All sorts of good things die out over time. Rainforests... elephants...
the art of written correspondence...
And, to this endangered species
list we can now add one more creature. Increasingly elusive but once
so valued, we need to protect this rare vestige of our natural
world.
Common
sense.
Ah yes, common sense. Native intelligence killed off by our increasing reliance on instruction, legislation, signs, labels, and other people to take responsibility for that which we are responsible for. This is a world where we blame anyone but ourselves when things go wrong. How did we get here?
Perhaps in some ways we've let emotion make us
exempt from being responsible. Because bad things happen. Sometimes
terrible, tragic things. And when they do, it helps if there is
somewhere to point our anger, and on which to focus our grief. These
emotions can be so overwhelming that we will naturally look for a way
to shift the weight of it.
So we shout at companies and demand
more warnings on things. This is despite the fact that you can have
all the warnings in the world and bad things will still happen.
The
truth is, the more we expect warnings and come to rely on them, the
more danger we put ourselves in, because we will simply charge on
ahead unless someone dangles a warning under our noses.
Our
reliance on warnings is killing us.
Recently a New Zealand
mother of eight died
after excessive Coca Cola consumption.
She would drink up to 10 litres of soft drink day. Her partner said
"I never thought about it. It's just a soft-drink, just like
drinking water." Her family say that nobody knew the dangers of
drinking this much coke because the product didn't come with a
warning. Coca Cola doesn't provide a caution label against
binge consumption but their bottles do offer a list of ingredients. It's more than just water. "I never thought about it" says it all.
So would a warning on the bottle really have been the answer, when this is a simple lack of common sense? After all, this woman was also a heavy smoker - a product which comes with a very obvious warning indeed. Warnings do not stop us making poor decisions. The sad thing is, this woman's body had given her warning signs but for some reason a label from a soft drink company is the only one worth listening to.
Being aware of what you are
putting into your body – especially in such extraordinary
quantities – is the responsibility of every adult individual. We
have to stop relying on food companies to tell us what to eat and how
to eat it. Chugging back fizzy drink until a company tells us to stop
is not the way to go. We have enough intelligence and information at our disposal to be informed about what we eat. We have
a choice.
The same goes for the risks we take. For instance,
there was a case of a teenage girl who got tipsy at a house party and jumped
into the shallow end of the swimming pool at the house. She hit her head and is now, sadly, confined to a
wheelchair. A simple case of foolish decisions resulting in a tragic
lesson, right?
This young woman didn't seem to think so. Instead she sued the family who owned the pool for
not putting up... you guessed it... more warning notices. The young woman lost her case because she was entirely responsible for her own actions.
I can appreciate it would have been much easier to point the finger than face the fact
that she had caused her own suffering. It's hard to face sometimes,
but we are in control of what we do.
With all the finger
pointing going on these days, are we really letting other people and
organisations run our lives? Are we actually handing over responsibility for the decisions we make to someone else? Why are we not able to stand up and say
"I know what I am doing"? Surely it is a liberating thing to own our actions. At the end of the day there should be no one else to blame.
Let's please revive common sense and stop waiting for someone else to tell us how to live.
The Comment Tree
Maybe one day I'll learn to form an opinion. And start a blog.
Monday, 23 April 2012
Thursday, 29 March 2012
How Can We Still Be Fighting This?
It seems feminism still has a long way to go. Lately I've seen so many instances of this that my blog seems to be about little else! This is not a feminism blog! But I can't just sit back and pretend we're not still living in an old-fashioned, chauvinist society. (Who can forget the "nice guy" on Twitter who believes that a woman owes sex to her partner even if she doesn't feel like doing it?) Certainly the same old argument about rape continues to rage – how is it that we're still having to clarify the meaning of rape, in this day and age? How are people not getting this?
Right now Indonesia is developing anti-pornography laws, the implementation of which is so misguided. Offensive criteria includes the wearing of short skirts; this means women who wear mini skirts will find themselves in trouble with the law. Why? Because (and I quote):
"There have been a lot of rape cases and other immoral acts recently and this is because women aren't wearing appropriate clothes". Who said this exactly? Indonesia's parliamentary speaker. Seriously. He then went on to say:
"You know what men are like. Provocative clothing will make them do things."
Good grief. Let's read that sentence again:
“You know what men are like. Provocative clothing will make them do things”.
Hang on... who is being cited as the cause of rape here? Who is getting the blame? Who is finding themselves facing restrictions on their rights? Men? Or Women?
When will the world stop defining rape as a natural, uncontrollable response to a woman's attire? What is wrong with these men who cannot help themselves? Why is it always the victim who gets blamed for "causing" rape?
The only person who causes rape is the person doing the raping. It's pretty freakin' straightforward yet I can't believe how many heated discussions I've had with people about this issue; people who certainly agree rape is bad, but think if women dress provocatively, they should expect reactions. I'm not going to argue with that fact per se. Personally I'd never go out in a mini skirt or a barely-there top but if I decided to do so, then yes, I would anticipate some people thinking certain things about me. But lewd thoughts are one thing – lewd actions are quite another. While “provocative clothing” might create a reaction, nobody has the right to force someone to have sex, or to do anything they don't want to do.
Others will argue that sometimes a woman will lead a man on, act like a tease, and then - when they get themselves into a compromising position - decline sex. I'm not going to disagree that this happens. Women have a right to decline. And yes, some women might behave like a big ol' tease and that must be frustrating. But that still does not give anyone the right to force someone to have sex, or to do anything they don't want to do. What is the MATTER with a man that feels a woman owes him something because she's turned him on? You can dislike a girl for leading you on; that's your prerogative. But if you think that's ok for you to force sex out of her, and you do so, then guess what - you're a rapist.
Yes, women have to take responsibility for themselves. As do men. For goodness sake, that's a given for all of us as human beings. But let me make this clear. Women do not have a responsibility to not get raped. The whole idea that women can prevent this from happening is so badly blinkered it's ridiculous. Women don't have control over rape. It is the rapist who has the control. And hell, I know so many men out there who will be appalled to think some of their fellow males are not responsible enough to wait for a woman's consent.
Whatever the circumstances, if you don't have consent, it's rape. It should be plain and simple. It IS plain and simple. So why are women still being targeted as the source of rape, rather than the rapists? Are we still going to be arguing about this ten years from now? Because it seems we've still got a long way to go.
Right now Indonesia is developing anti-pornography laws, the implementation of which is so misguided. Offensive criteria includes the wearing of short skirts; this means women who wear mini skirts will find themselves in trouble with the law. Why? Because (and I quote):
"There have been a lot of rape cases and other immoral acts recently and this is because women aren't wearing appropriate clothes". Who said this exactly? Indonesia's parliamentary speaker. Seriously. He then went on to say:
"You know what men are like. Provocative clothing will make them do things."
Good grief. Let's read that sentence again:
“You know what men are like. Provocative clothing will make them do things”.
Hang on... who is being cited as the cause of rape here? Who is getting the blame? Who is finding themselves facing restrictions on their rights? Men? Or Women?
When will the world stop defining rape as a natural, uncontrollable response to a woman's attire? What is wrong with these men who cannot help themselves? Why is it always the victim who gets blamed for "causing" rape?
The only person who causes rape is the person doing the raping. It's pretty freakin' straightforward yet I can't believe how many heated discussions I've had with people about this issue; people who certainly agree rape is bad, but think if women dress provocatively, they should expect reactions. I'm not going to argue with that fact per se. Personally I'd never go out in a mini skirt or a barely-there top but if I decided to do so, then yes, I would anticipate some people thinking certain things about me. But lewd thoughts are one thing – lewd actions are quite another. While “provocative clothing” might create a reaction, nobody has the right to force someone to have sex, or to do anything they don't want to do.
Others will argue that sometimes a woman will lead a man on, act like a tease, and then - when they get themselves into a compromising position - decline sex. I'm not going to disagree that this happens. Women have a right to decline. And yes, some women might behave like a big ol' tease and that must be frustrating. But that still does not give anyone the right to force someone to have sex, or to do anything they don't want to do. What is the MATTER with a man that feels a woman owes him something because she's turned him on? You can dislike a girl for leading you on; that's your prerogative. But if you think that's ok for you to force sex out of her, and you do so, then guess what - you're a rapist.
Yes, women have to take responsibility for themselves. As do men. For goodness sake, that's a given for all of us as human beings. But let me make this clear. Women do not have a responsibility to not get raped. The whole idea that women can prevent this from happening is so badly blinkered it's ridiculous. Women don't have control over rape. It is the rapist who has the control. And hell, I know so many men out there who will be appalled to think some of their fellow males are not responsible enough to wait for a woman's consent.
Whatever the circumstances, if you don't have consent, it's rape. It should be plain and simple. It IS plain and simple. So why are women still being targeted as the source of rape, rather than the rapists? Are we still going to be arguing about this ten years from now? Because it seems we've still got a long way to go.
Friday, 9 March 2012
The Active Woman
Recently, Linda Grant and Dawn Foster collected a staggering number of stories on Twitter,
revealing first-hand sexism by women across generations. It seems
some of the attitudes bandied about decades ago are still alive and
well today. Women still get asked about their relationship status in job interviews, and get harassed on the street. It makes for incredible reading. And it got me
thinking about my own experiences with sexism and gender belittling.
I realised that mine, as it were, seemed to revolve around the same topic. Sports retail.
Ladies. Ladies is an option. God, there are so many things wrong with that I don't know where to begin. For one, how about “Women”? But then this is really an invalid point. Quite simply, women don't need to be segregated from sports. Obviously males and females have different requirements for items of gear and clothing, but these are two perfectly acceptable options to choose from within each category. Someone might have thought that having a separate tab means women can go straight to all the female sports kit. Great idea. Hang on, though, why not an equally convenient tab for men?
Simple. Because men have all the other tabs.
That's right; men are the primary customer, women only secondary. Whether put there with good intentions or not, the Ladies tab is redundant, and it merely succeeds in leaving women in second place yet again.
Women are athletes. Women are cyclists, runners, swimmers, triathletes, as well as rowers, hikers, climbers, gymnasts, wrestlers and boxers. Why then, is this macho language and sexist attitude still so acceptable in the high street sports arena? We are slowly tackling gender inequality in professional sports (although we still have a long way to go) however, as with everything, change begins closer to home.
I don't wish to get into a rage about this. And I know that not all sporting companies, nor all men (or women, for that matter) are guilty of old-school sexism. But these gender assumptions and stereotypes are rife, and we must not tolerate them anymore. So next time someone makes a sexist remark, call them on it. If, like me, you can't seem to tackle the situation on the spot, then write in. Explain that this language or attitude is archaic and unintelligent. Let them know it won't be tolerated.
At the end of the day, most of us know that women are strong, enthusiastic, powerful sportspeople. Those who don't... they just need a little education. Let's teach them.
I realised that mine, as it were, seemed to revolve around the same topic. Sports retail.
Back in December 2007 my boyfriend at the time was buying me a new pair of
hiking boots for Christmas. So, into Snow & Rock we went. The
young salesman was like an eager dog running circles around my
boyfriend; bursting with chummy trekking tales and stories of
bravado. Me, I might as well have been invisible. Nevertheless, I got
on with the task at hand, trying boots on. The sales guy squatted,
pressed down on the toe of the boots currently still on my feet,
and turned to speak to my boyfriend.
“Make sure you check
they don't rub at the toe. Women never check these things but mate,
don't they love to whine about it!”
I never said anything,
except to my boyfriend, after we'd left the store. He was equally
taken aback by the sales guy, yet we'd just let it happen. I told myself I would not to let something like that go
without comment in future.
Of course, I'd long forgotten about this when I found myself dealing
with similar treatment last year.
I'd signed up to cycle from London to Paris, and on my lunch break went shopping at Evan's cycles. Handbag on my shoulder, I strolled in and inspected various bikes, knowing exactly what I was looking for. Eventually one of the young salesmen huddled over the counter detached himself and strolled over. I told him about my impending cycle challenge.
“Oh I've done that,” he quipped. “It's hard.”
“Yes, I know. It'll be a great experience!”
“No, I mean it's really hard. It's a long way.”
“Yeees... And that's why I need a bike with...”
“My mate and I did pretty well... but you really going to have to train.”
I'd signed up to cycle from London to Paris, and on my lunch break went shopping at Evan's cycles. Handbag on my shoulder, I strolled in and inspected various bikes, knowing exactly what I was looking for. Eventually one of the young salesmen huddled over the counter detached himself and strolled over. I told him about my impending cycle challenge.
“Oh I've done that,” he quipped. “It's hard.”
“Yes, I know. It'll be a great experience!”
“No, I mean it's really hard. It's a long way.”
“Yeees... And that's why I need a bike with...”
“My mate and I did pretty well... but you really going to have to train.”
“I know. I am.”
(A casual glance at my attire)
“I'm guessing you'll be in the slow group?”
(A casual glance at my attire)
“I'm guessing you'll be in the slow group?”
Needless to say, I didn't buy a bike from Evans. Of course, they didn't know
they'd even offended me, because I'd said nothing. It wasn't until I had left the shop and wandered
down the street that the reality of the conversation took hold in my brain. He had belittled me and my ability.
That actually happened. A guy who knew nothing about me other than
that I was a woman in heels, looking for a bike. From this he didn't
assume I was a cycling champion on my day off... he assumed I was an
incapable novice. (I am neither.)
I reckon if I was a man who had come in carrying a helmet and a sports bag full of lycra, and slapped the guy on the back, I'd be walking out with a set of wheels and a thumbs up. And I was annoyed at myself for not calling the guy up on his comment. How would anything ever change?
So I wrote to Evans' head office.
I don’t like being patronized. I don’t like being treated like I’m incapable of cycling with the best of them. I certainly don’t like someone speaking to me like that then think I’m actually going to fork out some money at the end of it. I’m cycling this for the British Red Cross. I’ve done long-distance cycling before. I know the kind of bike I want and I don’t need to be spoken to like that. I would love to see a memo go out to all your stores to remind them that women are cyclists too. Oh, and we also like to shop. So if you want to make a sale, wisen up. And get your hand off it.
I reckon if I was a man who had come in carrying a helmet and a sports bag full of lycra, and slapped the guy on the back, I'd be walking out with a set of wheels and a thumbs up. And I was annoyed at myself for not calling the guy up on his comment. How would anything ever change?
So I wrote to Evans' head office.
I don’t like being patronized. I don’t like being treated like I’m incapable of cycling with the best of them. I certainly don’t like someone speaking to me like that then think I’m actually going to fork out some money at the end of it. I’m cycling this for the British Red Cross. I’ve done long-distance cycling before. I know the kind of bike I want and I don’t need to be spoken to like that. I would love to see a memo go out to all your stores to remind them that women are cyclists too. Oh, and we also like to shop. So if you want to make a sale, wisen up. And get your hand off it.
Evan's were very apologetic and after
initially trying to fob me off with some store vouchers they agree to
donate to Red Cross instead. I was satisfied with their response;
they knew they'd done wrong. But the experience irked me. I realised
this casual sporting sexism was everywhere.
Sure enough, I soon stumbled upon it again when a couple of people recommended I get some of my cycle kit from http://www.wiggle.co.uk/. To be fair, this seemed like a great site, until I noticed its category options:Ladies. Ladies is an option. God, there are so many things wrong with that I don't know where to begin. For one, how about “Women”? But then this is really an invalid point. Quite simply, women don't need to be segregated from sports. Obviously males and females have different requirements for items of gear and clothing, but these are two perfectly acceptable options to choose from within each category. Someone might have thought that having a separate tab means women can go straight to all the female sports kit. Great idea. Hang on, though, why not an equally convenient tab for men?
Simple. Because men have all the other tabs.
That's right; men are the primary customer, women only secondary. Whether put there with good intentions or not, the Ladies tab is redundant, and it merely succeeds in leaving women in second place yet again.
Women are athletes. Women are cyclists, runners, swimmers, triathletes, as well as rowers, hikers, climbers, gymnasts, wrestlers and boxers. Why then, is this macho language and sexist attitude still so acceptable in the high street sports arena? We are slowly tackling gender inequality in professional sports (although we still have a long way to go) however, as with everything, change begins closer to home.
I don't wish to get into a rage about this. And I know that not all sporting companies, nor all men (or women, for that matter) are guilty of old-school sexism. But these gender assumptions and stereotypes are rife, and we must not tolerate them anymore. So next time someone makes a sexist remark, call them on it. If, like me, you can't seem to tackle the situation on the spot, then write in. Explain that this language or attitude is archaic and unintelligent. Let them know it won't be tolerated.
At the end of the day, most of us know that women are strong, enthusiastic, powerful sportspeople. Those who don't... they just need a little education. Let's teach them.
Sunday, 9 October 2011
Am I A Feminist?
I often hear women asked, "So are you a feminist?"
Personally I wouldn't know how to answer that question, mainly because I don't know what the genuine meaning is anymore. It has been blurred to extremes, from the "I will never cook for a man", to "Beyonce can crotch-dance in her hot pants because girls run the world". Say what? I can't make much sense of it anymore. To me, feminism means standing up for our right to be on an equal playing field with, and treated with the same respect as men. Ensuring women have the same opportunities as men, and the same freedom of choice.

So am I a feminist? I'm not sure. I know many strong, intelligent women doing good things for our gender who say they would not call themselves feminists. While on the other hand, many of those who consider themselves one often fall into one of two categories:
1) Feminists who hate men; and
2) Feminists who attack women.
I get why men are seen as the enemy. Misogynist language and sexist behaviour is a huge part of the problem, and it needs to be tackled. But don't forget, this doesn't just come from men. We do it to ourselves and we do it to one another. But the man-hating kind of feminists seem hell bent on creating lines to read between, convinced that everything has sexist undertones and I don't see the good this does. We need to tackle the behaviour, not the gender. After all, women are not the lesser sex, but neither are men. If we want men to respect us we need to respect men. Equal playing field, remember? At the end of the day, misandry is just another form of sexism, and how can feminists be taken seriously if they themselves are the very thing they're fighting against?
Then - and this baffles me - there's the type of feminist who attacks women. In particular women who bake cakes or wear dresses or like to leave the house in a full face of make up to go get a pint of milk. So? We should be celebrating the fact that a woman can do whatever the hell she wants with her life. Marry, not marry, procreate, not procreate, start a business, not start a business, bake a cake, or go down the shop and buy one. The woman-bashing feminist wants no bar of domesticity, and seems to believe a woman who gives up her career to play housewife, or spends her days making muffins might as well get down on her knees and let a man walk all over her. Get out of the kitchen, you're holding back our gender! But why should anyone conform one way or the other? This is about freedom of choice, and telling a woman to wear trousers, choose career over children and order a takeaway is not the answer. Let them bake cake.
It's these two angry definitions of feminism which make it hard to decide whether I am a feminist by name. But I do believe in women's rights. I am proud to be from New Zealand, the first country where women were given the right to vote. I believe both men and women have a part to play in holding us back (and it's nothing to do with kitchens). I also don't think enough young women are aware how much choice they now have. I want more female role models who are celebrated for their actions and their words and their talents - not for their appearance. And I don't believe the overtly-sexual nature of women in entertainment makes any sort of statement about girl power, because all it is doing is fueling the concept that women need to be sexually aggressive in order to be considered strong or powerful. That's what I believe.
(And I like to bake, but I don't because I'm terrible at it.)
So don't bother asking me if I'm a feminist, because to answer that I'd have to know your own personal definition of the word. I can tell you that I think women can do more to make themselves heard, and that one doesn't have to act like a man - nor a nubile temptress - to do so. Just use your voice. Your voice.
If that's still not clear, then this video (while centered on America) expresses everything I believe in.
Miss Representation 8 min. Trailer 8/23/11 from Miss Representation on Vimeo.
Labels:
entertainment,
feminism,
feminists,
media,
sexism,
women,
womens rights
Thursday, 22 September 2011
No Such Thing As Road Tax
![]() |
| Photo by akatori |
Firstly, in regards to the news piece: the idea of slowing down traffic seems to be another case of tackling the symptoms, rather than the root of the problem. The core issue - which few seem to be addressing - is the general attitude of drivers towards cyclists, and in many cases, of cyclists towards drivers. Demanding drivers slow down is only going to exacerbate the problem. I honestly don't think anything will improve unless there is a way to segregate cyclists and drivers with separate paths. In other words, car-free cycle lanes, and bike-free roads. If only this were possible! Instead we must continue to share the road.
As for the anti-cycling BBC viewers and their comments, I have to say one thing.
THERE IS NO ROAD TAX.
Road tax was abolished in 1937. Yes, 1937! Winston Churchill did away with it as he figured that "it will be only a step from this for them to claim in a few years the moral ownership of the roads." It's interesting that despite scrapping the road tax, this is still happening.
These days every taxpayer contributes to the upkeep of public roads. That means cyclists too. Yep, we all pay our share. What drivers pay is actually a vehicle excise duty, which focuses on Co2 emissions. It has nothing to do with roads. Or cyclists. So please stop taking it out on us.
At the end of the day it's important to get the facts right before building a battleground. We all pay for roads, and we all must share them.
Don't believe me? More helpful info here: http://ipayroadtax.com/
Saturday, 30 July 2011
Cycling to Paris
Of course, don't forget to tune back in here for everything else!
Wednesday, 22 June 2011
Gold Stars For Grown Ups
Life gives you little reminders in funny ways.
Today I got one in a queue.
It is a truth universally acknowledged that people in queues do not want to be queuing. In fact I think it's safe to say that anyone who has ever stood in a queue has not been happy about it. This evening I was in my third queue of the day: after the Underground ticket line, the Post Office, I was now standing zombie-like in the supermarket. I only wanted some milk, and the shortest line had three people in it. As anyone would agree, that was THREE PEOPLE TOO MANY.
As I waited, the checkout lady seemed to operate in slow motion and my mind sunk deeper into a pit of impatience. I watched the checkout staff distract one another with conversation. Why did they have to chat? The man in front of me had a little girl and I watched as she played peekaboo with the checkout lady. I smiled, but in my mind I wondered how long this was going to go on for.
And then AT LAST the man took his change and was turning to leave, when the checkout lady asked the girl, "Have you been good?"
The little girl stopped to consider the question.
"Yes! I-I-I....I got a gold star!"
The checkout lady smiled at her. "Did you now?"
"Yes! I got.... three! Three stars."
The queue stared at the checkout lady, waiting, watching.
The father stared as his daughter wondering what to do.
At the same time the little girl stared at the checkout lady, waiting for a response to what she clearly felt were notable achievements.
And so the checkout lady said, "Goodness! Was that today?"
Proudly, the child replied, "Yes... But also..."
And she counted out on her little fingers, staring up at the ceiling as she worked it out.
"Monday.... and then... and then... and yesterday..... and...... and..... TODAY."
"Well!" said the checkout lady, ready to wrap this up but not really knowing how.
The father looked nervously at the growing queue.
But everyone was looking at the little girl, who clearly had more to say on the matter.
"Cos.. cos... we get gold stars..." continued the girl, "but you have to be good!"
And so, the conversation reached its conclusion.
The relieved father led his daughter away, and everyone in the queue was smiling, looking a little dazed. Like they'd all experienced a moment of clarity.
The checkout lady gave me an apologetic smile as she scanned my milk.
"Well hey," I said to her, "One should always be proud of one's achievements."
"Oh yes, " she replied, "A gold star is a big deal at that age."
Then she added to herself, "I'm still waiting for mine!"
You know what?
We don't get gold stars anymore; nor do we give them out. That's because we're adults - we don't really need a sticker to acknowledge when we've done well. Or do we?
Unfortunately (being adults) we're all far too coy to shout about our achievements. That's kind of depressing, don't you think? Given we surely achieve a heck of a lot, being grown ups and all? We're so busy worrying, scowling, getting stressed, getting distracted, welling up with impatience in queues... what about the good stuff? What about that great feeling of accomplishment? The fact we are here! Doing what we do! Making life happen! Why do we forget about that?
Next time you do something you're proud of, freakin' well shout about it! TELL someone!
Even if it is the supermarket checkout lady.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Feel free to give yourself a gold star and shout about something you did that you're proud of in the comments. Anything at all! SHARE IT!
I'll go first.
Labels:
achievement,
children,
happiness,
life,
success
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)




