monogamous and opposite-sex – it’s still considered the norm. Challenging this norm, same-sex marriages have begun to be recognised in many countries after the hard work and activism of advocates. For many, this is a positive step for LGBTIQA+ people and society as the gains are seen to outweigh potential negatives. However, other activists are not as sure, as they take a more radical view that marriage should be either changed completely or left behind together. I investigated these two competing discourses and drew conclusions for this piece.

Firstly, the positives. 🙂 It has been suggested that access to marriage is tied, metaphorically and/or physically, to full citizenship rights in society ⁽⁹⁾. Also, as the phrase, “equal before the law” suggests, in democracies, the law is a place where all citizens should be equal ⁽⁸⁾. Hence, marriage is seen as a pathway to acceptance and legitimacy, a way of demonstrating that what people feel for each other is real and valuable. A chance to throw a big party and show how much they love each other. The exclusion of LGBTIQA+ people could be and has been argued to be an intolerable discriminatory practice. It has been suggested that in order for LGBTIQA+ rights to advance, all formal barriers to full equality must be overcome ⁽²⁾⁽⁴⁾ before or while other steps are taken – like fixing anti-discrimination laws ⁽¹⁰⁾. Due to the prominence of marriage in society, it can be seen as symbolic of other rights and some have argued that governments which do not afford equal respect of and protections for both LGBTIQA+ and heterosexual intimate relationships enable and participate in systemic homophobia and heterosexism ⁽⁴⁾. It has also been argued that this inequality harms LGBTIQA+ people in substantial, material ways – from subtle exclusion to violence ^(1)(2)(4). I agree with this – I’ve read very compelling personal accounts from people over the last few weeks and before that (not to mention hearing the lived experiences of my friends) which demonstrate the truth of it (6) (11). I also agree with the contention that one way of combatting the harms is to work towards full equality, including in marriage, for all regardless of sexuality. Research shows that there are particular social, legal and psychological benefits to this.

Marriage can reinforce partnership bonds, facilitate parenting and generate levels of social support for those who participate ⁽⁷⁾. LGBTIQA+ participation in marriage widens the scope of marriage norms, as non-traditional roles and practices are expressed, intentionally or otherwise ⁽¹⁾⁽⁷⁾, providing additional choices and freedoms. For example, with children. It could be said that the very presence of LGBTIQA+ people and families in so-called public spheres changes and destabilises the unconsciously accepted heteronormative view ⁽¹⁾ of society. Hmm, maybe that’s why the conservatives get so grumpy about it. Well, they can suck it up, because change is a thing that happens. Changes to societal views of family and so on include what is seen as normal by children – everything from the gender of their parents and/or extended family members, to how gendered or egalitarian their household is. Research shows that in observing and learning about these practices and by educating each other, children become directors of change ⁽¹⁾. After all, we’re products of where we come from, influenced by the personal world(s) we inhabit. And if those worlds are more equitable, so much the better. The presence of children also highlights discriminatory practices which occur within the current system which privileges marriage, particularly heterosexual marriage, over other relationships ⁽⁴⁾. To many LGBTIQA+ people, the idea of only being allowed something separate-and-different to marriage does not work if it’s not seen as legally and emotionally equal to it. Even if/when marriage alternatives were given equal rights, benefits, protections and obligations as marriage, it can be argued that LGBTIQA+ people are still discriminated against simply because they’re still unable to choose between marriage, a civil partnership, or something else ⁽¹⁴⁾.

But what about the feminist/queer case against marriage? Feminists have criticised marriage as being oppressive to women due to patriarchal structures of power for many years ⁽¹⁴⁾. These power structures are those which reinforce a socially conservative breadwinner model ⁽⁵⁾ – an opposite-sex relationship of mandated monogamy, working husband and dependent wife bearing the brunt of housework and child-rearing ⁽⁹⁾. If you think about it, this model has been – and still is – at the core of public policy for some time ^(5)(15). Non-traditional families – such as single parents, mixed-race partnerships, and LGBTIQA+ families – challenge the model. You can tell this from the way conservatives react. However, I’ve read concerns about whether the model is really being challenged ⁽¹⁵⁾. There’s an argument that marriage equality campaigns are being turned into binary debates of for and against. These leave little room for valid critiques of the social and economic institutions of marriage, and how the societal privileging of marriage marginalises other intimate relationships ^(9)(13). The argument continues that while the potential benefits of marriage should be recognised, the next or concurrent step should be to push for those rights to be expanded to all intimate consensual relationships. There’s a risk, activists argue, that not doing this would go against hard-fought-for feminist freedoms ⁽¹²⁾ and create a new tiered system within the LGBTIQA+ community of the socially acceptable marrieds held above the rest of the queers. This could lead to a reinforcing of conservative heteronormative marriage ideas, merely expanded slightly.

Despite this, there’s no question that many LGBTIQA+ people do want to get married ⁽⁴⁾, even as they recognise its pitfalls. Marriage as an institution isn’t necessarily seen as a good thing – but the equality before the law is ⁽²⁾. Marriage is a complex institution and we should resist the urge to press it into one box or another ⁽⁵⁾. If and when marriage equality becomes reality, then the contradiction of being separate-but-equal ⁽¹³⁾ is removed. It then becomes a choice for all, heterosexual and LGBTIQA+ alike, as to whether we’ll participate in marriage and how we could or would change the institution for the better. As it currently stands, some of the population have only a restricted choice and how is that choice then free or fair? Alongside this, we can then work for the expansion of legal and economic protections, currently enshrined in marriage, to all relationships so that all intimate consensual relationships are valued ⁽⁵⁾. We could even go further and ensure that welfare rights are fair for all regardless of relationship, employment and monetary status ⁽⁵⁾. This then challenges the conservative understanding that defending the rights of women, LGBTIQA+ and other marginalised groups undermines committed caring relationships. At the same time, it dismantles the patriarchal heteronormative one-size-fits-all approach and works towards a more caring society, away from the outdated universal breadwinner model to a universal caregiver one. In this latter model, LGBTIQA+ people would be just as accepted for caregivers and caregiving as heterosexuals ⁽⁵⁾. This opens up possibilities for greater awareness on and attention to other intersectional issues. After all, attending to one issue does not prevent us from working on others and “those of us who are interested in fighting for justice and the flourishing of sentient beings in any of these contexts should be interested in fighting for justice in all of these contexts” ^{(4, p. 77)}.

 

In other words, I’m in favour of marriage equality, as I’ve previously discussed. Btw, for me, my religious beliefs influence that view positively, as I’ve mentioned before as well. I’ll be unpacking that side of the argument soon too. If the postal survey goes ahead I’ll be participating in it and voting yes. I hope if you’re an Australian reading this that you will too.

If the postal survey goes ahead I’ll be participating in it and voting yes. I hope if you’re an Australian reading this that you will too.

 

References (these got a little muddled when rewriting this into a post, but I’d really encourage you to check them out):

1. Bernstein, M. (2015). Same-Sex Marriage and the Future of the LGBT Movement. Gender & Society, vol. 29, no. 3, pp. 321–337, DOI: 10.1177/0891243215575287
2. Bevacqua, M. (2004). Feminist Theory and the Question of Lesbian and Gay Marriage. Feminism & Psychology, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 36–40, DOI: 10.1177/0959-353504040300
3. Budgeon, S. (2009). Marriage, in Encyclopaedia of Gender and Society, O’Brien J, (ed.), vol. 2, Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, pp. 505-508.
4. Callahan, J, 2009, ‘Same-Sex Marriage: Why It Matters—At Least for Now’, Hypatia, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 70-81.
5. Ferguson, A, 2007, ‘Gay Marriage: An American and Feminist Dilemma’, Hypatia, vol. 27, no. 1, pp.39-57.
6. Gadsby, H. (2017, August 17). “Probably a good time to repost my anti-plebiscite piece…” Retrieved from https://www.facebook.com/plugins/post.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2Fhannahgadsbycomedy%2Fposts%2F10155675309518000
7. Green, AI, 2010, ‘Same-Sex Marriage: Lesbian and Gay Spouses Marrying Tradition and Innovation’, Canadian Journal of Sociology, vol.35 no. 3, pp.399-436. Retrieved from: http://www.jstor.org.ez.library.latrobe.edu.au/stable/canajsocicahican.35.3.399
8. Harrison, JB, 2015, ‘At Long Last Marriage’, Journal of Gender, Social Policy and the Law, vol. 24, no. 1, pp.1-60.
9. Josephson, J, 2005, ‘Citizenship, Same-Sex Marriage, and Feminist Critiques of Marriage’, Perspectives on Politics, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 269-284.
10. Lawrie, A. (2017, July 29). A quick guide to Australian LGBTI anti-discrimination laws [Blog post]. Retrieved from https://alastairlawrie.net/2017/07/29/a-quick-guide-to-australian-lgbti-anti-discrimination-laws/
11. Lawrie, A. (2017, August 9). 2,756 Days. Frustration and love [Blog post]. Retrieved from https://alastairlawrie.net/2017/08/09/2756-days-frustration-and-love/
12. Marso LJ, 2010, ‘Marriage and Bourgeois Respectability’, Politics & Gender, vol. 6, no. 1, pp.145-53, DOI: 10.1017/S1743923X09990572
13. Merin, Y, 2002a, ‘Chapter 2: The Changing Institution of Marriage and the Exclusion of Same-Sex Couples’, in Equality for Same-Sex Couples, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp. 6-60.
14. Merin, Y, 2002b, ‘Chapter 10: Alternatives to Marriage and the Doctrine of “Separate but Equal” ’, in Equality for Same-Sex Couples, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp. 278-307.
15. Wilson AR, 2010, ‘Feminism and Same-Sex Marriage: Who Cares?’, Politics & Gender, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 134-145, DOI: 10.1017/S1743923X09990560
16. Young, C & Boyd, S, 2006, ‘Losing the Feminist Voice? Debates on the Legal Recognition of Same Sex Partnerships in Canada’, Feminist Legal Studies, vol. 14, pp. 213–240, DOI 10.1007/s10691-006-9028-8.