You argue that we shut down discussion, well I’d argue the reverse, there was far more discussion of what rape-culture actually is because of the boycott, certainly in our tea room and in the media I saw.
But what was the audience for that discussion? Was it people who listened to Willie and JT interview Amy?
I’ve been involved in some culture-change implemetation for large organistations, and one of the rules-of-thumb was that when implementing change, the percentages in the organisation within which change was being implemented would nearly always break down at roughly 20-60-20 (20% strongly for, 60% neutral, 20% strongly resistant). There was never any point talking to the two 20% groups at the ends of the bell curve, because you’d either be preaching to the choir or wasting your breath. However, getting the 60% on board gave you an 80% majority, and then it didn’t matter whether the 20% still strongly opposed the changes or not, because the tide would sweep them with it regardless.
Given that, which group here is the better group to be the audience for this discussion? Willie and JT’s core audience, or the entire rest of the country? Which one is more likely to facilitate a shift in culture?
My grandfather was in the British Army for WW2, and was evacuated from Dunkirk the same day that my grandmother was giving birth to my dad. He told me about it in detail once when I was around 10-11. I always meant to get him on film talking about it, but never got round to it before he died – one of my greatest regrets.
He did leave four typed up pages that he obviously thought were sufficient to fully describe the entirety of his adult life, but they are full of phrases like “my experiences at this time were almost identical to theose of Ernie Martin”, before he moves on to another time and place: ‘I was posted to Old Delhi, and frequently visited Chawri Bazaaar, where I had a close shave during the Ghandi troubles [and that’s clearly all that needs saying on that point, so I’ll move on to talk about Germany now]’.
Personally, I've kept a bunch of letters and journals that I wrote 20-odd years ago in my teens and 20's, but can't bear to re-read them. Just this week my wife ambushed me with the first love letter I ever wrote her, and forced me to re-read it (the hot coals would have been preferable). I keep them for the same reasons as Emma talks about - my children might one day want a glimpse of my past life. And I might return to them when I'm older.
For those who are interested, the 'mutiny' is quite well detailed in John McLeod's book 'myth and reality - the New Zealand soldier in WW2'.
From the relevant section of the book, the text of a letter given to a Major A. S. Playle in Hamilton reads as follows:
We have paraded here as ordered. We now respectfully request that arrangements be made to place us on leave without pay until such time as every Grade One man in New Zealand has done his duty overseas.
Our slogan is: 'Every man once, before volunteers are called upon twice.'
Please convey this message to the Ministry of Defence and Members of the War Cabinet that we now desire to change places with the Grade One men in industry and to enjoy the many privileges of the Home Front.
From 'other ranks only'
Just like that. Because there are, obviously, no possible implications to this type of genetic testing ever, espcially in a society with semi- or fully privatised health insurance, and where acceptance or rejection of applications for various other types of thing such as life insurance may depend on providing honest answers to various questions about your genetic susceptibility to a whole range of things.
The Manifesto is not in copyright
One would be rather surprised if it was, property being theft and all that.
A friend says BBC is good
The shipping forecast is oddly soporific
I sleep very well, but my wife does the whole 'wake up at anywhere between 4.30 and 6.00 and not get back to sleep' thing. More advice on that would be much appreciated.
Once you accept that rapists do not wander around with horns and 666 tattooed on their foreheads, you realise that they are a product of their social environment. This in turn implies the social norms need adjusting. For many, especially the privileged males, this is a challenge to their orthodoxy and position.
Good old psychological 'othering' rears it's head again. 'I am a good person. My firends are good people and my friends of friends - my wider community - are also good people. As they are all good, they can never do evil. Therefore, those who do are monstrous abberations rather than a product of the environment. Our efforts must therefore be put into casting them out and shunning them rather than examining the environment, because it goes without saying that it doesn't need changing. Because we're all good people.'
social norms or cultural narratives sometimes take generations to ” adjust”
Well, um....yes? Martin Luther King to Obama was merely a few decades, and now that Obama is president, that struggle is done and dusted, right? Stonewall to gay marriage across the entire western world? Pay and representation parity for women in boardrooms and government?
I also went to a couple of bars over there, which had a really different vibe.
There are (or used to be) a handful of bars that didn’t mind the smokers, so you could sit in and have the experience of drinking at a nice bar along with being able to freely skin up if you fancied it. But they were very much the exception – in general drinking and smoking are/were kept quite separate. I understand it’s changed quite a bit over there, too. The problem with being a country that is an island of regualtion in a sea of prohibition with porous land borders is that you inevitably end up attracting large numbers of a pretty unsavoury element, and there have been some changes made to crack down on things as I understand it. It’d be a bit different for somewhere like NZ, though. Sometimes geographical isolation is a positive.
I don’t buy alcohol immediately that I see it and drink it in the middle of the day, because that’s not the way I want to spend my life.
This was always my reply to fanatical stoners who insisted that there was no harm in it (less harm than booze blahblahblah). If I was getting out of bed and necking half a bottle of rotgut for breakfast, I’d have a problem. That’s not really any different from rolling out of bed and immediately rolling up. It becomes your life rather than an enhancement to your life.
To expand on that slightly, I am reliably informed that control/restraint techniques are not taught well in the NZ police training curriculum, and there is little to no on-going or follow-up training. And why would there be in a culture where brute force can be used instead?
It's harder to learn effective control/restraint, but it can be used effectively even with very large body size differentials. A culture less focussed on brute force and with a more finessed training and fitness standard would perhaps value these sort of skills more.
I'm sure you'd be one of the first to cry foul if incidences of use of firearms or Tasers increased because officers were not required to meet such rigorous physical standards, but if you don't have the strength the only alternative is to use a weapon.
Without wishing to add to the derail, you are offering this as an either/or (strength, or heavy weapon), and don't seem willing to consider that non-frontline roles could be created or expanded without diluting the physical requirements.
I know two NZ serving police officers. One is female, slightly build and around 5'4''. Last I heard, she was a specialist detective working in child protection having served her 'street time'. She was the only female in the unit. The other was around six foot and was an amateur boxer. He told me a story once of how he arrested a guy P'd off his head who started acting up rough. A couple of gentle taps to the groin with the nightstick didn't calm him down, so the intensity went up. Apparently, the guy just about started to notice he was being repeatedly smashed in the nuts with full force around the ninth or tenth strike.
While I agree that physical fitness is important, you'll have to work a lot harder to convince me that it's the be-all and end-all you're making it out to be.
At an appropriate price point and with appropriate regulation, solid middle-aged punters like me become appealing customers and importantly, we are actually in the market. Right now I have much more to lose trying to hook up with a reputable supplier than a spotty youth with no career and no responsibilities.
This. While I may or may nor have indulged in my mis-spent youth (and, like Ollie North, I have no recollection of the event in question. Any of them), any desire I have now is far outweighed by the trouble I'd have to go to in order to hook up a connection (and I wouldn't know where to start these days), and what I potentially have to lose.
When I drink now, it tends to be in moderation, and I almost always pay a premium for something I actually enjoy sloshing across my tongue rather than the cheapest rotgut I can find that'll get me legless (ah Mad Dog 20/20, I'll never forget the good times). I'd do the same (strictly in theory, you understand) for a decent, premium-quality smoke, and I'd feel a lot better about doing it knowing that I wasn't helping to fund organised crime.