It seems like the land movement has fundamentally altered the risk profile for a lot of the city in ways that haven’t yet been worked through, because everyone’s still cleaning up from the quakes themselves.
There's a lot of... I was looking for an indirect way to say "money", but fuck it, money, tied up in denying that the changes in flood risk are because of the earthquake. And, like Bronwyn says, what do you do? Where the Heathcote is now regularly flooding, maybe that could be fixed by dredging. But near where I live, the flooding risk is because of a whole bunch of little underground streams that, prior to the quakes, used to just burble away minding their own business. The land around them dropped, and now perfectly normal levels of rainfall causes huge surface flooding. What can be done about that?
The drop in the land levels is quite hard to get your head around, because it's pretty much invisible.
though it may have been Isabelle on Campbell Live?
The Flockton Basin is insanity. It seems so clear the land should have been red-zoned - it dropped up to 50cm in the quakes. Dredging Dudley Creek is not going to solve the problem.
It's been heartening to see so many non-Chch people so angry after watching that Campbell Live piece. It would be even nicer if it meant something changed.
You already did. You just received it by text.
True. Those were fucking brilliant. Kind of sad I missed the Twitter end of that, though - Megan ran this for me, as there was no 3G at my mother's death-bed.
That was the most fun I’ve had standing up, I mean sitting at a keyboard, in some time.
So glad. Because that was a Bunch of Fun for me. I love collaborative creativity. I suppose we could use PAS to do a 'paragraph at a time' story. The only problem might be people making additions at the same time.
This might be the most thoroughly I've derailed a thread for a while...
My social medium has more frequently been the dinner party where we share where we are in real time and at the same place.
I would love to be able to do this, with the people who mean the most to me. But they live in three different countries, and all over New Zealand, so that's never going to happen. Fortunately for me, they're all on social media.
I am happy to just use forums such as this, which have creative merit
An old friend of mine and I used Twitter to spontaneously co-write a limerick the other day. Different spaces lend themselves to different kinds of creativity. I really want to use Twitter to write a line at a time story now.
Which is to say, basically, that I agree with pretty much everything everyone is saying here. Bless.
intent does matter.
Intent does matter. Intent is not magic. These things are both true.
There is a world of difference between somebody hitting you deliberately, and somebody hitting you by accident. But you'd still want the person who hit you by accident to say, "Oh god, I'm sorry, are you okay?" and not, "Well, you shouldn't have had your head there." Intent matters very much, but it doesn't make your face, or your heart, stop bleeding.
A phrase that Emma uses here – “read kindly” – seems important to me. Reading what the subject has said in the worst possible light rarely ends well. Assuming good faith is better.
Again, this is true, But Also. Reading kindly doesn't mean excusing everything anyone says. Sometimes the best possible light is still pretty fucking dark. It also doesn't mean not being able to criticise - constructively. It's still okay to say, "Did you mean X? Because it kind of sounds like you might mean Y." (Which is also a great way to deal with people who are dog-whistling.)
And this is where Twitter - which I love very dearly, and which has been a life-savingly supportive environment for me - falls down. It doesn't allow space for nuance. The character limit pushes people to telegraph things
Perhaps it might be better to say “undesirable things that are sometimes said and done in the name of intersectionality.”
Or we could say “call-out culture” and stop pretending it goes one way. The spurious justification might be different, but the behaviour is no different from the sparkle-pony slut-shaming “you get women raped” bollocks people who believe in intersectionality have always been on the receiving end of.
I’ve spent quite a bit of time occupying a ‘between’ position in some of these disputes, and I’ve had it from both sides. It’s no different.
ETA: Ironically, this very issue is one I appear to be smack in the middle of.
But we use death to make a point all the time, and rightly so. The key is to use generic issues around death not specific issues about the person.
her framing of the issue
I found the piece badly flawed. She repeatedly refers to pile-ons, or call-out culture, as "intersectionality". She may as well call it "cow" for all the sense that makes. Intersectionality is a thing, it's a word that has valuable meaning, and it's the only reason I have anything to do with feminism. I loathe call-out culture, but it's not unique to feminism, let alone third-wave feminism. And I know she makes those points in that column, but she goes on calling it "intersectionality".
I have an acquaintance I hugely admire, because she goes and gets shit done. Her activism is active. And every time she does something, she has to take the flak from a dozen, or a hundred, keyboard warriors who nit-pick her on not being inclusive enough. Now, sometimes in there are grains of legitimate criticism, but man, the temptation to just walk the fuck away...