Posts by Rageaholic
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Also, I wonder if this type of controversy (although more likely Beenie Man related) is the reason that the Council was hesitant to allow Mt Smart as a venue this year? Will be interesting to see if they host it again next year.
-
I’m in two minds about this. One the one hand, a venue owner can refuse to host a show for whatever reason it likes. If the Powerstation (for instance) didn’t want to host Odd Future and the Studio (is that place still going?) hosted it instead, no one would even notice. Council owns the venue and may see is as no different from this. But on the other hand, the owner in this case is the government and the government deciding which shows are ok in which venues makes me uncomfortable. I don’t want to live in a town where only events deemed acceptable by the Council are held in Council venues (they run a lot of them , and a lot of them are for the arts which of course tend to be extremely controversial).
I can’t wait to see what the actual process involved was. I am hoping the conversation went something like this (short version, obvs):
Council: Hey this Odd Future bunch are pretty offensive and we’re not sure about holding them in one of our venues.
BDO: You know, we were having second thoughts anyway because we don’t like them either and it’s just not worth the potential controversy. They’re OUT.As for Odd Future being at the BDO? I love the BDO, but I would not go knowing that there were audience members there that think that misogyny and hate-speech is OK or even funny or ironic. If I’m walking around and someone yells slurs at me or says something rapey, I am not going to laugh it off and I am unwilling to put myself in that situation. And there is always the possibility that there will be people whose already misogynist or homophobic views are confirmed (even if it is not what the band intended) and while fuelled on adrenaline or testosterone or booze or whatever decides to act on those views. Not a community I want to be a part of, even just for a day.
-
I actually find their official sign just as hilarious. "Vote for yourself" coupled with an American icon.
-
Up Front: It's Not Sex, and It's Not Education, in reply to Lucy Stewart,
Do the extra-larges come under the 144 for $3 deal?
I didn't ask, sorry - I just needed a few to tide me over until the test results came through,a nd also had regular sized ones at home. I just asked for the extra large out of curiousity.
More info about what normal, large, and small sizes *are* for penises would also be really handy for kids. And about the diversity of genital appearance in general - useful both for self-esteem and ability to spot real abnormality. I dunno if that's in the curriculum now, I don't recall it when I was in school.
+1 - I think people (especially during their more educational years) should see as many different example of "real life" genitalia as possible so that they can see how much they vary in real life. (although I would probably refer to "medium sized" rather than normal ;) )
-
Up Front: It's Not Sex, and It's Not Education, in reply to BenWilson,
I'd like to hear from the guy who actually prefers them and would wear them even in a monogamous and trusting relationship.
I am not the actual guy, but I was in a monogamous and trusting relationship with a man who would sometimes prefer condoms because the slight dimishment of pleasure meant he could actually go for longer, which he also enjoyed.
I think making more widely avaliable a variety of condom types and sizes would make a huge difference. I had a (different from above, obvs) partner who didn't like condoms so we had no PIV until we had been tested. While I was at Family Planning they asked if I needed any condoms, and I got some extra-large ones on a hunch. Sure enough, my partner had never tried them or even thought to, and he said they were significantly more comfortable and easy to use.
-
Muse: NZIFF Rant: A Diva's Place Is On…, in reply to Martin Lindberg,
Actually, I wonder if an intermission would solve a lot of these problems. Bring back the intermission so that people know that half way through they can use the loo, check their messages, arrange afterparties, have a smoke, have a shag, whatever - instead of just doing these things at a whim during the film since there is no other opportunity to until it is over.
I don't go to the movies because of a lot of these reasons. I know that I would be much more likely to pay $20 a ticket if I knew I wouldn't miss anything by having to pee halfway through, and that I wouldn't disturb anyone by doing it.
-
The only* bizarre crowd control issue I noticed was when trying to get into the "D" so that I could be as close as possible for The Stooges and Rammestein. When I got to the entrance of the D there was a big red light and hundreds of people (all very pleasant and polite I must add) waiting around in the rain for it to go green. When it went green after I had been waiting a full half hour, the crush to get into the entrance of the D was far more unpleasant and intense than any mosh pit I have ever been in. The D system seemed counter-productive, and I really don't see it accomplishing anything.
And once I got in there I was so glad I did - both Iggy and Rammestein were fantastic! So much fun, and rocked so hard. Best band of the day was Grinderman though; Nick Cave can do no wrong, despite the technical difficulties and shitty shitty weather.*Disclaimer: I did not go into any of the licensed areas since I couldn't be bothered queuing for a beer in what was decidedly not beer weather, and as a smoker I kept my distance from the security staff (they should have a designated smoking area for an event that goes on all day). This lack of contact with BDO staff possibly contributed to my lack of negative experiences with them.
-
Up Front: That's Inappropriate!, in reply to Tess Rooney,
So what is your objection to young people in short skirts if you realise it is not harmful? Seriously, if you don't think that they are "asking for it" I don't grasp what your issue is. Because if it is just that sometimes teenagers act sexual, you won't win that battle. See: the youth of ALWAYS.
-
Up Front: That's Inappropriate!, in reply to Tess Rooney,
Yes clothing sends a message, and short skirts can be worn to tittilate men. But why is this a bad thing? A teenager exploring sexuality and tittilation seems perfectly normal to me! Yes, school is not the appropriate forum for this (although there are worse out there!), and she broke the rules. I don't think we are arguing that though. Are you saying that no teenager should be tittilating ever? You do realise that if someone finds a young girl tittilating and does something that she does not agree to they are at fault not her, right?
-
Coming out of the woodwork here for a minute…
Of course sometimes wearing a short skirt is meant to be sexual, even for a 14 year old – 14 year olds are discovering and experimenting with their sexuality. It’s what they are supposed to do, it’s part of growning up and finding out who you are, how to be an adult and how to live within society’s expectations. I don’t why a 14 year old experimenting with her sexuality is a bad thing, which is what Tess seems to be implying. She rebelled and broke the rules, in a sexual manner – double whammy! But she should not have been shamed for it, she should be encouraged to explore these things at other times or in other ways.I really relate to this girl, I had a short skirt with my uniform, and usually refused to conform with most of the other usinform rules too. I turned out OK, and I’m pretty sure Amethyst will too.
ETA: I do not mean to imply that "experimenting with sexuality" = "sexually avaliable". I do not believe that wearing a short skirt because it feels sexy means that a person is necessarily "up for it" for want of a better term.
