My new proposed title is:
Defending the Other or Confronting Normality?
I'm enjoying the double-meaning of "confronting" - both the verbal sense of challenging, and the adjectival sense of difficulty, struggle. This latter sense is pretty much what I'm advocating - a constant process of challenging dominant, homogenising, Othering processes that devalue diversity, including "progressive" discourses that try to normalise and tame the Other, instead, I advocate pushing the boundaries to acknowledge the breadth of human diversity.
In my more confrontational moments, I consider taking on the more stigmatised aspects of each of the categories I'm analysing, for example taking on S/m or "bug chasing" behaviour within queer culture, or "radical" Islamist clerics, or anti-social personality disorder. Although many mouth the rhetoric of tolerance, everyone draws lines, finding certain practices/identities abhorrent. I think that we often choose to put our heads in the sand, pretending that queers are all very respectable, Muslims are docile, and people with mental illnesses are pitiable. I suspect that the word "radical" (as opposed to moderate) often serves to delineate acceptable from not. Which amuses me, because my history in radical feminism - and my affiliation with radical environmentalism - means that I appreciate radical thought for how it sees itself, as taking ideas to their logical conclusion, with full integrity. To use the word "radical" as a simple perjorative is deeply misguided.
Anyway, this post is going off track (that's why i blog after all, to be able to weave along whatever track takes my fancy) ...
Wednesday, April 25, 2007
WonderRagz are GO
Over the past fortnight or so, I've put a bit of energy into my Ragz. I made a display case that looks great! And I've repacked my stock into cellophane bags (that are biodegradable and look SO much better than the snap-locks I was using). Now I just have to print out the new labels I made (that don't have the name of the material, and have a simple tick-a-box option for sizing) and seal the packages with them. Oh, and I plan to make a stack more, especially maxis (I only have one left).
Then, the next stage is to make a few more display cases, for places where I plan to sell them. The case I have made looks small, but in fact stores a huge number of them. So, I know now that the case needs to be heaps smaller for places that will have less stock. And I've started making this really cute banner for my stalls - I've cut out little pads, that look SO cute!
So, it's all GO!
Then, the next stage is to make a few more display cases, for places where I plan to sell them. The case I have made looks small, but in fact stores a huge number of them. So, I know now that the case needs to be heaps smaller for places that will have less stock. And I've started making this really cute banner for my stalls - I've cut out little pads, that look SO cute!
So, it's all GO!
Political handywoman
I just looked up Suzanne Pharr on the internet, cos she wrote the foreword for Eli Clare's awesome book Exile and Pride. Anyway, Pharr describes herself with the wonderful term "political handywoman", explicitly choosing to identify not as an expert, but with the blue-collar label "handywoman." I think that's neat. I'm not sure how much she charges organisations for her services - I'd hope that her practice matches her rhetoric!
Sunday, April 22, 2007
My learning style
Today I've been exploring my "learning style" as part of the "Postgrad Essentials" course I'm doing. The test was pretty cool - it asked questions and I was often amazed at how clear my answers were. Anyway, here were my results:
Active/Reflective: I was 7 points in the direction of Reflective (that's a "moderate preference");
Sensory/Intuitive: I was 9 points in the direction of Intuitive (that's a "strong preference");
Visual/Verbal: I was 3 points in the direction of Verbal (that's considered "well balanced");
Sequential/Global: I was 11 points in the direction of Global (that's a "very strong preference", in fact as strong as is possible!)
So, basically, I like working alone, intuitively and reflectively, and I like to connect what I'm doing all together. I reckon that pretty accurately represents how I am working at the moment!
It seemed to kinda hint at a lack of discipline too, which is perhaps true - a resistance to the hard slog of detailed, consistent work.
Active/Reflective: I was 7 points in the direction of Reflective (that's a "moderate preference");
Sensory/Intuitive: I was 9 points in the direction of Intuitive (that's a "strong preference");
Visual/Verbal: I was 3 points in the direction of Verbal (that's considered "well balanced");
Sequential/Global: I was 11 points in the direction of Global (that's a "very strong preference", in fact as strong as is possible!)
So, basically, I like working alone, intuitively and reflectively, and I like to connect what I'm doing all together. I reckon that pretty accurately represents how I am working at the moment!
It seemed to kinda hint at a lack of discipline too, which is perhaps true - a resistance to the hard slog of detailed, consistent work.
diversity
this is perhaps going to sound ridiculously obvious, but I was just searching around for possible conferences relevant to my interests, and i discovered an interdisciplinary conference that was about diversity and i realised that that is a broad descriptor of what i am researching. it's been frustrating trying to find what possible broad heading my interests would come under, and i knew it was interdisciplinary, but that's IT! of course, it's so much more specific than that - it's looking at the language of those who defend the stigmatised.
der. i know, it doesn't sound like a breakthrough, but it feels really grounding to interdisciplinary attention given to this issue, cos what i am doing is inherently interdisciplinary, it is really about diversity rather than being about race, or about mental health or about sexuality per se.
der. i know, it doesn't sound like a breakthrough, but it feels really grounding to interdisciplinary attention given to this issue, cos what i am doing is inherently interdisciplinary, it is really about diversity rather than being about race, or about mental health or about sexuality per se.
Thursday, April 19, 2007
why a blog?
so, last time i met with one of my supervisors, we agreed that i would give her a lit review on my readings on race. i haven't got a lit review on race to give her today. i've done a lot of reading and thinking, but haven't spent enough time writing up my reading.
my instinct was to castigate myself for being "behind" or "disorganised" or "lacking discipline" or whatever. i wondered what i could do - maybe apologise and reschedule our appointment, maybe whip together my notes or stay up late for a few nights and pull together what i could, putting life on hold for a while (e.g. last night i nearly cancelled on a comedy festival gig that i was seeing with friends, thankfully i didn't cos it was really good). in the past, this has pretty much been my solution, when an essay has been due and i've spent too much time reading and not enough time writing. i think it's meant that the quality of my writing has suffered, that it hasn't reflected the depth and breadth of my understanding and ideas.
and i realised that this is my PhD, and more than that, this is my life. i keep hearing the bit about it being my PhD, and an old lecturer once told me that the way you live during your honours year can set a template for the rest of your academic career. i bunked down for my honours year - largely because my partner had just died suddenly and i was grieving privately and my thesis was a convenient screen to hide behind. i regret some things that i didn't do that year, and i am not going to live that way again, especially since a PhD is a marathon not a sprint.
but this makes it sound like i'm justifying myself, defending my degree of commitment, when this isn't at all what i'm thinking. i am so immersed in my thesis, i am progressing in leaps and bounds, but the way that i am expressing myself is in my blog. i'm learning that the way that i approach my study is not to systematically organise my thoughts into neat categories, like "race" and "sexuality". i just flicked open one of my favourite books - a book that has been one of the most influential in my thinking in the past few years - Eli Clare's Exile and Pride. It's a personal, political interweaving of Clare's insights into disability (she has cerebral palsy), sexuality (she's queer), gender (she's gender-queer), race (she's white, her whole rural town was white), environmentalism (she articulates a wonderful environmental ethic), class (she's rural, mixed/working class, but moved to the city so that she could have queer activist community and employment opportunities), etc. a reviewer described her work as "a vision of broadbased and intersectional politics that can move us beyond the current divisions of single-issue movements." I emulate her breadth and connections.
The term "broadbased" is key - it isn't "breadth" in the sense of glossing over the specificities of each "issue" she discusses, it's very grounded in specific experience. But it acknowledges the inherent intersectionality of many "issues" that are too often discussed separately. The clearest example from her work is her discussion of the "freak show", which historically displayed people from colonised countries, people with disabilities, people with atypical sexual characteristics (e.g. intersex), developmentally disabled people, cojoined twins, people of short stature, etc, together as variations on the "freak." She explores how this show reinforced the "normality" and superiority of the viewers. She explores the contemporary manifestations of this historical grouping.
it reminds me of an idea someone expressed (i think it was either said or hage, i can't remember, but i'll find it when i put my notes from them onto computer) - about the idea of an array, a cataloguing, an assortment of people, e.g. the multicultural fair, where all the "different" foods and costumes are displayed, or (I would add) the DSM, where all the "different" pathologies and failings are laid out. He explored the way in which this process reduces diversity to managable proportions, produces the normality of those who are not part of the display, and I would argue even describes the conditions of normality by a process of contrast. For example, definitions in the DSM rely on an otherwise unarticulated sense of what is "normal behaviour". The "normality" of not stealing, for example, is articulated by contrast with kleptomania [even though stealing is routine in imperial cultures, but somehow the land and cultures of indigenous peoples can be stolen without that being defined as stealing].
something that i find really powerful is the identification of the pathological tendencies of "normal" society, the "insanity of normality" as Jensen constantly describes it. Perhaps pathological is not quite what i mean, i mean naming, describing normals, not leaving them unnamed, unexamined and thus natural. it reminds me of a car trip once i made with the other editors of Lesbian Network magazine (back in my lesbian feminist days). I was the only middle-class person in the car, the others were all working class, and they were discussing middle-class characteristics in a way that i had never previously experienced. i felt profoundly self-conscious and suddenly aware of my taking-for-granted the goodness of middle class habits. Specifically, they were talking about how "nice" middle class people can be, how fake this can be and how annoying such fakeness is.
anyhow, i think i'm digressing. i'm wanting to talk about why i'm blogging. i don't intend to write my thesis in the way i write my blog. of course not. that would be unacademic. but i do intend to explore my ideas in a grounded way on my blog. explore the ideas that don't fit neatly onto a microsoft word document with subheadings and clear references, or into an Endnote file. the writers i most admire (Eli Clare, Arundhati Roy, Derrick Jensen, bell hooks, Audre Lorde, Alison Bechdel, Edward Said, Ghassan Hage, and I just started flicking through Gloria Anzaldua's Borderlands/ La Frontera and I suspect she may join this list), Kate Millett ... OK this list is getting long) - they all blend their experiences of the world into their theorising. they understand and value their life experiences as knowledge.
i'm truly not sure how my thesis-writing will develop (the use of the future tense here is not entirely accurate, but what i have written so far is minimal) but i know that this process of blogging is allowing my ideas to develop, i am continually drawing on my reading and reflecting on it, and i desire to write every day.
my instinct was to castigate myself for being "behind" or "disorganised" or "lacking discipline" or whatever. i wondered what i could do - maybe apologise and reschedule our appointment, maybe whip together my notes or stay up late for a few nights and pull together what i could, putting life on hold for a while (e.g. last night i nearly cancelled on a comedy festival gig that i was seeing with friends, thankfully i didn't cos it was really good). in the past, this has pretty much been my solution, when an essay has been due and i've spent too much time reading and not enough time writing. i think it's meant that the quality of my writing has suffered, that it hasn't reflected the depth and breadth of my understanding and ideas.
and i realised that this is my PhD, and more than that, this is my life. i keep hearing the bit about it being my PhD, and an old lecturer once told me that the way you live during your honours year can set a template for the rest of your academic career. i bunked down for my honours year - largely because my partner had just died suddenly and i was grieving privately and my thesis was a convenient screen to hide behind. i regret some things that i didn't do that year, and i am not going to live that way again, especially since a PhD is a marathon not a sprint.
but this makes it sound like i'm justifying myself, defending my degree of commitment, when this isn't at all what i'm thinking. i am so immersed in my thesis, i am progressing in leaps and bounds, but the way that i am expressing myself is in my blog. i'm learning that the way that i approach my study is not to systematically organise my thoughts into neat categories, like "race" and "sexuality". i just flicked open one of my favourite books - a book that has been one of the most influential in my thinking in the past few years - Eli Clare's Exile and Pride. It's a personal, political interweaving of Clare's insights into disability (she has cerebral palsy), sexuality (she's queer), gender (she's gender-queer), race (she's white, her whole rural town was white), environmentalism (she articulates a wonderful environmental ethic), class (she's rural, mixed/working class, but moved to the city so that she could have queer activist community and employment opportunities), etc. a reviewer described her work as "a vision of broadbased and intersectional politics that can move us beyond the current divisions of single-issue movements." I emulate her breadth and connections.
The term "broadbased" is key - it isn't "breadth" in the sense of glossing over the specificities of each "issue" she discusses, it's very grounded in specific experience. But it acknowledges the inherent intersectionality of many "issues" that are too often discussed separately. The clearest example from her work is her discussion of the "freak show", which historically displayed people from colonised countries, people with disabilities, people with atypical sexual characteristics (e.g. intersex), developmentally disabled people, cojoined twins, people of short stature, etc, together as variations on the "freak." She explores how this show reinforced the "normality" and superiority of the viewers. She explores the contemporary manifestations of this historical grouping.
it reminds me of an idea someone expressed (i think it was either said or hage, i can't remember, but i'll find it when i put my notes from them onto computer) - about the idea of an array, a cataloguing, an assortment of people, e.g. the multicultural fair, where all the "different" foods and costumes are displayed, or (I would add) the DSM, where all the "different" pathologies and failings are laid out. He explored the way in which this process reduces diversity to managable proportions, produces the normality of those who are not part of the display, and I would argue even describes the conditions of normality by a process of contrast. For example, definitions in the DSM rely on an otherwise unarticulated sense of what is "normal behaviour". The "normality" of not stealing, for example, is articulated by contrast with kleptomania [even though stealing is routine in imperial cultures, but somehow the land and cultures of indigenous peoples can be stolen without that being defined as stealing].
something that i find really powerful is the identification of the pathological tendencies of "normal" society, the "insanity of normality" as Jensen constantly describes it. Perhaps pathological is not quite what i mean, i mean naming, describing normals, not leaving them unnamed, unexamined and thus natural. it reminds me of a car trip once i made with the other editors of Lesbian Network magazine (back in my lesbian feminist days). I was the only middle-class person in the car, the others were all working class, and they were discussing middle-class characteristics in a way that i had never previously experienced. i felt profoundly self-conscious and suddenly aware of my taking-for-granted the goodness of middle class habits. Specifically, they were talking about how "nice" middle class people can be, how fake this can be and how annoying such fakeness is.
anyhow, i think i'm digressing. i'm wanting to talk about why i'm blogging. i don't intend to write my thesis in the way i write my blog. of course not. that would be unacademic. but i do intend to explore my ideas in a grounded way on my blog. explore the ideas that don't fit neatly onto a microsoft word document with subheadings and clear references, or into an Endnote file. the writers i most admire (Eli Clare, Arundhati Roy, Derrick Jensen, bell hooks, Audre Lorde, Alison Bechdel, Edward Said, Ghassan Hage, and I just started flicking through Gloria Anzaldua's Borderlands/ La Frontera and I suspect she may join this list), Kate Millett ... OK this list is getting long) - they all blend their experiences of the world into their theorising. they understand and value their life experiences as knowledge.
i'm truly not sure how my thesis-writing will develop (the use of the future tense here is not entirely accurate, but what i have written so far is minimal) but i know that this process of blogging is allowing my ideas to develop, i am continually drawing on my reading and reflecting on it, and i desire to write every day.
acacias are hardy and molasses kills cabbage moth
so my newest garden lessons are that acacias are hardy - one of the chooks had severely damaged one of my new acacias (acacia myrtifolia), but CERES nursery staff assure me they are hardy and will recover. which is just as well cos they were out of stock and i wanted to grow one!
the other lesson i learnt on-site at the CERES market garden. Meg took me there this week, which at first seemed like a rather boring stuff-around kind of way to spend time, but once we got there was really awesome! Meg was giving a group of Muslim schoolgirls a lesson in organic market gardening - it was great to see these girls in hijab and long skirts shovel and rake compost and then scatter seeds. the most amusing point was when one of the girls said to her teacher "miss, can we take off our skirts" - of course, they were all wearing pants underneath, but i was ignorant of this fact and wondered about the extreme contrast of total covering one minute, stripping the next. under their school outer clothes, many of them were wearing fashionable clothes and they were comparing labels, prices and the availability of "cool" clothes in their local shopping centres. i enjoyed the experience.
anyway, back to the gardening lesson. i wondered how they controlled cabbage moth (which is wreaking havoc with my brassicas at the moment). they spray the leaves with a teaspoon of molasses and a teaspoon of detergent mixed in a litre of water. the molasses kills the caterpillars (which eat the leaves) and the detergent keeps the molasses on. So i came home and sprayed my brassicas. fingers crossed :>
the other lesson i learnt on-site at the CERES market garden. Meg took me there this week, which at first seemed like a rather boring stuff-around kind of way to spend time, but once we got there was really awesome! Meg was giving a group of Muslim schoolgirls a lesson in organic market gardening - it was great to see these girls in hijab and long skirts shovel and rake compost and then scatter seeds. the most amusing point was when one of the girls said to her teacher "miss, can we take off our skirts" - of course, they were all wearing pants underneath, but i was ignorant of this fact and wondered about the extreme contrast of total covering one minute, stripping the next. under their school outer clothes, many of them were wearing fashionable clothes and they were comparing labels, prices and the availability of "cool" clothes in their local shopping centres. i enjoyed the experience.
anyway, back to the gardening lesson. i wondered how they controlled cabbage moth (which is wreaking havoc with my brassicas at the moment). they spray the leaves with a teaspoon of molasses and a teaspoon of detergent mixed in a litre of water. the molasses kills the caterpillars (which eat the leaves) and the detergent keeps the molasses on. So i came home and sprayed my brassicas. fingers crossed :>
post Varekai musings
Last night i had a free ticket to check out Varekai - the Cirque du Soleil show. WOW! My jaw was on the floor for most of the show. I almost forgot to clap at some points, it was just so incredible. There was a guy juggling huge balls and doing the craziest stuff- like at one point he had a stick and two balls, he caught the stick in his mouth and then got one ball from his foot onto the stick and then the second ball on top of the first (also from his foot). Even cooler were the acro guys juggling each other (the flier would be in a headstand on the bases feet, then tossed in the air, and landing again); or the 3 little boys who juggled while doing backflips in sync; or the young woman in the sparkly costume (pretty!) who contorted her body into the most flinch-worthy positions. Or the stacks of three people standing on each other's shoulders ... no my favourite was the net/tissue act. this guy used a diamond shaped net like a tissue/rope, wrapping himself in it, wrapping and falling like a tissue act, climbing up it, while extending it like wings. I don't do it justice here, it was mesmerising and I've never seen anything like it. There was also a cool double-trapeze act that was fun to pick out tricks in (having done a very modest amount of trapeze, and an even more modest amount of triple).
So, anyway, it got me thinking about how I can keep doing aerials but ditch the class. So I came up with the idea of doing beginners aerials (it's a big class) - I know it's a bit of a regression and part of my pride is railing against it, but apart from that it's such a good idea (sorry pride, I'm not ignoring you)! And then today i found out that my acro class has been cancelled, which sucks cos it's the one i'm most excited about! hannah is trying to recruit, but i'm resigned to possibly hooking into the intermediate class (which is also on friday). I think that might be pretty cool - beginner's aerials (thursday) and intermediate acro (friday). not sure about conditioning on mondays though ... 3 circus nights a week is a bit full on. but that said, i am wanting to get my fitness back up and circus seems to be the only thing i actually sho up for!
So, anyway, it got me thinking about how I can keep doing aerials but ditch the class. So I came up with the idea of doing beginners aerials (it's a big class) - I know it's a bit of a regression and part of my pride is railing against it, but apart from that it's such a good idea (sorry pride, I'm not ignoring you)! And then today i found out that my acro class has been cancelled, which sucks cos it's the one i'm most excited about! hannah is trying to recruit, but i'm resigned to possibly hooking into the intermediate class (which is also on friday). I think that might be pretty cool - beginner's aerials (thursday) and intermediate acro (friday). not sure about conditioning on mondays though ... 3 circus nights a week is a bit full on. but that said, i am wanting to get my fitness back up and circus seems to be the only thing i actually sho up for!
Decent White Men
My earlier musings led me to browse back to my thesis notes on Derrick Jensen. He uses the expression "decent White men" and arguest that this group of people commit the most horrific destruction on the planet.
This also reminded me of Howard's comments soon after being elected, that the era of PC was over, now people could "reasonably and moderately and decently" talk about subjects that were formerly taboo. In other words, so long as one adopts middle-class manners, it's ok to be mean-spirited, oppressive, prejudiced ... you name it.
And to go a further step in my train of thought, it brings me to Eli Clare's comments about "rednecks", about how middle-class progressives believe that social prejudice is most concentrated amongst the (white) rural, working class. I've read other accounts by working class women who point this out.
To me, this is symptomatic of the desire to locate social problems in others, rather than exploring lines of power, lines of complicity, lines of symmetry.
This also reminded me of Howard's comments soon after being elected, that the era of PC was over, now people could "reasonably and moderately and decently" talk about subjects that were formerly taboo. In other words, so long as one adopts middle-class manners, it's ok to be mean-spirited, oppressive, prejudiced ... you name it.
And to go a further step in my train of thought, it brings me to Eli Clare's comments about "rednecks", about how middle-class progressives believe that social prejudice is most concentrated amongst the (white) rural, working class. I've read other accounts by working class women who point this out.
To me, this is symptomatic of the desire to locate social problems in others, rather than exploring lines of power, lines of complicity, lines of symmetry.
Wednesday, April 18, 2007
Cho Seung-Hui (Virginia Tech massacre)
So, I've been browsing information about Cho Seung-Hui, the guy who killed 33 people at Virginia Tech a few days ago.
A black woman blogger ("Jersey Goddess") wrote that she prayed he wouldn't turn out to be an illegal immigrant. Luckily, he wasn't, so illegal immigrants can't be demonised. At first, he was described as "an Asian male" and the flurry of Islamophobic crap that I found was incredible - it was assumed by some that he must have been Muslim, that this was a "jihad." Thank goodness there aren't cultural stereotypes of "violent Koreans" to draw on.
Now, of course, it's stressed that he had a mental illness, as if this explains the violence. Us crazy people, you gotta watch out for us. Although, as a press release from the American National Alliance on Mental Illness stresses, people with mental illnesses are more likely to be the victim of violence, and are less likely to perpetrate it.
It led me to think. Ethnicity seems to be more often mentioned when it's someone from a stigmatised group commiting a crime (particularly black people in the US/UK, and these days Middle-Eastern people or Muslims), which creates/draws on the image of black and brown men as dangerous, innately violent. Whiteness is rarely named. Which is, of course ironic since there are some murderous white men running the world at the moment. Their killing is state-sanctioned so somehow "legitimate".
There is an implicit link between violence and mental illness, as if sensible, people of sound mind wouldn't kill or mistreat people (although survivors of the Holocaust constantly remark upon how ordinary their persecutors were).
I haven't been able to write about this for a few days because one morning I woke up and the ABC report speculated that Cho may have had the same diagnosis that I have been given. The psychiatrist who suggested this worked at Melbourne Uni and was making this "diagnosis" having never met the guy. It brought up some past shit for me. It also reiterated my suspicions that this "diagnosis" has no basis in subjective human experiences, except the "objective experience" of the psychiatrist (ie. the objectifying experience).
A black woman blogger ("Jersey Goddess") wrote that she prayed he wouldn't turn out to be an illegal immigrant. Luckily, he wasn't, so illegal immigrants can't be demonised. At first, he was described as "an Asian male" and the flurry of Islamophobic crap that I found was incredible - it was assumed by some that he must have been Muslim, that this was a "jihad." Thank goodness there aren't cultural stereotypes of "violent Koreans" to draw on.
Now, of course, it's stressed that he had a mental illness, as if this explains the violence. Us crazy people, you gotta watch out for us. Although, as a press release from the American National Alliance on Mental Illness stresses, people with mental illnesses are more likely to be the victim of violence, and are less likely to perpetrate it.
It led me to think. Ethnicity seems to be more often mentioned when it's someone from a stigmatised group commiting a crime (particularly black people in the US/UK, and these days Middle-Eastern people or Muslims), which creates/draws on the image of black and brown men as dangerous, innately violent. Whiteness is rarely named. Which is, of course ironic since there are some murderous white men running the world at the moment. Their killing is state-sanctioned so somehow "legitimate".
There is an implicit link between violence and mental illness, as if sensible, people of sound mind wouldn't kill or mistreat people (although survivors of the Holocaust constantly remark upon how ordinary their persecutors were).
I haven't been able to write about this for a few days because one morning I woke up and the ABC report speculated that Cho may have had the same diagnosis that I have been given. The psychiatrist who suggested this worked at Melbourne Uni and was making this "diagnosis" having never met the guy. It brought up some past shit for me. It also reiterated my suspicions that this "diagnosis" has no basis in subjective human experiences, except the "objective experience" of the psychiatrist (ie. the objectifying experience).
Dream Large (Melbourne Model)
So, as a staff member of the University of Melbourne, I got emailed a copy of "Dream Large" - Melbourne Uni's advertising campaign to sell its renewed focus on elitism.
It's kinda hilarious - part of me wishes I was a film student, cos it's just begging to be spoofed. My favourite one is the "Can you see?" movie, where it shows images of all these "problems" (like poverty, disease, Aboriginal children (it's not entirely clear what the "problem" is) ...) and basically suggests that Melbourne graduates will solve them. The arrogance is astounding.
It was useful in illustrating for me, one of the problems of the progressive vision that I am critiquing, the assumption that privileged people can and should "solve" all the world's problems, which overlooks our participation in the very problems.
I am reminded of a quote from Derrick Jensen's brilliant analysis of hatred in The Culture of Make Believe, he quotes Dina Chan, a Cambodian sex-worker sho says, "I want you to remember, we are not 'problems', ... we do not want you to tell us what is better for us. ... you do not understand because you do not listen."
Derrick Jensen's thesis is that the cultural imperative of White culture (this is his terminology) it to "rob the world of its subjectivity ... to turn everyone and everything into objects." For example, he applies this to the KKK, who turns black people into "niggers", the judicial system which turns them into "inmates", corporations who turn them into "workers" and "consumers." I would add - and this is one of the central ideas I want to explore in my thesis - is that progressives (in the broadest sense) turn black people into a "cause" - much as the Melbourne Model video does. Like all the powerful institutions in White, western culture that we progressives scorn and despise, we too rob the world of its subjectivity. We may do so with benevolence, but everyone sees themselves as good, don't they? I mean, even the KKK calls itself a "love group" these days.
It's kinda hilarious - part of me wishes I was a film student, cos it's just begging to be spoofed. My favourite one is the "Can you see?" movie, where it shows images of all these "problems" (like poverty, disease, Aboriginal children (it's not entirely clear what the "problem" is) ...) and basically suggests that Melbourne graduates will solve them. The arrogance is astounding.
It was useful in illustrating for me, one of the problems of the progressive vision that I am critiquing, the assumption that privileged people can and should "solve" all the world's problems, which overlooks our participation in the very problems.
I am reminded of a quote from Derrick Jensen's brilliant analysis of hatred in The Culture of Make Believe, he quotes Dina Chan, a Cambodian sex-worker sho says, "I want you to remember, we are not 'problems', ... we do not want you to tell us what is better for us. ... you do not understand because you do not listen."
Derrick Jensen's thesis is that the cultural imperative of White culture (this is his terminology) it to "rob the world of its subjectivity ... to turn everyone and everything into objects." For example, he applies this to the KKK, who turns black people into "niggers", the judicial system which turns them into "inmates", corporations who turn them into "workers" and "consumers." I would add - and this is one of the central ideas I want to explore in my thesis - is that progressives (in the broadest sense) turn black people into a "cause" - much as the Melbourne Model video does. Like all the powerful institutions in White, western culture that we progressives scorn and despise, we too rob the world of its subjectivity. We may do so with benevolence, but everyone sees themselves as good, don't they? I mean, even the KKK calls itself a "love group" these days.
Tuesday, April 17, 2007
basis of my thesis
I think the core of my thesis is this: how do you defend someone whose identity is stigmatised?
My central idea is that this is usually done very badly, e.g. stigma is often deflected (like the Lebanese vying to be included in the category of "White" in early twentieth century Australia, or asylum seekers described as "not criminals"), and often reasserts the dominance of what I call (following Goffman) the normals .
Something I've been exploring is how stigmatised groups can be appreciated for their strengths, rather than trying to hide their difference. I think this is best done in artistic forms. For example, Merinda Epstein has drawn a gorgeous cartoon about a woman with a mental illness going to a job interview and talking about her qualities; she states that she has "exquisite sensitivity" and "deep insight into human suffering." Lest this representation become too sentimental, Merinda undercuts this with several less desirable qualities, the last of which is that "sometimes my medication makes me fart."
I read a theory that the internet was created by people with aspergers syndrome, as a tool to be able to communicate in more comfortable ways. Ever since, this image has stuck in my mind. Why have I never before realised that there are other relationships to have with people who have a diagnosis of a mental illness, besides pity.
This Margaret Cho quote celebrating gay men I have to include in full:
"What I love most about gay men is the way that they are about sex. ... There is a kind of fun and frivolity that surrounds gay men and their sexuality that is not there for straight men and sex. I think if you are oppressed over who you wanna sleep with, when you actually go and do it, you're going to have a really good time. If you are hated for who you like to fuck, you are gunna kick up your heels and fuck. And it is such an inspiration to watch."
I love that she talks about fucking. Because too many (defensive) representations of queer life talk about us as if we don't fuck. They sanitise our lives, as if that will make us more acceptable, as if by not drawing attention to the central aspect that we are hated for, maybe we'll be accepted, maybe the bigots will overlook the fact that we desire to fuck each other. I love that Cho values this as a strength of queer culture, not some embarrassing aspect that is better hidden.
In my own experience, I've realised that my queer experiences of negotiating being/not being "out" has given me a genuine insight into privacy and disclosure, in the context of negotiating stigma. Last week I was chatting with a colleague about whether or not I could tell a mutual friend that this colleague and I work together. Our job has a certain level of taboo to it, and I knew instinctively to pause to consider whether the information was disclosable, or whether I should ascertain how "out" this colleague was about her job, before telling anyone what she does. I have a similar instinct with the other information people have disclosed to me. I'm not claiming some high moral ground for queers, but rather, I'm arguing that there is a certain empathy that comes from having a "discreditable" (to use another of Goffman's terms) aspect to one's life.
Finally, I've also heard young Muslim women talk about their relationships with each other, about how Islam-influenced gender relations have brought them closer to each other, to a level of intimacy with other women that was absent in my teenage years, despite being in an all-women's environment.
***
I've also been thinking a lot lately about how ahistorical much progressive thinking is. I mean, it really wasn't that long ago that queers were forcibly institutionalised and given shock treatment to "cure" our homosexuality. And of course, the Nazis were gassing us (well, gay men predominantly) along with the Jews, the Communists, the Gypsies and the "mentally feeble." I read somewhere that the Nazis first tested their gas chambers on inmates of mental asylums - people were already locked up and whom no one cared much about anyway - they were incredibly expendable. So, I feel like to act as if being queer is very ordinary is to forget this past. I'm not sure how one does draw on this past, but I like how Margaret Cho deals with it - to acknowledge that this past has consequences for today, that it influences how we exist in the world.
Conversely, I think a lot of people act as if Islamophobia is a relatively new phenomenon, especially since the word "Islamophobia" is such a recent coinage. Apparently, according to the Oxford dictionary, it was first used in 1976, but became more popular in the 1990s. That's a pretty short history. But the more I read about the historical relations between Muslim-majority nations and Christian-majority nations, the more I realise how deeply embedded Christian fear of Muslims is, going right back to the Crusades, maintained throughout the Ottoman empire, many wars, historic events, etc. Always ready to thrive in a new context.
As for mental illness, well Beyond Blue really is incredible in its work to make depression more acceptable. But I don't think schizophrenia or personality disorders have become at all "acceptable." I think that depression is somehow easier to dissociate from the person's identity - depression is represented as something that is transitory, unlike something like schizophrenia or a personality disorder, which are understood as part of the perso - even if they are "in remission" or their condition "under control," there is still a shadow of potential "craziness."
Maybe it's because there are frameworks for "good people" to relate to the "good, pitiable Other": pity is certainly a relationship that has a long and respectable history - pity for the orphans, pity for the handicapped, pity for the half-caste, pity for the starving Ethiopians. But the one who is pitied must be well-behaved. Of all the mental illnesses, depression is one of the "better behaved" varieties.
Pity extends to the poor oppressed Afghani women, who need to be liberated by the heroic US. We don't have many cultural templates for pitying adult men - the prototypical pitiable creature is a child.
And i've been thinking about how queers aren't typically pitied. We're reviled.
I'm trying to trace some of the ways that we deal with the Other, in the sense of pity or denying their difference, or normalising them ...
My central idea is that this is usually done very badly, e.g. stigma is often deflected (like the Lebanese vying to be included in the category of "White" in early twentieth century Australia, or asylum seekers described as "not criminals"), and often reasserts the dominance of what I call (following Goffman) the normals .
Something I've been exploring is how stigmatised groups can be appreciated for their strengths, rather than trying to hide their difference. I think this is best done in artistic forms. For example, Merinda Epstein has drawn a gorgeous cartoon about a woman with a mental illness going to a job interview and talking about her qualities; she states that she has "exquisite sensitivity" and "deep insight into human suffering." Lest this representation become too sentimental, Merinda undercuts this with several less desirable qualities, the last of which is that "sometimes my medication makes me fart."
I read a theory that the internet was created by people with aspergers syndrome, as a tool to be able to communicate in more comfortable ways. Ever since, this image has stuck in my mind. Why have I never before realised that there are other relationships to have with people who have a diagnosis of a mental illness, besides pity.
This Margaret Cho quote celebrating gay men I have to include in full:
"What I love most about gay men is the way that they are about sex. ... There is a kind of fun and frivolity that surrounds gay men and their sexuality that is not there for straight men and sex. I think if you are oppressed over who you wanna sleep with, when you actually go and do it, you're going to have a really good time. If you are hated for who you like to fuck, you are gunna kick up your heels and fuck. And it is such an inspiration to watch."
I love that she talks about fucking. Because too many (defensive) representations of queer life talk about us as if we don't fuck. They sanitise our lives, as if that will make us more acceptable, as if by not drawing attention to the central aspect that we are hated for, maybe we'll be accepted, maybe the bigots will overlook the fact that we desire to fuck each other. I love that Cho values this as a strength of queer culture, not some embarrassing aspect that is better hidden.
In my own experience, I've realised that my queer experiences of negotiating being/not being "out" has given me a genuine insight into privacy and disclosure, in the context of negotiating stigma. Last week I was chatting with a colleague about whether or not I could tell a mutual friend that this colleague and I work together. Our job has a certain level of taboo to it, and I knew instinctively to pause to consider whether the information was disclosable, or whether I should ascertain how "out" this colleague was about her job, before telling anyone what she does. I have a similar instinct with the other information people have disclosed to me. I'm not claiming some high moral ground for queers, but rather, I'm arguing that there is a certain empathy that comes from having a "discreditable" (to use another of Goffman's terms) aspect to one's life.
Finally, I've also heard young Muslim women talk about their relationships with each other, about how Islam-influenced gender relations have brought them closer to each other, to a level of intimacy with other women that was absent in my teenage years, despite being in an all-women's environment.
***
I've also been thinking a lot lately about how ahistorical much progressive thinking is. I mean, it really wasn't that long ago that queers were forcibly institutionalised and given shock treatment to "cure" our homosexuality. And of course, the Nazis were gassing us (well, gay men predominantly) along with the Jews, the Communists, the Gypsies and the "mentally feeble." I read somewhere that the Nazis first tested their gas chambers on inmates of mental asylums - people were already locked up and whom no one cared much about anyway - they were incredibly expendable. So, I feel like to act as if being queer is very ordinary is to forget this past. I'm not sure how one does draw on this past, but I like how Margaret Cho deals with it - to acknowledge that this past has consequences for today, that it influences how we exist in the world.
Conversely, I think a lot of people act as if Islamophobia is a relatively new phenomenon, especially since the word "Islamophobia" is such a recent coinage. Apparently, according to the Oxford dictionary, it was first used in 1976, but became more popular in the 1990s. That's a pretty short history. But the more I read about the historical relations between Muslim-majority nations and Christian-majority nations, the more I realise how deeply embedded Christian fear of Muslims is, going right back to the Crusades, maintained throughout the Ottoman empire, many wars, historic events, etc. Always ready to thrive in a new context.
As for mental illness, well Beyond Blue really is incredible in its work to make depression more acceptable. But I don't think schizophrenia or personality disorders have become at all "acceptable." I think that depression is somehow easier to dissociate from the person's identity - depression is represented as something that is transitory, unlike something like schizophrenia or a personality disorder, which are understood as part of the perso - even if they are "in remission" or their condition "under control," there is still a shadow of potential "craziness."
Maybe it's because there are frameworks for "good people" to relate to the "good, pitiable Other": pity is certainly a relationship that has a long and respectable history - pity for the orphans, pity for the handicapped, pity for the half-caste, pity for the starving Ethiopians. But the one who is pitied must be well-behaved. Of all the mental illnesses, depression is one of the "better behaved" varieties.
Pity extends to the poor oppressed Afghani women, who need to be liberated by the heroic US. We don't have many cultural templates for pitying adult men - the prototypical pitiable creature is a child.
And i've been thinking about how queers aren't typically pitied. We're reviled.
I'm trying to trace some of the ways that we deal with the Other, in the sense of pity or denying their difference, or normalising them ...
Monday, April 16, 2007
aerials?
tonight i did a conditioning class and then aerials. at the moment, my body is still reeling from doing web - where you climb a rope, put your hand into a loop then get spun around. i still feel nauseous and it's about 3 hours later. so, i'm a bit down on aerials for that!
but more seriously, i don't think i felt at all supported in the class, and i think i need to be. i'm quite self-conscious and feel discouraged easily. i have very few skills in aerials and have never found it easy. that would be fine if the environment were more supportive, but it feels like everyone is really just waiting to use the apparatus themselves.
jan asked me how it went and it was striking how negative i felt - and i was really trying to sound positive!
am not making a decision tonight, but i do feel like it's unlikely i'll continue with it. in terms of signs from the universe, i ended up paying only part of my fees for this term - strangely enough, i paid exactly the right amount for just my acro class (ie if i did drop the classes i went to today, it would work out with the money). AND then i could actually join the gym like i have been saying i'll do for ages! if i keep doing these classes, it doesn't leave much time for the gym ...
i'll keep y'all posted :>
but more seriously, i don't think i felt at all supported in the class, and i think i need to be. i'm quite self-conscious and feel discouraged easily. i have very few skills in aerials and have never found it easy. that would be fine if the environment were more supportive, but it feels like everyone is really just waiting to use the apparatus themselves.
jan asked me how it went and it was striking how negative i felt - and i was really trying to sound positive!
am not making a decision tonight, but i do feel like it's unlikely i'll continue with it. in terms of signs from the universe, i ended up paying only part of my fees for this term - strangely enough, i paid exactly the right amount for just my acro class (ie if i did drop the classes i went to today, it would work out with the money). AND then i could actually join the gym like i have been saying i'll do for ages! if i keep doing these classes, it doesn't leave much time for the gym ...
i'll keep y'all posted :>
Sunday, April 15, 2007
counter spaces, liberals and defensiveness
one of the books i'm reading at the moment is about how Muslims are (mis)represented in the media. it traces hegemonic, dominant discourses, but seems to assume that "counter spaces" are somehow unproblematically great. i'm not meaning to be harsh to this particular book, it just got me thinking about the nature of my project.
i want my research to challenge the binary of good representations and bad representations. i think that the whole "goodness" that liberals attribute to ourselves is immensely problematic in the context of representing Others. benevolence is not necessarily a good foundation for dealing with a marginalised, despised Other.
People hate queers. They bash us to death, rape us, stare at us, administer shock therapy, kick us out of home, pray for us, harrass us in public spaces, create porn eroticising us, use the word "gay"to put each other down in the playground, pass laws that discriminate against us, police their own gender so as not to mistaken as one of us. Sometimes they "accept" us. they rarely see our queerness as reason for celebration.
anyone who tries to argue that we're all just people is ignoring central facts of our lives. There are places i will not travel with my girlfriend. there are moments when we suddenly drop hands in public, censoring ourselves, understanding that our safety may depend on it. i love an expression that margaret cho uses in relation to people of colour - she says "we hesitate". i'm appropriating that to describe my queer experience. i hesitate to tell people about my lover who died, i hesitate to hold my lover's hand in public, i hesitate to read lesbian books in public, i hesitate ...
and anyone who argues that "we pay our taxes too" doesn't speak for me - i don't want to give money to this government to spend furthering its abhorrent agenda; anyone who says "queers shouldn't marry" doesn't represent me - i think life's choices are complex, and sometimes when you weigh things up, the apparently conservative path works best. anyone who is cruel to trannies doesn't represent me ...
in the context of mental health, fear is a presence in my life. i fear relapses. i fear being seen as crazy. i fear having personality quirks attributed to my mental illness. i fear being mentally unwell for too long, and my lover tiring of me. i fear embarassing myself in public. i fear being found out by people who will use the information to discredit me. i fear getting so sick that i'll be institutionalised. i fear taking on too much responsibility because the stress may break me. i fear running out of medication. i fear being honest with my psychiatrist, in case i no longer get access to my drugs. i fear having children in case i can't handle the stress and they are negatively impacted by "mommy's craziness", i fear being pitied, i fear people misunderstanding what a disability is and believing that i am simply "unable", underestimating my abilities. i fear dying young.
i don't want misplaced pity. i HATE it when people make decisions for me because they don't trust my abilities. that's worse than being mentally unwell.
my experience is not an unproblematic "yay for those wonderfully benevolent people, taking my side." the reality is that "my side" is infinitely more complex than benevolence can get its head around. i don't desire to be tamed and domesticated, or judged, or radicalised. progressives sometimes give me the shits as much as conservatives.
i want my research to challenge the binary of good representations and bad representations. i think that the whole "goodness" that liberals attribute to ourselves is immensely problematic in the context of representing Others. benevolence is not necessarily a good foundation for dealing with a marginalised, despised Other.
People hate queers. They bash us to death, rape us, stare at us, administer shock therapy, kick us out of home, pray for us, harrass us in public spaces, create porn eroticising us, use the word "gay"to put each other down in the playground, pass laws that discriminate against us, police their own gender so as not to mistaken as one of us. Sometimes they "accept" us. they rarely see our queerness as reason for celebration.
anyone who tries to argue that we're all just people is ignoring central facts of our lives. There are places i will not travel with my girlfriend. there are moments when we suddenly drop hands in public, censoring ourselves, understanding that our safety may depend on it. i love an expression that margaret cho uses in relation to people of colour - she says "we hesitate". i'm appropriating that to describe my queer experience. i hesitate to tell people about my lover who died, i hesitate to hold my lover's hand in public, i hesitate to read lesbian books in public, i hesitate ...
and anyone who argues that "we pay our taxes too" doesn't speak for me - i don't want to give money to this government to spend furthering its abhorrent agenda; anyone who says "queers shouldn't marry" doesn't represent me - i think life's choices are complex, and sometimes when you weigh things up, the apparently conservative path works best. anyone who is cruel to trannies doesn't represent me ...
in the context of mental health, fear is a presence in my life. i fear relapses. i fear being seen as crazy. i fear having personality quirks attributed to my mental illness. i fear being mentally unwell for too long, and my lover tiring of me. i fear embarassing myself in public. i fear being found out by people who will use the information to discredit me. i fear getting so sick that i'll be institutionalised. i fear taking on too much responsibility because the stress may break me. i fear running out of medication. i fear being honest with my psychiatrist, in case i no longer get access to my drugs. i fear having children in case i can't handle the stress and they are negatively impacted by "mommy's craziness", i fear being pitied, i fear people misunderstanding what a disability is and believing that i am simply "unable", underestimating my abilities. i fear dying young.
i don't want misplaced pity. i HATE it when people make decisions for me because they don't trust my abilities. that's worse than being mentally unwell.
my experience is not an unproblematic "yay for those wonderfully benevolent people, taking my side." the reality is that "my side" is infinitely more complex than benevolence can get its head around. i don't desire to be tamed and domesticated, or judged, or radicalised. progressives sometimes give me the shits as much as conservatives.
circus term 2
so today i made a snap decision. well i kinda had to because circus term 2 starts back today. oops that was a bit late (unlike me to be late, hey? actually, as i write, i'm trying to finish with a book that's nearly two weeks overdue from the library, but anyway ...) this term i am going to do aerials as well as acro. there's a conditioning class before aerials, so that means i'll get a good workout on mondays. then i'll try to do my pilates class on wednesday and then acro on fridays. i think that's quite nice, actually!
as for the show, jan tells me she's disappointed i've said i'm not going to do it. i'll see. i'd considered doing the performance class - i love performing best of all - but it seems that that has been replaced with a comedy/performance class or anni's "performance lab" which sounds horrific if you ask me (which of course, you didn't but this is a blog, so i get to rant!). the performance lab is where you go with your ideas and she helps develop them. not really my style.
am a bit worried about going back to aerials - i'm not a natural at it, and i always struggled last year to remember stuff. but i did love being in the air!!
as for the show, jan tells me she's disappointed i've said i'm not going to do it. i'll see. i'd considered doing the performance class - i love performing best of all - but it seems that that has been replaced with a comedy/performance class or anni's "performance lab" which sounds horrific if you ask me (which of course, you didn't but this is a blog, so i get to rant!). the performance lab is where you go with your ideas and she helps develop them. not really my style.
am a bit worried about going back to aerials - i'm not a natural at it, and i always struggled last year to remember stuff. but i did love being in the air!!
colour in Australia
I want to write about colour in Australia, to move away from the rhetoric of "multiculturalism," to explore other ways of understanding ethnic diversity in contemporary Australia.
People of colour today are a minority in Australia. White people are numerically and politically dominant. But these facts have been historically produced through violence, exploitation and discrimination; I would argue that this state of affairs continues to be produced through various factors, including violence, exploitation and discrimination, but also through more subtle powers, such as policing immigration, regulating "multiculturalism", controlling how the history of our nation is taught, owning the media, etc. White people in Australia have a vested interest in keeping for ourselves the fruits of colonisation. ironically, many people of colour also share in these fruits.
Internationally, people of colour are overwhelmingly the majority, although international power is disproportionately held by White people. Historically, Australia was entirely populated by people of colour. The landmass now known as Australia was multicultural, with no dominant group. People of colour from neighbouring countries would visit, perhaps stay. It was only when White people came though that the balance of power began to radically shift. It should be noted that it is not only White people who colonise (e.g. Ghengis Khan, Ottoman Empire, Japanese colonial expansion, etc), but that this is historical process in Australia.
For many years after invasion, the numerical dominance of people of colour continued, but the political dominance of White people spread. Indigenous peoples were still the majority for some years. There were also non-Indigenous people of colour (e.g. Chinese people, Afghan camelleers, Lebanese people), who were marginal to White society, present but not welcomed by the White authorities. Some Indigenous communities continued to welcome other people of colour (e.g. from what is now known as Indonesia).
The boundaries of the category of "White" have always been permeable. White society had its own critically important ethnic divisions, those between British Protestant and Irish Catholic, and between upper and working class (which in some ways mirrored the former division).
To be welcome in Australia during the first half of the twentieth century - when Whiteness was explicitly identified as critical to being welcome - some immigrant groups (e.g. Lebanese) maintained that they were White. Others, specifically Indigenous people with some White parentage, were considered partially White and forcibly separated from their Indigenous communities, often raised in ignorance of their ethnic background. Other communities lied about, fudged or made less explicit their ethnicity, claiming a status that was considered more "White" (eg. Indigenous people identifying as Greek, Iranian people Anglocising their name).
...
Coming to terms with this history, and writing this has been a journey for me, as a White person. I think I've taken White-dominance for granted, believing that the minority status of people of colour is natural, that they are but spice in the main dish (us Whities). White centrality (supremacy) has been constructed and I've internalised it in my mind. e.g. when John Howard says "We decide who comes here", I instinctively know that by "we" he means people like me, and whereas people of colour can only "come here", be rejected or welcomed by us, and possibly be "sent home" if we Whities change our mind about their welcome. Like the question "where does your family come from" is rarely asked of me, and it's a shock when it is (or rather was, just the once). I too come from somewhere.
One of the guys at the theatre workshop I attended talked about his experience of being Iranian. He said, "it's not too bad being different. It provides conversation topics, it makes me a bit more interesting and the food tastes GREAT." It was funny and arresting. I realised that I always hesitate to claim my English ancestry (which is, I believe, the majority of my ancestry) because it's boring and the food tastes crap. At least claiming the Irish or Scottish parts is interesting, like, there's pride in claiming Rob Roy as my 11th great grandfather. You know, he fought the big powers. It's an interesting challenge to claim the pride in my heritage, to own my middle-class Britishness (do i proclaim my passion for classical music?)
your thoughts appreciated.
People of colour today are a minority in Australia. White people are numerically and politically dominant. But these facts have been historically produced through violence, exploitation and discrimination; I would argue that this state of affairs continues to be produced through various factors, including violence, exploitation and discrimination, but also through more subtle powers, such as policing immigration, regulating "multiculturalism", controlling how the history of our nation is taught, owning the media, etc. White people in Australia have a vested interest in keeping for ourselves the fruits of colonisation. ironically, many people of colour also share in these fruits.
Internationally, people of colour are overwhelmingly the majority, although international power is disproportionately held by White people. Historically, Australia was entirely populated by people of colour. The landmass now known as Australia was multicultural, with no dominant group. People of colour from neighbouring countries would visit, perhaps stay. It was only when White people came though that the balance of power began to radically shift. It should be noted that it is not only White people who colonise (e.g. Ghengis Khan, Ottoman Empire, Japanese colonial expansion, etc), but that this is historical process in Australia.
For many years after invasion, the numerical dominance of people of colour continued, but the political dominance of White people spread. Indigenous peoples were still the majority for some years. There were also non-Indigenous people of colour (e.g. Chinese people, Afghan camelleers, Lebanese people), who were marginal to White society, present but not welcomed by the White authorities. Some Indigenous communities continued to welcome other people of colour (e.g. from what is now known as Indonesia).
The boundaries of the category of "White" have always been permeable. White society had its own critically important ethnic divisions, those between British Protestant and Irish Catholic, and between upper and working class (which in some ways mirrored the former division).
To be welcome in Australia during the first half of the twentieth century - when Whiteness was explicitly identified as critical to being welcome - some immigrant groups (e.g. Lebanese) maintained that they were White. Others, specifically Indigenous people with some White parentage, were considered partially White and forcibly separated from their Indigenous communities, often raised in ignorance of their ethnic background. Other communities lied about, fudged or made less explicit their ethnicity, claiming a status that was considered more "White" (eg. Indigenous people identifying as Greek, Iranian people Anglocising their name).
...
Coming to terms with this history, and writing this has been a journey for me, as a White person. I think I've taken White-dominance for granted, believing that the minority status of people of colour is natural, that they are but spice in the main dish (us Whities). White centrality (supremacy) has been constructed and I've internalised it in my mind. e.g. when John Howard says "We decide who comes here", I instinctively know that by "we" he means people like me, and whereas people of colour can only "come here", be rejected or welcomed by us, and possibly be "sent home" if we Whities change our mind about their welcome. Like the question "where does your family come from" is rarely asked of me, and it's a shock when it is (or rather was, just the once). I too come from somewhere.
One of the guys at the theatre workshop I attended talked about his experience of being Iranian. He said, "it's not too bad being different. It provides conversation topics, it makes me a bit more interesting and the food tastes GREAT." It was funny and arresting. I realised that I always hesitate to claim my English ancestry (which is, I believe, the majority of my ancestry) because it's boring and the food tastes crap. At least claiming the Irish or Scottish parts is interesting, like, there's pride in claiming Rob Roy as my 11th great grandfather. You know, he fought the big powers. It's an interesting challenge to claim the pride in my heritage, to own my middle-class Britishness (do i proclaim my passion for classical music?)
your thoughts appreciated.
the stranger
so jan has given me feedback about my running title - "defending the other" and she thinks it sounds like i'm defending the other, hence losing its critical gist. i think she has a point. what about "defenders of the other"?
in other news, i participated in a theatre workshop on the weekend "the art of change", through rmit community advocacy unit. it was fun and i learnt a lot. the theme is "otherness." two ideas that were raised for me were that of the stranger. i liked the way that framed the other. the relationship one has with the stranger is telling. does one mistreat them? does one try to understand them? does one only offer them hospitality if they conform to your own values? how long does one stay a stranger? there's quite a lot of literature on middle-eastern cultural values on hospitality and the stranger. (i use the phrase "middle-eastern" due to profound ignorance of the spread of these values, i'm not sure if they are muslim, regional, or what).
the other idea is that of absence from public discourse. it's one of those things that needs to be named to be noticed. who is absent? not just who is present but treated with hostility, but whose existence is silenced. this is relevant in terms of the presence of lebanese people in australia for over a century, but their absence in the "story" of australian history; also in the absence of disabled people from public spaces, an absence which i think is referenced in the Yooralla poster, when it asks the rhetorical question "why Yooralla week?" and answers itself with "Because this is our community." this seems to me to be an act of claiming space by a group that is specifically invisible. Finally, it's also relevant in the discursive silencing of diversity that happens in so many ways. for example, in the use of "we" to refer to an exclusive group, but without naming that exclusivity. for example, when anyone talks about how "we" should treat a marginalised group, they are invisiblising the presence of those people in the group already. my experience of progressive groups has been that those of us who are in a position of privilege, but are aware of the desirability of participation by those who are not in that position, so often ignore the presence of those people in our groups already. for example, in a feminist collective that i was involved in, a women who was not a woman of colour (she is jewish and identifies as "not-white-enough", but definitely not as a woman of colour) bemoaned the absence of women of colour in the group, despite the presence of close friends in the group who are women of colour. i think there's something about a profound stranger-ing of the Other, by which i mean that once you know someone personally, they are no longer deemed to be a member of the class of Others. so, utterances like "i can't stand gays, i mean i have this gay friend dan, and he's lovely, but you know, he's different, he's not like those other gays" make perfect sense.
in other news, i participated in a theatre workshop on the weekend "the art of change", through rmit community advocacy unit. it was fun and i learnt a lot. the theme is "otherness." two ideas that were raised for me were that of the stranger. i liked the way that framed the other. the relationship one has with the stranger is telling. does one mistreat them? does one try to understand them? does one only offer them hospitality if they conform to your own values? how long does one stay a stranger? there's quite a lot of literature on middle-eastern cultural values on hospitality and the stranger. (i use the phrase "middle-eastern" due to profound ignorance of the spread of these values, i'm not sure if they are muslim, regional, or what).
the other idea is that of absence from public discourse. it's one of those things that needs to be named to be noticed. who is absent? not just who is present but treated with hostility, but whose existence is silenced. this is relevant in terms of the presence of lebanese people in australia for over a century, but their absence in the "story" of australian history; also in the absence of disabled people from public spaces, an absence which i think is referenced in the Yooralla poster, when it asks the rhetorical question "why Yooralla week?" and answers itself with "Because this is our community." this seems to me to be an act of claiming space by a group that is specifically invisible. Finally, it's also relevant in the discursive silencing of diversity that happens in so many ways. for example, in the use of "we" to refer to an exclusive group, but without naming that exclusivity. for example, when anyone talks about how "we" should treat a marginalised group, they are invisiblising the presence of those people in the group already. my experience of progressive groups has been that those of us who are in a position of privilege, but are aware of the desirability of participation by those who are not in that position, so often ignore the presence of those people in our groups already. for example, in a feminist collective that i was involved in, a women who was not a woman of colour (she is jewish and identifies as "not-white-enough", but definitely not as a woman of colour) bemoaned the absence of women of colour in the group, despite the presence of close friends in the group who are women of colour. i think there's something about a profound stranger-ing of the Other, by which i mean that once you know someone personally, they are no longer deemed to be a member of the class of Others. so, utterances like "i can't stand gays, i mean i have this gay friend dan, and he's lovely, but you know, he's different, he's not like those other gays" make perfect sense.
Big crafternoon
So yesterday was crafternoon - every now and then (it used to be once a month, but we'll see how that goes) we have people around to craft together. it was a quiet one in terms of craft, but there was a big posse out the back playing games (gently persuaded to do so by nellie who couldn't believe that people needed persuading - i mean, it's games! of course they would have fun, if they just got on with it! which of course they did).
jan worked on our america scrapbook. it looks so great. it's been slow, but it's so creative how she's reflected the trip - not just a chronological account, but a thematic and humorous account. maybe it'll be ready by the two-year anniversary of the trip :>
but i worked on wonder ragz. i've had some orders piling up over the past few months, and business has been rather held up by my apparent inactivity on the wonder ragz front. BUT, i made some necessary progress towards what i call "the new generation" of wonder ragz. based on feedback, i realised that i needed to upgrade my overlocking skills - that is, use the blade to cut the edges. but there were two problems with this, first, my overlocker wasn't working properly (i found out the blade was bent, and got it fixed) and it's really tricky to cut around a round shape, because the cutter tries to cut the bit where the end meets the start. but i've learnt how to do it (you cut out a rectangle of material, the width is the amount the blade is trimming, and the length is the length between the stitch and the blade - it's tricky and it took me *several* tries to get the hang of it). So, I've now got much better skills at overlocking. it's still tricky going around corners, and i'm not yet able to overlock thick material. maybe i can't and i need to work out a way to have the outer layer extend beyond the padding, so that i'm only overlocking the outer layer?? i need to work on this more. i only successfully overlocked pantyliners, but that was a huge leap for me - it means i have the technique down, i just need to build on it.
in other developments, i redesigned the labels, so that now they are tick-a-box rather than each label needing to be exactly right. much better, i think.
and i ordered packaging online. i will need to make the night-time ones a bit shorter (which i think is totally fine). i'm planning to make them a bit wider too (based on feedback). the packaging is cellophane, which is fully biodegradable.
but the most exciting development, by far, is that i turned an old wooden container (that i was using to store empty plant containers) into a display case. it's pretty. i sawed a piece of wood to put down the middle, so there are two sections. i'm also planning to line it with felt - the kind that has a sticky side. it's going to look much better. i'll also have to design a display case for the night-time ones - they are so much taller and i don't want them flopping everywhere. But now that i have the general idea, i'm sure it will be relatively easy.
oh, and so that i can use the cutter on the overlocker, and not reduce the size of the pads, i've got new templates.
so the plan is to get the new packaging and overlocking sorted, then approach a few shops about selling them. hmmm. i'd probably have to update the brochure and website too ... it's a bit of work, eh?
jan worked on our america scrapbook. it looks so great. it's been slow, but it's so creative how she's reflected the trip - not just a chronological account, but a thematic and humorous account. maybe it'll be ready by the two-year anniversary of the trip :>
but i worked on wonder ragz. i've had some orders piling up over the past few months, and business has been rather held up by my apparent inactivity on the wonder ragz front. BUT, i made some necessary progress towards what i call "the new generation" of wonder ragz. based on feedback, i realised that i needed to upgrade my overlocking skills - that is, use the blade to cut the edges. but there were two problems with this, first, my overlocker wasn't working properly (i found out the blade was bent, and got it fixed) and it's really tricky to cut around a round shape, because the cutter tries to cut the bit where the end meets the start. but i've learnt how to do it (you cut out a rectangle of material, the width is the amount the blade is trimming, and the length is the length between the stitch and the blade - it's tricky and it took me *several* tries to get the hang of it). So, I've now got much better skills at overlocking. it's still tricky going around corners, and i'm not yet able to overlock thick material. maybe i can't and i need to work out a way to have the outer layer extend beyond the padding, so that i'm only overlocking the outer layer?? i need to work on this more. i only successfully overlocked pantyliners, but that was a huge leap for me - it means i have the technique down, i just need to build on it.
in other developments, i redesigned the labels, so that now they are tick-a-box rather than each label needing to be exactly right. much better, i think.
and i ordered packaging online. i will need to make the night-time ones a bit shorter (which i think is totally fine). i'm planning to make them a bit wider too (based on feedback). the packaging is cellophane, which is fully biodegradable.
but the most exciting development, by far, is that i turned an old wooden container (that i was using to store empty plant containers) into a display case. it's pretty. i sawed a piece of wood to put down the middle, so there are two sections. i'm also planning to line it with felt - the kind that has a sticky side. it's going to look much better. i'll also have to design a display case for the night-time ones - they are so much taller and i don't want them flopping everywhere. But now that i have the general idea, i'm sure it will be relatively easy.
oh, and so that i can use the cutter on the overlocker, and not reduce the size of the pads, i've got new templates.
so the plan is to get the new packaging and overlocking sorted, then approach a few shops about selling them. hmmm. i'd probably have to update the brochure and website too ... it's a bit of work, eh?
bye bye betty bigbottom?
it seems that betty bigbottom has gone on an adventure. she's not been seen in her coop for over a day now. it's even possible she's been gone since friday (it's monday as i write) - on Saturday I was out all day, and when i went to hang with the chooks on sunday, betty was not there. just alice palace, looking very lonely, but not particularly aware that anything was going on, you know, just pecking around like a chicken. last night, though, she looked so lonely, perched on her bed all alone. betty and alice usually cuddle up together. i suspect alice was chilly without her hotty.
over the last month or so, betty had been getting onto the roof of their coop. i wasn't sure how she got up there - there was a chair in the coop, and i thought maybe she used that, so i removed it. i also clipped their wings (well looked up my chook book and cut feathers according to what it said). and i fenced all the vegie areas of the garden so that i could let them out more often (hoping that would curb her needing-to-get-out-and-about tendencies). but all to no avail. she still kept adventuring. what about alice? well she followed betty.
so, when i discovered that betty was missing (sunday morning), i checked over the fence in the neighbours' yards (no luck), and called to her, and listened. i could hear a chook in the distance, and alice was definitely communicating with a chook. but alas, i discovered that the people who have just moved in two doors down have four chooks and i'm sure that's what i could hear.
a chook has got loose before (i think it was betty that time too!) and jan and i went door knocking to all our neighbours, so i'm assuming that if any of them had found a chook (or an extra chook), they would've said something.
i dreamt last night that betty came home. i'm still hoping. that's what happened last time - one morning (ok, well the very next morning), she was there, she was just back.
she's a plucky one, betty. she has a big bottom, a big fluffy, white bottom. she doesn't like being held and she doesn't communicate much, she just wants to peck on the ground and explore new things. but if you see her, send her home. alice and i miss her.
over the last month or so, betty had been getting onto the roof of their coop. i wasn't sure how she got up there - there was a chair in the coop, and i thought maybe she used that, so i removed it. i also clipped their wings (well looked up my chook book and cut feathers according to what it said). and i fenced all the vegie areas of the garden so that i could let them out more often (hoping that would curb her needing-to-get-out-and-about tendencies). but all to no avail. she still kept adventuring. what about alice? well she followed betty.
so, when i discovered that betty was missing (sunday morning), i checked over the fence in the neighbours' yards (no luck), and called to her, and listened. i could hear a chook in the distance, and alice was definitely communicating with a chook. but alas, i discovered that the people who have just moved in two doors down have four chooks and i'm sure that's what i could hear.
a chook has got loose before (i think it was betty that time too!) and jan and i went door knocking to all our neighbours, so i'm assuming that if any of them had found a chook (or an extra chook), they would've said something.
i dreamt last night that betty came home. i'm still hoping. that's what happened last time - one morning (ok, well the very next morning), she was there, she was just back.
she's a plucky one, betty. she has a big bottom, a big fluffy, white bottom. she doesn't like being held and she doesn't communicate much, she just wants to peck on the ground and explore new things. but if you see her, send her home. alice and i miss her.
Sunday, April 8, 2007
PhD topic (in progress)
My PhD topic, at the moment, is:
"Defending the Other"
looking at the various ways in which various Others (specifically queers, Muslims and Arabs, and people with mental illnesses) are defended in public discourse.
"Defending the Other"
looking at the various ways in which various Others (specifically queers, Muslims and Arabs, and people with mental illnesses) are defended in public discourse.
Nativising the garden at last
So, yesterday i spent a few hours scouring my native gardening books trying to learn more about plants that would work in my garden. by "work", i mean i don't want the to need much water to thrive, i want them to grow quickly, i want them to be native to this area, and of course, i want them to look pretty!
i've been getting into permaculture. now, this possibly sounds wanky, but is actually just about a way of being with the garden, learning by doing and working with the garden, minimising the amount of effort that me or the garden needs to make to produce abundance (e.g. planting things that need to be watered heaps closest to the house). It suits me cos i'm a big nerd, and it is a lot about understanding stuff like soil structure, root depth and ecosystems (e.g. what encourages what, what eats what), rather than just buying heaps of shit and nuking the pests. Well, actually i have been buying a lot - this is definitely my most expensive habit - but i'm learning what needs what.
the garden is a beautiful, lush haven of serenity. there are so many butterflies at the moment, mainly enjoying the calendula that grows on the edges of everything, just outside the vegie patches. and the birds!! the rainbow lorikeet i found the other day was not an unusual visitor, she seemed totally appropriate.
anyway, i'm compiling a couple of lists of "possible" plants for each area of the garden that still has room (ie not the vegie patches). to be considered "possible", a plant has to be native, have low-water requirements, be happy with the amount of sun the area gets, be fast-growing and attractive. then, once i have a list of all the "possibles", then i'll start matching colours, flowering seasons, etc. it's a really nerdy way to garden - i used to just go to the nursery and pick the pretty ones and hope for the best - but this is teaching me so much and it's amazing how much pleasure you can get from a garden when you know more stuff about it. i mean i get so excited when plants do what i predict, like flourish when i water them the way they need (e.g. big drinks instead of surface watering) or grow from tiny seeds into being a proper pumpkin or carrot.
will keep updating on the garden's progress :>
i've been getting into permaculture. now, this possibly sounds wanky, but is actually just about a way of being with the garden, learning by doing and working with the garden, minimising the amount of effort that me or the garden needs to make to produce abundance (e.g. planting things that need to be watered heaps closest to the house). It suits me cos i'm a big nerd, and it is a lot about understanding stuff like soil structure, root depth and ecosystems (e.g. what encourages what, what eats what), rather than just buying heaps of shit and nuking the pests. Well, actually i have been buying a lot - this is definitely my most expensive habit - but i'm learning what needs what.
the garden is a beautiful, lush haven of serenity. there are so many butterflies at the moment, mainly enjoying the calendula that grows on the edges of everything, just outside the vegie patches. and the birds!! the rainbow lorikeet i found the other day was not an unusual visitor, she seemed totally appropriate.
anyway, i'm compiling a couple of lists of "possible" plants for each area of the garden that still has room (ie not the vegie patches). to be considered "possible", a plant has to be native, have low-water requirements, be happy with the amount of sun the area gets, be fast-growing and attractive. then, once i have a list of all the "possibles", then i'll start matching colours, flowering seasons, etc. it's a really nerdy way to garden - i used to just go to the nursery and pick the pretty ones and hope for the best - but this is teaching me so much and it's amazing how much pleasure you can get from a garden when you know more stuff about it. i mean i get so excited when plants do what i predict, like flourish when i water them the way they need (e.g. big drinks instead of surface watering) or grow from tiny seeds into being a proper pumpkin or carrot.
will keep updating on the garden's progress :>
Orientalism
i just started to read Said's Orientalism (1978, republished in 2003). It's gripping and is helping me to articulate what it is that I am doing in my thesis. I am expanding the concept of orientalism beyond race, to sexuality and disability. At least, that is part of the project. Another is queerying and cripping race, cripping sexuality and queerying disability. I like the way Said juxtaposes the orient and the occident, where the latter generates the former (like het discourse generates homosexuality, as Foucault has explained). When i refer to "progressives" in describing whose discourse i'm looking at, i mean occidentals who talk about orientals, but also orientals who orientalise themselves. In Foucaultian terms, i mean both hets who talk about homos, and homos who talk in the "reverse discourse" defending homosexuality.
a new running title: Defending the Other.
i found a really useful concept a few days ago in a chapter in Hage's Arab-Australians Today book. they talked about there being a difference between essentalisms that are controlled by other people and used to control you, and essentialisms that you use yourself, to generate community. it's an interesting idea, because it certainly resonates with my life, for example with mental health consumer stuff, i'm happy to take on the bpd label among mad people, because it does explain something about my experience, and i definitely bond with other bpd-ers over our experiences. but i hesitate to use the label around people who don't get the politics/experience, because it can essentialise me and contain me in ways that i despise.
but, on the other hand, i've also experienced essentialism used in the community-building sense to be deeply problematic. a few years ago, i went to lesfest, which is an annual lesbian festival that excludes transpeople on political grounds. on some level, i understand the desire to create community around a sense of commonality, and i do think that what i've heard/read about trans experience that it is different to that of women who have been identified as women their whole lives. but then, i also believe that women are so heterogenous, that actually transpeople aren't the only people that the lesfest community excludes, the processes of exclusion extend to anyone suspected of disagreeing with the politics of trans-exclusion (aka "women-born-women's only space"), to people who engage in bisexual activity, or believe that such women should be welcome, to people whose lesbian-feminist politics are "a bit iffy", perhaps they are into S/m, or are femmie, or enjoy heels and lippie, or to be honest, it felt like anyone who wasn't middle-aged, feminist from the 70s, short-haired, wearing purple and green paraphernalia and volunteering "for the community", then we were outside the circle of unconditional welcome.
Derrida in On Cosmopolitanism and Forgiveness puts forward a concept of "absolute forgiveness", which I think is fundamentally what "unconditional welcome" is about. I haven't yet read this work by Derrida, so I'm going to have to quote from a website i googled up :>
"absolute forgiveness requires a radically singular confrontation between self and other, while conditional forgiveness requires the breaching of categories such as self and other, either by a mediating party, or simply by the recognition of the ways in which we are always already intertwined with the other. (OCF 49)." (from http://www.iep.utm.edu/d/derrida.htm#SH7c)
That's definitely what I keep finding in my very informal research, e.g. Yooralla's ad that says "Why Yooralla Week? Because this is our community." To me, this ad is really asking "why be nice to people with disabilities?" (in fact, I'd go further and say, there's a dark undercurrent of "why not solve the problem of disabled people by gassing them or perhaps preventing them from being born? (the latter is the more contemporary way of "solving the problem" but springs from the same profound repugnance)). Why? "because they're part of our community". Not "because they have the capacity to suffer" or "because human life is precious" or "because human diversity is intrinsically valuable" or "because the logic of human perfection is an inherently destructive way of imagining what the purpose of life is" or ... whatever else is possible.
Wow. am feeling like, so academic, referring to ideas from Said, Foucault, Hage and Derrida all in the same post. I should look back at this next time i feel like i spent the whole week planting cabbages and digging up jerusalem artichokes. although my time is spent more in the garden than at my desk, i think my brain works better this way.
a new running title: Defending the Other.
i found a really useful concept a few days ago in a chapter in Hage's Arab-Australians Today book. they talked about there being a difference between essentalisms that are controlled by other people and used to control you, and essentialisms that you use yourself, to generate community. it's an interesting idea, because it certainly resonates with my life, for example with mental health consumer stuff, i'm happy to take on the bpd label among mad people, because it does explain something about my experience, and i definitely bond with other bpd-ers over our experiences. but i hesitate to use the label around people who don't get the politics/experience, because it can essentialise me and contain me in ways that i despise.
but, on the other hand, i've also experienced essentialism used in the community-building sense to be deeply problematic. a few years ago, i went to lesfest, which is an annual lesbian festival that excludes transpeople on political grounds. on some level, i understand the desire to create community around a sense of commonality, and i do think that what i've heard/read about trans experience that it is different to that of women who have been identified as women their whole lives. but then, i also believe that women are so heterogenous, that actually transpeople aren't the only people that the lesfest community excludes, the processes of exclusion extend to anyone suspected of disagreeing with the politics of trans-exclusion (aka "women-born-women's only space"), to people who engage in bisexual activity, or believe that such women should be welcome, to people whose lesbian-feminist politics are "a bit iffy", perhaps they are into S/m, or are femmie, or enjoy heels and lippie, or to be honest, it felt like anyone who wasn't middle-aged, feminist from the 70s, short-haired, wearing purple and green paraphernalia and volunteering "for the community", then we were outside the circle of unconditional welcome.
Derrida in On Cosmopolitanism and Forgiveness puts forward a concept of "absolute forgiveness", which I think is fundamentally what "unconditional welcome" is about. I haven't yet read this work by Derrida, so I'm going to have to quote from a website i googled up :>
"absolute forgiveness requires a radically singular confrontation between self and other, while conditional forgiveness requires the breaching of categories such as self and other, either by a mediating party, or simply by the recognition of the ways in which we are always already intertwined with the other. (OCF 49)." (from http://www.iep.utm.edu/d/derrida.htm#SH7c)
That's definitely what I keep finding in my very informal research, e.g. Yooralla's ad that says "Why Yooralla Week? Because this is our community." To me, this ad is really asking "why be nice to people with disabilities?" (in fact, I'd go further and say, there's a dark undercurrent of "why not solve the problem of disabled people by gassing them or perhaps preventing them from being born? (the latter is the more contemporary way of "solving the problem" but springs from the same profound repugnance)). Why? "because they're part of our community". Not "because they have the capacity to suffer" or "because human life is precious" or "because human diversity is intrinsically valuable" or "because the logic of human perfection is an inherently destructive way of imagining what the purpose of life is" or ... whatever else is possible.
Wow. am feeling like, so academic, referring to ideas from Said, Foucault, Hage and Derrida all in the same post. I should look back at this next time i feel like i spent the whole week planting cabbages and digging up jerusalem artichokes. although my time is spent more in the garden than at my desk, i think my brain works better this way.
Wednesday, April 4, 2007
circus decisions
so, i'm in the women's circus (check it out at www.womenscircus.org.au). last year i was in an aerials class, as well as new women's. we got to do heaps in the show from both classes. we were really lucky.
but i'm not wanting to do the show this year. it was too full on and i couldn't really handle the stress of it all. at the time, i was also applying to do my phd, working a lot, and still struggling with my mental health. it was all a bit much. i don't think i'll do the show this year.
so far this year, all i've done is an intensive tumbling class and beginner's acro and conditioning. the latter were both on the same night, which meant that i was only out one night a week. that was pretty good. but i want to do more this term - i'm tossing up whether i should do aerials again or a tumbling/acro class at circus oz. even as a i write, i know that the tumbling/acro class would be better. there's something about aerials and the specific aerials class that didn't feel good. i think it's because i have a terrible memory for aerials - my body just doesn't seem to work that way. but i do want to do it again, maybe when i have developed more fitness and more body-awareness. it's funny, but i feel like hand-stands are a pretty basic skill that i want to develop at this point in time.
but i'm not wanting to do the show this year. it was too full on and i couldn't really handle the stress of it all. at the time, i was also applying to do my phd, working a lot, and still struggling with my mental health. it was all a bit much. i don't think i'll do the show this year.
so far this year, all i've done is an intensive tumbling class and beginner's acro and conditioning. the latter were both on the same night, which meant that i was only out one night a week. that was pretty good. but i want to do more this term - i'm tossing up whether i should do aerials again or a tumbling/acro class at circus oz. even as a i write, i know that the tumbling/acro class would be better. there's something about aerials and the specific aerials class that didn't feel good. i think it's because i have a terrible memory for aerials - my body just doesn't seem to work that way. but i do want to do it again, maybe when i have developed more fitness and more body-awareness. it's funny, but i feel like hand-stands are a pretty basic skill that i want to develop at this point in time.
Wonder ragz - the next generation
If you don't know what wonderragz are, check out: www.bloodsistas.com
anyway, so at the moment, wonder ragz are due for an update. so far they are:
* made in 4 thicknesses, maxi, regular, light and panty-liner; and 2 lengths, day and night. I think that these are all good, but i think they all need to be wider, especially the thicker ones, and night-time ones.
*packaged in snap-lock bags. this was a good idea to start off, but is really not viable for much longer. i feel like this packaging problem is holding me back from trying to sell them more often and in more places. So, last week i emailed a company about packaging (they didn't have any dimensions that were appropriate, and i wanted to have some made in the right size) but i haven't heard back. maybe i should look again at the sizes and be more open-minded about what could work.
*labelled using stick-on, printed, labels. I print them with all their details and this is not working all that well, cos there are SO many permutations and combinations that are possible, and so I have to make each one especially. I wish I had a stamp of some sort, with the logo on it. Also, I reckon I should use check boxes for the sizes and then I could just print labels with each design name on it (and have options for night/day; panty-liner/light/regular/maxi). Genius!
*I've been selling them at the Melb-Uni co-op mainly, as well as through word-of-mouth, and i've done 3 markets. I have mainly kept track, but not extremely well, i confess.
*in terms of market stall, i have a small fold-out table and chair, some red velvet to display them on (I think this could be made a bit more exciting), the labels that i use are always in danger of flying away, although they look nice (shiny pen on black background). the packaging gets really shiny in the sun, so i really need to use an umbrella of some sort. I've been planning to make a banner that says either bloodsistas or wonder ragz. i think probably bloodsistas, cos then it references the website. and i might make some more displays, e.g. colourful flags, or a chart that explains them.
*also, my overlocker is playing up at the moment, i think it needs to be serviced (i think i broke it a bit). maybe i should fix that asap, because that's what is really holding everything up (i have a few orders i need to fill).
that's all. I think it's nearly time to get off the computer and go and follow up some of these ideas!
xxxgrey
anyway, so at the moment, wonder ragz are due for an update. so far they are:
* made in 4 thicknesses, maxi, regular, light and panty-liner; and 2 lengths, day and night. I think that these are all good, but i think they all need to be wider, especially the thicker ones, and night-time ones.
*packaged in snap-lock bags. this was a good idea to start off, but is really not viable for much longer. i feel like this packaging problem is holding me back from trying to sell them more often and in more places. So, last week i emailed a company about packaging (they didn't have any dimensions that were appropriate, and i wanted to have some made in the right size) but i haven't heard back. maybe i should look again at the sizes and be more open-minded about what could work.
*labelled using stick-on, printed, labels. I print them with all their details and this is not working all that well, cos there are SO many permutations and combinations that are possible, and so I have to make each one especially. I wish I had a stamp of some sort, with the logo on it. Also, I reckon I should use check boxes for the sizes and then I could just print labels with each design name on it (and have options for night/day; panty-liner/light/regular/maxi). Genius!
*I've been selling them at the Melb-Uni co-op mainly, as well as through word-of-mouth, and i've done 3 markets. I have mainly kept track, but not extremely well, i confess.
*in terms of market stall, i have a small fold-out table and chair, some red velvet to display them on (I think this could be made a bit more exciting), the labels that i use are always in danger of flying away, although they look nice (shiny pen on black background). the packaging gets really shiny in the sun, so i really need to use an umbrella of some sort. I've been planning to make a banner that says either bloodsistas or wonder ragz. i think probably bloodsistas, cos then it references the website. and i might make some more displays, e.g. colourful flags, or a chart that explains them.
*also, my overlocker is playing up at the moment, i think it needs to be serviced (i think i broke it a bit). maybe i should fix that asap, because that's what is really holding everything up (i have a few orders i need to fill).
that's all. I think it's nearly time to get off the computer and go and follow up some of these ideas!
xxxgrey
Finished fencing
So, yesterday, i finished fencing off the bits of the garden where i am growing things.
a few days ago, the chooks were on the roof of their house, apparently disgruntled at being left in their coop for about a week without any time in the garden. it was funny cos they could have flown down into the neighbours' garden (which they've done before), except that they have a dog and the dog was in their yard. so the chooks were just sitting on the roof, hanging out.
i realised that i couldn't keep them out of the garden indefinitely. but whenever they have come into the garden, they have eaten and scratched everything in reach. so, i bit the bullet, or rather opened up my wallet, and bought heaps of fencing wire and fenced off all the main areas. and i've put a fence up on the side of the house, so that i can shut them in and have jessie (the dog) out and about. jess killed a chook (emma) in the first few weeks after the chooks started living here, and i've no doubt she'd do the same again given the chance.
anyway, it was a huge job, and i'm not 100% sure it will actually work, cos i wanted to keep the fences low, to keep the garden beds accessible to me, when i want to plant stuff. the chooks could just jump over the fences if they wanted to. but, let's hope they don't!
this morning i finished the gate on the side fence, or rather put the hinges on the gate and nailed in a piece of wood that sticks up above the fence. This bit of wood is there so that i can hang flags along the length of the fence, so that the chooks are deterred from trying to fly over the fence. I'll make the flags some time in the next week or so.
a few days ago, the chooks were on the roof of their house, apparently disgruntled at being left in their coop for about a week without any time in the garden. it was funny cos they could have flown down into the neighbours' garden (which they've done before), except that they have a dog and the dog was in their yard. so the chooks were just sitting on the roof, hanging out.
i realised that i couldn't keep them out of the garden indefinitely. but whenever they have come into the garden, they have eaten and scratched everything in reach. so, i bit the bullet, or rather opened up my wallet, and bought heaps of fencing wire and fenced off all the main areas. and i've put a fence up on the side of the house, so that i can shut them in and have jessie (the dog) out and about. jess killed a chook (emma) in the first few weeks after the chooks started living here, and i've no doubt she'd do the same again given the chance.
anyway, it was a huge job, and i'm not 100% sure it will actually work, cos i wanted to keep the fences low, to keep the garden beds accessible to me, when i want to plant stuff. the chooks could just jump over the fences if they wanted to. but, let's hope they don't!
this morning i finished the gate on the side fence, or rather put the hinges on the gate and nailed in a piece of wood that sticks up above the fence. This bit of wood is there so that i can hang flags along the length of the fence, so that the chooks are deterred from trying to fly over the fence. I'll make the flags some time in the next week or so.
Starting out
So i'm starting a blog today.
my partner, jan, suggested it because i've just started a phd and i'm bursting with ideas and fragments of ideas and ... well ... jan's *not* doing my phd and i think i'll drive her nuts if i keep updating her with all my latest "very exciting, must tell someone right away" ideas.
not that being nuts is all that bad ... ok so it's not the greatest, but it gives me a perspective on life that i value. more about that later, no doubt.
So, I feel like i'm procrastinating way more than actually studying. i think it's ok. the problem is that i love gardening, and i run a small business, and i love listening to the radio (ABC listener, I am), and i have a dog and two chooks to play with, and today i found an injured rainbow lorikeet in my backyard and of course i had to take her to the vet (and play with her on the way, she was SO gorgeous).
But maybe i have nothing to worry about, cos i really am getting a lot of study done. Recently I've been reading about the Lebanese in Australia, multiculturalism, race and whiteness. So, what's my thesis about? (i don't hear anyone ask). OK, so I *think* it's about "defending the stigmatised: discoursive defenses of arab/muslims, queers and nutcases." I'm looking at the ways in which progressives talk about stigmatised difference. I use the term "progressives" very loosely because I'm looking at anyone who speaks in defence of stigmatised groups, including relatively conservative groups like "Beyond Blue." I believe that progressives are (ii) often actually constructing themselves, and (ii) misrepresenting the people they believe themselves to be defending, suppressing the diversity and radically differentness of these categories. One effect is the reaffirmation of normative pressures.
Um. Ok. So some concrete examples may make this all a bit clearer.
(i) within discussions around same-sex relationship recognition, i've heard so many queers refer to the idea that "we pay our taxes too" or "we're really very normal"
(ii) i've seen many statements by "muslim leaders" that affirm the commitment of muslim communities to "australian values" (whatever the hell they are)
(iii) discourses of rehabilitation, treatment, and even pathology of people with mental illnesses create an idea of some normality that we should all be aspiring to.
Um, anyway, i think that's enough for a first post. thanks for reading!
xxgrey
my partner, jan, suggested it because i've just started a phd and i'm bursting with ideas and fragments of ideas and ... well ... jan's *not* doing my phd and i think i'll drive her nuts if i keep updating her with all my latest "very exciting, must tell someone right away" ideas.
not that being nuts is all that bad ... ok so it's not the greatest, but it gives me a perspective on life that i value. more about that later, no doubt.
So, I feel like i'm procrastinating way more than actually studying. i think it's ok. the problem is that i love gardening, and i run a small business, and i love listening to the radio (ABC listener, I am), and i have a dog and two chooks to play with, and today i found an injured rainbow lorikeet in my backyard and of course i had to take her to the vet (and play with her on the way, she was SO gorgeous).
But maybe i have nothing to worry about, cos i really am getting a lot of study done. Recently I've been reading about the Lebanese in Australia, multiculturalism, race and whiteness. So, what's my thesis about? (i don't hear anyone ask). OK, so I *think* it's about "defending the stigmatised: discoursive defenses of arab/muslims, queers and nutcases." I'm looking at the ways in which progressives talk about stigmatised difference. I use the term "progressives" very loosely because I'm looking at anyone who speaks in defence of stigmatised groups, including relatively conservative groups like "Beyond Blue." I believe that progressives are (ii) often actually constructing themselves, and (ii) misrepresenting the people they believe themselves to be defending, suppressing the diversity and radically differentness of these categories. One effect is the reaffirmation of normative pressures.
Um. Ok. So some concrete examples may make this all a bit clearer.
(i) within discussions around same-sex relationship recognition, i've heard so many queers refer to the idea that "we pay our taxes too" or "we're really very normal"
(ii) i've seen many statements by "muslim leaders" that affirm the commitment of muslim communities to "australian values" (whatever the hell they are)
(iii) discourses of rehabilitation, treatment, and even pathology of people with mental illnesses create an idea of some normality that we should all be aspiring to.
Um, anyway, i think that's enough for a first post. thanks for reading!
xxgrey
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)