Up Front by Emma Hart

Read Post

Up Front: Respectably-Dressed Sensible Demure Lady Stroll

457 Responses

First ←Older Page 1 3 4 5 6 7 19 Newer→ Last

  • Christopher Dempsey,

    Just a wee aside to thank whoever suggested Mendeley... it's great. I've spent a bit of the afternoon figuring out Endnote first, then Mendeley, and well, Mendely looks promising. Thankyou.

    Parnell / Tamaki-Auckland… • Since Sep 2008 • 642 posts Report Reply

  • giovanni tiso, in reply to nzlemming,

    My point is why do representatives of the state acknowledge any of these cults by attending their events?

    Sure, but it's also important to recognise the vast difference between some of the cults.

    Wellington • Since Jun 2007 • 7358 posts Report Reply

  • nzlemming, in reply to Hilary Stace,

    Lockwood Smith makes up more "rules" in the House than any other speaker has ever done, I believe.

    Waikanae • Since Nov 2006 • 2080 posts Report Reply

  • nzlemming, in reply to giovanni tiso,

    I disagree. A cult is a cult, from a state perspective. The only difference is whether you as an individual approve of how they operate, and that is entirely subjective.

    Waikanae • Since Nov 2006 • 2080 posts Report Reply

  • recordari, in reply to nzlemming,

    My point is why do representatives of the state acknowledge any of these cults by attending their events?

    Votes. What other reason could there be? Moral turpentine?

    AUCKLAND • Since Dec 2009 • 2607 posts Report Reply

  • giovanni tiso, in reply to nzlemming,

    A cult is a cult, from a state perspective. The only difference is whether you as an individual approve of how they operate, and that is entirely subjective.

    Well, I'm no fan of the Dawkins line on religion - I think it's pretty bloody stupid to be honest. So-called rationalists have their own hang-ups, and political movements have their own irrational or quasi-irrational beliefs. Courting a religious group is no different from courting any other group of people that self-identifies according to a set of beliefs. But most religious groups also agitate politically, and it's the content of Destiny's political activity that ought to disqualify them I think.

    Wellington • Since Jun 2007 • 7358 posts Report Reply

  • James Butler, in reply to recordari,

    Votes. What other reason could there be? Moral turpentine?

    Exactly. I think the reasoning goes like this:
    1) Even those with reprehensible views deserve representation in Parliament
    2) As the <party name> Party, we are the best representation money can buy
    3) ???
    4) PLEASE VOTE FOR ME PLEASE!!!!!1!!!

    Auckland • Since Jan 2009 • 801 posts Report Reply

  • andin, in reply to Deborah,

    That’s a very scary thing to do i.e. to interrogate your own past behaviour.

    Is this possible at more than the individual level? And maybe, come up with longer lasting solutions. But it makes me feel as if little has changed, the soup(society) we all swim in produces, with another generation, the same result.

    raglan • Since Mar 2007 • 1213 posts Report Reply

  • Craig Ranapia, in reply to nzlemming,

    Lockwood Smith makes up more “rules” in the House than any other speaker has ever done, I believe.

    Really? There actually are dress standards in the Chamber, and if you like please make a case that they’re anachronistic or inconsistently applied but let’s not pretend the incumbent Speaker just pulled them out of his arse.

    And you know something, considering what triggered Slutwalk in the first place I really don’t feel very comfortable drawing any equation between a poxy football jersey being ruled out of order in the debating chamber and women being told they’re asking to be raped if they dress “slutty.” (Or, for that matter, football hooligans kicking the shit out of you because you're wearing the wrong kit.)

    North Shore, Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 11933 posts Report Reply

  • B Jones,

    I don't know, things like the SlutWalk seem to me to be making a contribution to that soup - a dash of lemon juice, perhaps. Making a loud public statement against the very commonly held idea that it's up to women to regulate their conduct to prevent rape gets people talking about the issue and uncovering their prejudices. Add some chili by discussing things men can do to prevent rape (like thinking again about what constitutes fair pursuit), and you've turned boring old chicken soup into tom yum.

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 811 posts Report Reply

  • andin, in reply to B Jones,

    Add some chili by discussing things men can do to prevent rape (like thinking again about what constitutes fair pursuit), and you’ve turned boring old chicken soup into tom yum.

    Sounds good to me! So Akslutwalk then.
    And did you see Campbell Live, extraordinary displays!
    The smart one was keeping her mouth shut, letting the men do what men do......

    raglan • Since Mar 2007 • 1213 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha, in reply to Craig Ranapia,

    inconsistently applied

    differently demure, perhaps? (with pictures)

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 16627 posts Report Reply

  • Che Tibby, in reply to andin,

    But it makes me feel as if little has changed, the soup(society) we all swim in produces, with another generation, the same result.

    that would be the key for me, ensuring no next generation of mine does stupid shit he might regret.

    doing us all a favour really.

    the back of an envelope • Since Nov 2006 • 2026 posts Report Reply

  • Islander, in reply to Julie Fairey,

    Kia ora - I truly hate the word "slut."
    I am also one of a tiny unseen group - about 1.25% of humanity- tiny, but not unknown about. We are asexuals: we never seek sexual experience (normally.) And - going on my experience- we are often targeted by shitheads- because we are unavailable and rapist/fuckwits reguard that as a challenge-

    Big O, Mahitahi, Te Wahi … • Since Feb 2007 • 5643 posts Report Reply

  • Craig Ranapia, in reply to Sacha,

    differently demure, perhaps? (with pictures)

    That’s an entirely legitimate question. I’m still not sure anyone (least of all Claire Curran) would welcome me fronting up to the Chamber in my Dykes for Bush ’04 t-shirt. Then the again, we seem to have bullshit like this pop up with monotonous regularity. How hard would it be for the Speaker to sit down a reasonable cross-section of Parliamentary women and sort out something that's not so vague as to be damn near meaningless? (Someone might also like to to take Tony Ryall along to Kirks and pick out a half dozen ties that aren't "skull-fucked with a box of crayons" ugly. Really, bitch -- make an effort.)

    North Shore, Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 11933 posts Report Reply

  • Julie Fairey,

    In terms of things we can do, I have to think back to my teens, mainly, when I used to annoyingly referee the drinking games because there was one guy who used to rig then to get one young woman v drunk (not the same one each time). I'd point out his cheating and generally annoy him (and not really make any friends) until he gave up that ploy, at least when I was around. I didn't really understand what I was doing at the time; thinking about it now chills me a bit.

    So I think about acknowledging our gut instincts; that when we think there is something not right we follow it up. Even when that's awkward and unpopular I guess. Give people an easy out - if they don't take it that's ok, you gave it a go. Maybe they'll know you're a safe person to go to if something goes wrong.

    In terms of that looking back thing - it is hard. I was helping run an anti-date rape workshop in uni hostels one year when I suddenly realized that one of the scenarios we were discussing and naming, correctly, as rape, matched something one of my friends did to another one of my friends a couple of years previously. I was still friends with both of them., and they were still friends too. How could I call it rape when the victim didn't? But it was.

    Orcland • Since Dec 2007 • 217 posts Report Reply

  • Che Tibby, in reply to Sacha,

    waitaminute...is that an all whites shirt AND a pearl necklace?

    now, i am not known for my fashion sense.

    but i know i crime when i see one.

    the back of an envelope • Since Nov 2006 • 2026 posts Report Reply

  • Julie Fairey,

    Also we can positively model consent. And communication. If we can teach people, especially our kids that actually talking about sex, actively seeking and giving consent, is the way to go about it, then theyhopefully start thinking about sex as something intrinsically and explicitly consensual.

    Orcland • Since Dec 2007 • 217 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha, in reply to Craig Ranapia,

    not so vague

    You're trying too hard. Nothing "vague" about it in this case. Adding a pearl necklace does not affect the fact that a netball top and a rugby top are both local sporting uniforms. Either both are allowable "standard business dress" for women MPs in the debating chamber or neither is. Though the class overtones of the Speaker's inconsistent treatment could prove interesting..

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 16627 posts Report Reply

  • Russell Brown,

    Now that we all seem to agree the obvious: that no woman contributes to her own rape by what she takes out of the wardrobe on a Friday night, we might want wonder about where we do draw the line on human responses.

    Personally, I think we should cling to the right to think someone’s else’s dress – male or female – is tacky, tasteless or inappropriate, and perhaps even to say so to our companions. Jesus, we make small cultural judgements about each other every day – and may in turn be judged by what we say.

    If I see a bunch of suits out on the town, their dress usually signals to me that they’re dorks before their behaviour does. And when I see drunk young women at the Viaduct falling over in their heels and handkerchief dresses (pick a Friday night, any Friday night), my response is always the same.

    1. I’m amused by the spectacle.

    2/ I hope someone’s looking out for them that evening.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 18839 posts Report Reply

  • Craig Ranapia, in reply to Sacha,

    DELETED SO AS NOT TO OFFEND SACHA’S DELICATE SENSE OF RELEVANCE. AND, YES, I’M BEING PISSY UNTIL I CAN HAVE ANOTHER SLUG OF COUGH SYRUP.

    North Shore, Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 11933 posts Report Reply

  • Steve Parks, in reply to giovanni tiso,

    But most religious groups also agitate politically, and it’s the content of Destiny’s political activity that ought to disqualify them I think.

    I wouldn’t even say “disqualify”, if you mean from having MPs attend. I just think that if an MP accepts an invitation such as in this case, they should either:

    a) Make a point of challenging the organisation’s bigotry, as Metiria Turei said she would have in the Destiny Church case (if she’d received her invite), or;
    b) At least own the fact that they agree with their bigotry.

    Wellington • Since May 2007 • 1148 posts Report Reply

  • Craig Ranapia, in reply to Russell Brown,

    Personally, I think we should cling to the right to think someone’s else’s dress – male or female – is tacky, tasteless or inappropriate, and perhaps even to say so to our companions.

    And there's also a time to make sure that brain-mouth filter is in good working order. I may internally cringe every time I see a woman wearing hijab -- but I also need to STFU and respect the (presumed) agency and freedom of the women involved. It's very easy to be "tolerant" of people who look and think and behave the way you do; the real test of liberal values is being tolerant of those who don't.

    North Shore, Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 11933 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha, in reply to Craig Ranapia,

    because I know a woman who owns some vintage Donna Karan suits

    eh? new heights of irrelevance I'm afraid

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 16627 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha, in reply to Craig Ranapia,

    how much fucking effort does it take for Parliament to sort itself out?

    What, like ruling consistently that sporting uniforms are not business dress? Not at all tricky for a half-competent Speaker.

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 16627 posts Report Reply

First ←Older Page 1 3 4 5 6 7 19 Newer→ Last

Post your response…

Please sign in using your Public Address credentials…

Login

You may also create an account or retrieve your password.