Quick hit: Maternity moolah mess

From Stuff today:

Foreigners having babies in New Zealand hospitals are leaving behind unpaid bills totalling millions of dollars for their care.

Figures supplied to The Dominion Post under the Official Information Act show that in Counties Manukau alone, the health board writes off about $1 million a year in bad debts for maternity services but the Health Ministry admits it does not know how many babies are now born to non-resident women.

Chief executive Geraint Martin said about 250 mothers a year were ineligible for publicly funded maternity but fewer than one in five paid up.

"This amounts to approximately $1 million per year in outstanding bad debt for our DHB."

Before 2003, all maternity care in New Zealand was free but the rules were tightened after revelations foreign women were cashing in with "childbirth expeditions".

Since then, taxpayer-funded care has been limited to mothers who have New Zealand citizenship or residency; have appropriate working visas or refugee status; fall under the reciprocal agreement with Australia and Britain; or whose partners are eligible.

Click through for the rest.

Anyone else reading the first word pejoratively or am I just overly sensitive?

Totally and utterly not OK

By now no doubt everyone's heard about the death threats against Green MP Sue Bradford. Very, very, deeply uncool.

It's a timely reminder of both the scary side of social media and the vulnerability of those who push unpopular barrows. Many years ago I received a couple of anonymous threats, and more recently when we had some troll trouble some of it got very nasty including physical threats towards me and others writing here.

I can't speak for anyone else but despite the rational part of my brain telling me that it's just talk some level of fear would get to me, which is exactly what the Nasty wants.

I hope Sue is ok, and that she is getting support from her friends and whanau. I admire what she is doing and I would hope that even those who disagree with her would still defend her right to feel (and be) safe.

As a threat was made via twitter it might be nice for Sue to receive some support the same way. You can do this by putting @suebr in your twitter status, plus your message of suppport.

Well at least there’s still the HoS to annoy me…

In times of personal crisis, we often find ourselves reaching for the familiar. So when Sunday rolled around, I knew there’d be something in the papers to get me all fired up about something. And sure enough the Herald delivered with their secrets to wedded bliss.

And apparently it’s all up to the women. We need to stop being so slutty, we are spending too many years being "hurt" and "used" by men and should try to ‘settle’ into marriage earlier. The article is little more than a blatant infomercial for relationship ‘gurus’ Ian and Mary Grant’s new book on successful marriage.

Dear god how many stupid people must there be out there who keep purchasing relationship books with the same theme, if a man finds a woman desirable he will work hard to win her affection and commit earlier so women you need to stop being so slutty?

Argh.

Aside from the obvious annoyance with the idea that women need to put their sexual desires to one side in order to woo a guy (who may or may turn out to be a complete asshole) the thing that grates on my nerves the most is that marriage is the end of the relationship game. Once we’ve waited for the boy to finally slip a ring on our finger (because a woman who proposes is clearly a slut), we’ve scaled the heights of womanhood and are infallible.

Of course the big assumption that the Herald on Sunday makes is that the only desirable men for women to shack up with are those who have don’t bring baggage into the relationship in the form of previous wives or even worse, children. From my perspective, being Dad’s ‘whatever’ to the child isn’t the hard part, it’s dealing with the ex wife part of the bargain that downright sucks. And it’s for that reason that I wouldn’t recommend a ‘used’ option for all but the hardiest of women. It’s hard, real hard. But I love that personal disaster or not, the Suit always brings flowers to greet me at the airport after a trip away and will argue with me about what’s written in the Sunday papers .

For our Wellington readers who have the hippy hippy shakes

see more dog and puppy pictures

more cuts to education

i've just been informed of proposed funding cuts to preparatory programmes at our universities. these are programmes for those who haven't managed to pass the NCEA entry requirements for a variety of reasons, and provide an alternative pathway to tertiary education. here are some further details:

Government funding pressures directed at universities and arguments that universities should not provide tertiary study preparation programmes are behind nationwide moves to eradicate university bridging programmes. In the Waikato region, university staff have been informed that there will be a “significant and possibly total reduction” in pre-degree offerings for domestic students.

Apparently, the University of Waikato is currently trying to negotiate with the Tertiary Education Commission to keep offerings which will cater for 80 students a year in its preparation programmes. Even if it succeeds, this is nothing compared with the usual 500 students per year who attend university preparation programmes, here in the Waikato! What will our country look like if only those who have a smooth run through high school get the opportunity to gain degrees? What about valuing diversity, inclusion, and equity?

Many students who do the preparation programmes have an immense contribution to make because they have experienced ‘life’s ups and downs’ at an early age, not to mention the fact that many of them miss UE because they were excelling at sports or taking up overseas exchange opportunities. Surely they deserve the chance to study at university, just like other school leavers!

All this seems to be going on very quietly, without the knowledge of, or discussion with key stakeholders like our local high schools and other organisations which support our young people.

In the current economic climate, we need the university preparation programmes for our young people more than ever. The message about what’s going on needs to be circulated. Funding decisions about the fate of our school leavers are being made by the Tertiary Education Commission, by Monday. After that, the university will be deciding how its commitment to these programmes can or cannot be delivered.

The University of Waikato Vice Chancellor needs to be given a strong message about how important these programmes are to our region so that he is encouraged to negotiate strongly to keep them and to follow through on their delivery after the negotiations. Here is a link being used to send this message to him. There is a letter template which you can add your name to so you can send this vital message directly to the Vice Chancellor. Please don’t hesitate, time is of the essence, but you can make a difference in less than a minute.

Please circulate this message to anyone you think supports these programmes.

another example of cuts being made with little or no consultation, and the bare minimum of publicity. the tertiary sector is already suffering from caps on student numbers, which means that infrastructure and staff resources to education thousands of students across the country will be wasted, because of the caps.

i can't understand the desire to cut access to tertiary education, particulary from a government that wants, apparently, to close the wage gap with australia. upskilling is the best way to improve wages. but this measure to cut preparatory programmes will marginalise those who already haven't been served well by our secondary system. and the whole country loses out when these people are denied the opportunity to improve their situation.

inappropriate to visit fire stations

we live in a democracy, apparently. which means that any person should be able to visit a fire station if they choose, and if that fire station gives approval for the visit. but apparently, the leader of the opposition is not allowed to do so.

back in february, hon phil goff wanted to visit the hamilton fire station but wasn't given permission to do so by the relevant minister, at the time hon richard worth. the reason given by mr worth was that it was inappropriate for the leader of the opposition to visit the station before the minister had done so. mr goff had wanted to give his personal condolences in regard to the fire fighter killed in the coolstore fire at tamahere last year. but since mr worth hadn't managed to do the same, he stopped the visit.

with the departure of mr worth, the new minister in charge is hon nathan guy. and his excuse for refusing a visit?

"I do not believe it is appropriate for Opposition members of Parliament to visit fire stations that are located outside their electorates," Mr Guy said in the August 25 letter.

A spokeswoman for Mr Guy said the minister also considered it inappropriate for MPs to visit during periods of industrial negotiation.

um, what?? i really can't find the words to describe this particular bit of stupidity.

Quick hit: Sailing away or possibly not

From Stuff:

The Australian Family Association has joined Dutch child protection authorities in raising concerns about a New Zealand-born teenager's bid to become the youngest person to circumnavigate the globe.

"Being cut off from parents and peers and all sorts of other social stimulus or interaction just seems to me quite crazy," a spokesman for the association, John Morrissey, a long-time secondary school teacher, told the ABC.

Laura Dekker, 13, expects to hear a court decision overnight tomorrow (NZ time) on whether she should be taken into care to stop her setting off on the solo voyage next month when she turns 14.

The Dutch Council for Child Protection has applied to the District Court in Utrecht to be granted temporary custody of Dekker if her parents do not put a stop to her trip.

Dekker has requested her municipality to de-register her as a resident so that she can move to New Zealand, where she was born on a yacht, but the De Volkskrant newspaper reported her New Zealand passport has expired.

Click through for more.

So what do you think dear readers, Nanny State(s) interfers again or sensible curbing of unwise parenting?

And would the reaction have been different had it been a boy? (I think not, but am interested in your thoughts)

A time and a place...

First of all a big thank you for all your nice comments in my last post.

I got back to New Zealand very late on Monday night and my wonderful midwife had already gotten the early pregnancy unit to call me first thing Tuesday and had my D&C today. I know that miscarriage is a 'natural process' but quite frankly I couldn't contemplate waiting days or even weeks for my body to expel the womb contents when all I really want to do is to get on with my life.

So this morning off I went to Greenlane for the final stage of this pregnancy.
Unfortunately just as I was about to enter the centre, I came into contact with a man with placards reading 'thanks mum' with pictures of a little fetus on them and a phone number for pregnancy counselling services.

Fortunately I was most definitely in the 'anger' stage of the grieving process. I was livid that this man probably hadn't even considered in his rush to save the 'unborn' that there might be women walking into Greenlane with very much wanted but non-viable babies in our tummies who didn't need yet another reminder that our pregnancy had failed

And boy did I let him know.

I don't think I have ever experienced the kind of violent rage before in my life. I could literally see flashes of white as I sucked in air between screams.

Rather than feeling upset afterwards I felt oddly at peace. The anger at the injustice of why my pregnancy ended while other people more undeserving people get to keep their babies had been welling up inside for days. The Suit had experienced some of it but that placard holder was a giant fucking lightening rod for all my rage and quite frankly I can't think of more deserving target.

And it's not just because I disagree with his views.

It's because there's a time and place for everything even political debate. It is a mark of a civilized society that everyone, especially the people you might disagree with, deserves a bit of dignity in times of distress. I'd like to think my outburst might make this group stop and re-think their tactics but somehow I doubt it. Clearly their compassion only extends to those babies who could be born rather than the ones who never will. And as for the women who for one reason or another won't be giving birth, our humanity just doesn't matter.

P.S I could totally see why Michael Jackson could get hooked on the drugs they use for general anesthetic. Oh boy did I feel like I could fly like a fairy after waking up although that might have been from the huge amount of blood I lost afterwards.

Urgh cupcakes

This one's for Pauline, who doesn't really like cupcakes.

Found here. Via the power of Google.

Quick hit: Surely this didn't need to go to court?

From the Herald:

"Take my mother-in-law - please," isn't a joke you're likely to hear often these days from Sunda Croonquist. The veteran comic is being sued by her mother-in-law after making her the punchline of too many jokes.

The mother-in-law is accusing Croonquist of spreading false, defamatory and racist lies with in-law jokes that have become a staple of her routine in nightclubs and on television channels like Comedy Central.

...Or her first visit to her mother-in-law's house: "I walk in, I say, 'Thank you so much for having me here, Ruthie.' She says, 'The pleasure's all mine, have a seat."' Then, in a loud aside, 'Harriet, put my pocketbook away."'

Croonquist said there was a time when her in-laws would laugh with everyone else at the black-member-of-a-Jewish-family jokes.

"They played my tape at Passover one year, and they loved it!" she said.

But things changed after Croonquist, promoting upcoming gigs in New Jersey, posted information on her website that, according to her in-laws, allowed pretty much anyone to figure out the identities of her in-laws.

They sued in April in US District Court in New Jersey, where they live. The action seeks unspecified damages and demands that Croonquist remove any offensive statements from her website, routines and recordings.

Croonquist says she would drop any language her family finds offensive, but refuses to pay any settlement. Her lawyer has filed a motion to have the suit dismissed, and a judge is scheduled to hear it on Sept. 8...

Click through for the whole article.

And for the record my mother-in-law is awesome.

time to get active

a couple of action points:

1. a reminder that the pay equity petition closes on 1 september. if you have any signed sheets, please get them in the mail as soon as possible. the petition will be presented to parliament on 17 september, the sitting day closest to women's suffrage day.

2. i received this request by email:

Sandra Coney has asked that as many people as possible write to the Ministry of Health, AND to the Minister of Health, asking that thefull report of the 1988 Cartwright Inquiry be put on the MoH website. Its currently not there, and its out of print so not easily accessible to the general public - and it obviously needs to be when there are seemingly creditable people like Prof Linda Bryder writing negative nonsense publicly about the effects of that Report.

Director-General, Ministry of Health: stephen_mckernan@moh.govt.nz
Minister of Health: Tony.ryall@ministers.govt.nz

3. we haven't really covered the dispute between telecom and current employees who they are trying to turn into dependent contractors. it's another way to pay less than the minimum wage. more details about the issue can be found here and here and here. in summary:

You may be aware that Telecom is reorganising the provision of maintenance and broadband implementation services so that technicians who are currently employees will be forced at great expense to become private contractors. For the privilege of doing this they will incur considerable set up costs, earn less money and have no job security. The saved profits will be distributed between Telecom and an Australian Company Visionstream.

Matt McCarten summarises the struggle eloquently here. More details can be found at the EPMU’s website at www.epmu.org.nz.

If Telecom succeeds you can bet that many other corporations will try to achieve the same thing.

The campaign will need funding. To help you can instantly make a $10 donation by ringing 0900 STAND TALL (0900 782638255). Please consider making a donation and circulate this message.

Akl Women's Suffrage Breakfast - chance to go with other leftie ladies

My dear gravid friend Arna is putting together a group of leftie laydeez to go to Women's Health Action's Suffrage Breakfast this year. I'd be there except if things go well tomorrow I will be out of Auckland that day. If you are keen please contact Arna Metcalfe on 027 6728148 or arnametcalfe at xnet dot co dot nz, tickets are $33 each, including breakfast.

Here's a little bit about the event itself:

The Women’s Suffrage Breakfast is a wonderful opportunity to meet with friends and celebrate Suffrage Day.

Given that it is Women’s Health Action’s 25th Anniversary this year, we have invited Sandra Coney, one of the founders of Women’s Health Action Trust to speak. She will be reflecting on 25 years of Women’s Health activism in New Zealand. This will be an informative and entertaining event.”

The suffrage breakfast will be held in the Newmarket Room at the Ellerslie Event Centre, Ellerslie Racecourse, Auckland from 7am - 9am on the 25th September 2009.

Sadly The Hand Mirror will not be able to organise it's Suffrage Eve Debate this year, due to being just too damn busy. We'll be looking to get it going again next year though.

If you know of any other Suffrage Day events that we could put up here then do feel free to share!

BSA finds TVNZ dealt with PH OK

From Stuff, big thanks to Am for alerting me to this via Facebook:

A Broadcasting Standards Authority complaint about Paul Henry's 'moustache gate' has not been upheld because TVNZ handled the matter appropriately.

On March 25, the Breakfast host read viewer comments that a female Greenpeace worker, who had been a guest on the show, had a moustache. He then added his own comments, while his co-host Alison Mau pleaded with him to stop.

TVNZ spokeswoman Megan Richards announced in May that the broadcaster had upheld the complaints against Henry because the guest was treated unfairly. It had replied to the around 30 people who complained and apologised. Henry and senior Breakfast staff were counselled.

However, dissatisfied with TVNZ's response, complainant Tony Brown referred the matter to the Broadcasting Standards Authority, saying he was "quite unhappy about the pathetic action they have taken as a result of the incident".

Mr Brown considered TVNZ had a duty to make a public apology to viewers.

TVNZ was aware the incident had provoked significant negative publicity for TVNZ, and considered that as sufficient penalty.

"It was also concerned that further on-air publicity at this stage might only serve to re-victimise the woman in question," the authority's finding said.

The authority found that Henry had blatantly breached standards, but did not uphold Mr Brown's complaint because TVNZ's response had been sufficient. It agreed TVNZ would be hard pressed to readdress the matter on air without further re-victimisation of the Breakfast guest.

I've got no idea who Tony Brown is, but I can understand the motivation behind his complaint. Frankly I was pretty hosed off that Paul Henry didn't actually contact Stephanie Mills to apologise until after TVNZ said publicly that he had. And that no journo actually bothered to contact Mills to check before just printing what TVNZ said. Still TVNZ did do a lot more than I thought they would. And I would hope that this incident puts Henry on shakier ground if he does something similar again.

This is another good opportunity to remind those who haven't seen it yet that what Stephanie Mills was talking about was actually really important and didn't deserve to get overwhelmed by Henry's pettiness.

Quick hit: Single sex schooling better?

From The Press, via Stuff:

The gender gap in educational achievement could be reduced by single-sex schooling, research shows.

Traditionally, female pupils have surpassed their male counterparts at secondary school. Education experts have recommended same-sex classrooms and a Christchurch longitudinal study has reinforced their case.

A Ministry of Education spokeswoman said there were no plans to introduce same-sex classrooms as part of the curriculum, although some schools were conducting their own trials.

...Principal researcher Sheree Gibb said she had looked at the data in response to debate over the issue, "and it showed clear differences between the two school types in both the size and direction of the gender gap".

She said the study provided no information on why the gap closed in a single-sex school, but it could be because of management style, distraction in co-ed schooling or decile level.

Click through for the whole article.

My perception is that most single-sex schools that remain are in reasonably high decile areas, although may well be wrong. I went to a girls only school from Form 1 until part way through Form 6, then changed to a co-ed school for the rest of my time at secondary, so I've experienced both and can see advantages, and disadvantages, in both. For me, as a young woman who had no brothers or male cousins close to me in age, switching to a co-ed environment was helpful socially. It was also a better school academically, for a whole variety of reasons.

What say you, dear readers?

Vileness in the Herald this morning

In relation to an article about the auctioning off of the crypt directly above Marilyn Monroe's. You can click through for yourself if you want to read the innudendos, urgh.

Although I will just add that the paper headline is worse than the online one. In print they've gone with

$6.8 million to spend eternity over Marilyn

I say again, urgh.

more on ACC

thought i'd do an update on a couple of posts i've put up recently.

in amongst the buffoonery and jerking off at parliament today, there was this question:

Hon DAVID PARKER (Labour) to the Minister for ACC: How will the proposed changes to the treatment of sensitive claims meet the legal requirements of the ACC scheme to provide “for a fair and sustainable scheme for managing personal injury that has, as its overriding goals, minimising both the overall incidence of injury in the community, and the impact of injury on the community”?

and related supplementaries, regarding changes to ACC funded counselling services for victims of sexual abuse. the minister's response was interesting, and i'll reproduce part of it here:

Hon PANSY WONG (Acting Minister for ACC) : ACC’s proposed changes to the treatment guidelines for mental injury resulting from sexual abuse are based on a comprehensive 5-year programme of clinical research commissioned by the corporation. The Massey University school of psychology undertook this research with a team comprising 23 researchers and an advisory committee of 13 people. A multi-method approach was taken, utilising quantitative and qualitative analysis, literature reviews, questionnaires, and focus groups. The research team included specialists in survivor advocacy, psychology, counselling, education, migrant resettlement, indigenous issues, and the mental health of children and older people.

the research report was tabled, but i don't know how to find tabled reports on-line yet. however, the reason i found the answer interesting was because i read luddite journo's post (hat tip: lew's excellent post at kiwipolitico) about one of the researchers funded by ACC. i don't want to reduce traffic to LJ's blog, so i suggest you read about it over there. i don't know that this particular researcher was one of the 23 that the minister refers to.

i'd also be interested in finding out if the report actually recommended that victims of sexual abuse see at least 3 different health professionals, or that an arbitrary cap be placed on funding for counselling services.

[ETA: toad has a great post about this issue here, with a link to the research report (pdf) the minister refers to.]


on the issue of pay equity between white women and women of colour, there has been some news about funding for wages to maori health providers being less than to non-maori providers. it's an issue that the nurses organisation has been trying to get addressed, but with little success so far. waatea news covered it this morning (morning report, radio nz, 8.48am, towards the end) and there is a post up at red alert about the issue as well.


and finally, nice to get a very brief but honourable mention by dennis welch in his run down of nz political blogs and their impact on the MSM this morning (nine to noon, radio nz, 11.50am).

who'll be caring for you?

there's a new department of labour report out about "the growing reliance on migrant caregivers":

New Zealand’s population is rapidly ageing. It is estimated that in 2031 those 65 and older will represent 35 percent of the population aged 15-64. While part of this increase is due to healthy ageing, nevertheless the number of people requiring some form of care is projected to dramatically increase. It is projected that 48,200 paid caregivers will be needed by 2036 to look after a growing number of older disabled New Zealanders requiring high levels of care and support. It is highly unlikely that the local supply will be sufficient to meet this demand. Therefore immigration of low-skill workers needs to be considered as a part of the measures needed to alleviate the future pressures on the demand for paid caregivers for the elderly. New Zealand does not have a formal scheme for caregiver migration. However there has been a rapid and growing reliance on migrant caregivers for the elderly over the last five years. Globally as the demand for elder care grows, New Zealand may not be able to rely on the current sources of migrant caregivers for the elderly and alternative regions such as Melanesia and non-traditional parts of Asia need to be considered. While temporary migration is one option, programmes that provide pathways to permanent migration also need to be considered.

melanesia and non-traditional parts of asia. in other words women of colour. still doing the work that the rest of the nation doesn't want to dirty their hands with. still doing it for very little pay. the age of servitude is not really over, is it?

after all, the first paragraph of the abstract goes like this:

Caring for the elderly is perceived to be a relatively low skilled, low paid and a low status vocation. This makes it difficult to attract people, especially young people from the local labour force into this vocation. Reflecting the type of work and its status, caring is highly gendered.

it's more than gendered, there is also the issue of race. but page 9 & 10 of the report (pdf file) refers to an OECD report which came out with recommendations to improve the caregiver workforce, only one of which related to migration. they talk about improved pay rates, better training, a career structure, improved safety standards, better use of IT and health promotion.

this particular report has a focus on migration, and the danger is that we will continue to import women who will do this work for low wages, instead of working on the measures outlined in the by the OECD report. after all, it's easier and cheaper. and there is no shortage of people wanting to migrate to this country.

a final point: in all the talk of pay equity, there is little discussion about equity in the wages of women of colour as compared to white women. i'd like to see more information about that, and some thought put into strategies to reduce inequities.

(hat tip: ruth desouza posting to AEN)

Time out for parents

Reflecting on the sad story of Caitlyn Matthews, a little girl with serious and permanent brain damage caused when she was shaken as a baby, my partner said, 'We should promote time out for parents'.* I understood completely, and so probably does every exhausted, stressed-out parent of small children who is simply desperate for a couple of hours of uninterrupted sleep, or even the opportunity to just have a shower or go to the loo in peace and quiet.

Caitlyn's story made me remember a time when my daughter was a toddler, and still breastfeeding. She was no longer taking the whole breastfeeding enterprise seriously, and had discovered the sadistic joy that comes from biting mum's boob, then laughing as I yowled in pain. One day, in exhaustion and utter frustration, I came incredibly close to slapping her. I feel guilty about it to this very day. The things that seem obvious to someone who isn't exhausted or stressed - put the child down, take a deep breath and count to ten, leave the room - can sometimes just elude you when you're feeling overwhelmed.

This is just one reason why I'm so strongly opposed to smacking. If I'd slapped my daughter, no doubt some (possibly Christian fundamentalist) pro-smacker would have leapt to my defense, claiming that 'correction' of my child is my right as a parent. But in so many instances, as would have been the case if I'd actually slapped my daughter, what passes as correction is nothing but parental anger, frustration, exhaustion and lack of self-control. A friend of mine once mentioned to me how her father - a normally gentle man whom I like and have respect for - once lost his temper and pushed her, and her head put a hole in the wall. The line between an act of frustration and an act causing lifelong damage can be frighteningly thin.

Giving yourself parental time out - physically or mentally removing yourself from the stress - can be pretty hard to do. I'm not overly proud of it, but in moments of extreme frustration, I yell and howl like a banshee: incoherent phrases which may include expletives. My kids don't take much notice of it, but they know it means mummy needs a few moments to regain the marbles she's just lost. It's not a particularly sophisticated tactic, but I figure it's better than doing something that will scare my children, upset them or cause them harm.

What time out tactics do other parents use on themselves?


* Caitlyn's story was one of two I spied today about the plight of shaken babies. The second was about the cost of caring for those who sustain severe head injuries. I thought it was kind of odd - the fiscal consequences wouldn't be my first argument against child abuse.

Post script: Caitlyn's grandparents, who are raising her, just spoke on Campbell Live about the difficulties and many joys of caring for her, and the importance of stressed parents learning to walk away. They - and lots of other grandparents raising grandchildren in tough circumstances - do an incredible job.

Quick hit: Modelling gets unionised

From Stuff:

Two Australian models working in London are about to set up the industry's first code of conduct to protect models from exploitation by agents and photographers.

Victoria Keon-Cohen and Dunja Knezevic campaigned for London's Equity union in 2007 and since then have represented models who have been cheated out of money, physically hurt on photo shoots and subjected to sexual harassment by photographers.

The women, who between them have modelled for Versace, Levi's, Vogue and Marks & Spencer, say they hope to change the culture in an industry where models are treated as expendable.

...The models have enlisted the support of their agency, IMG, one of the world's biggest, for the new code.

The two are also negotiating about the code with the British Fashion Council and the Association of Modelling Agencies.

Click through for the whole article.

Some of the stories of cases they have dealt with are really sucky.

What to expect.... when you weren't expecting

Dear Child,
Not the one who gives me huge sloppy kisses, but the other one inside my tummy.

We've had a pretty odd beginning. Other women will tell you that it was their tingling breasts, missed period or some odd intuition that they 'just knew' they were pregnant. For me not taking a dump in four days that was a sign that something was up. One bulk pregnancy test purchase later, I got a sign I didn't need. Two lines, mocking me inside the toilets of McDonalds.

Some women cry for different reasons over home pregnancy tests; anguish over yet another negative result or perhaps joy after months or even years of trying. I'm not sure why I cried but a few days later, there were a few more sobs at the doctors office with the official news that I was up the duff. Your father's response wasn't quite what I expected either. I thought a normal reaction to this sort of news would have been a 'fuck' or maybe even a 'are you sure?' but the announcement of your existence was met with a 'I TOLD YOU I HAD SUPER SPERM' followed by 'I should text my best mate, at least he got six months of trying before his wife fell pregnant.' After I let Daddy marvel at his strength of his semen, we had to decide what to do with you, the unexpected womb visitor.

The rational part of my brain was ticking over all the reasons why we needed to say goodbye but then by golly those hormones got to me and all I could think was 'Babies, babies, babies, NOW!' Everywhere I looked there were pregnant women and babies. 'Don't they look so sweet and cute?' I'd think to myself, 'I could totally do the whole motherhood thing, hell I already have a part-time kid care of your father.' I would like to say it was the experience of seeing your bean-like outline on the screen but honestly the only thing on my mind was willing the moment the radiologist would stop pushing that metal wand thingy into my full bladder and let me go pee.

I've been trying to get used to the feeling that my body isn't entirely my own anymore. Tired doesn't even begin to explain the constant overwhelming exhaustion I've had these past few months. I wake up tired, I get tireder throughout the day before I can go home and take a nap before pulling myself off the sofa to go bed for the night. Not to mention the constant nausea, regular vomiting oh and my little b-cup breasts exploded seemingly overnight into giant D cups a few weeks into this journey. Your Dad asked me what it's like being pregnant and the only description I give was that pregnancy is like having permanent hangover after not sleeping for a week.

That feeling of being stuck with hangover has meant I chowed my way through many servings of my favourite hangover food, whopper meals, way more than either of us would have liked. I know I should, but I really don't care what all that processed food has done to your brain development much less my figure. The fastfood gave me a few hours respite from the feeling that I'm about to projectile vomit should I open my mouth for too long. While we're on the topic of 'bad food' I apologize for putting you in mortal peril during my period of indecisiveness by eating my way through the following banned for pregnant women foods: brie, sushi, sashimi, smoked salmon, raw cookie dough, ham, homemade ice-cream and tiramsu. But hey at least I've stayed away from caffeine and booze so I'm not really that bad a hostess right?

But as it turned out, I was a bad hostess.

Just as getting used to the concept of being pregnant and excited about being your mother, week 13 hit. For most women week 13 is the time they get to relax as the 'danger time' for miscarriage has passed. My week 13 involved getting a bad sign in the middle of nowheresville Australia and bouncing from one hospital to the next trying to find someone who could give me a good sign. But instead the doctor confirmed what I already feared was going on, my pregnancy hormone levels had already plummeted which meant you weren't alive anymore.

It's odd that I should feel that my heart is broken into a million tiny pieces over your short existence. At first all I could think about was how all the drama in my life, lack of space and astronomical lawyers bills made plan A, abortion, the only real option. But when the time came to start making the arrangements, I couldn't go through with Plan A. Why you might wonder? I suppose it was because even though you were a huge surprise and your timing was really crappy, on some level you were wanted.

That moment of knowing was much like your existence, so brief I'm pretty sure we almost missed it. But one day your daddy rubbed my tummy and asked 'how's my baby?' with his cheeky grin that is usually reserved for when his bowels omit a gas so foul that it really should be bottled and sold on the black market as a weapon of mass destruction. I think that's the point when we both decided that no matter how bad the timing, plan A had just be torn to shreds.

But now it's me that feels like I'm being pulled to shreds. I'm sitting in a foreign land with a dead fetus in my belly, feeling so alone. All I want is a giant hug from your Dad, but he's back in New Zealand. I know that I'll be back there tomorrow but right now it feels like forever. I also know that even though this pregnancy ended in disaster, at least I have no trouble with the getting pregnant part of the procreation process. Someday hopefully not long from now, I'll be holding a new child in my arms and the pieces of my heart will be put back together again. Except for that one piece you'll always have.

Love from,

Mummy

Market failure?

The UK's Filament magazine is having an uphill battle. It's a magazine for women featuring erotic imagery of men, and goes by the slogan, 'The thinking woman's crumpet'. The problem is, Filament can't get printers or distributors to support production of a magazine featuring images of men with erections. In a nation awash with tabloids featuring scantily clad page three girls, erotic imagery appealing to women is somehow too distasteful.

There are some very good arguments to be had from feminists who oppose porn, and believe that two wrongs - objectifying men similarly to women - don't make a right. And I'm going to conveniently avoid these arguments for now. The thing that intrigues me about this issue is how it reflects on pornography as a market.

Erotic imagery is as old as humankind, and porn has a long history too. It's unsurprising that the majority of porn has been targeted at men, not simply because it reinforces widely held cultural ideas that men are the active partners in sex and women are passive, but because men have had access to the financial resources needed to purchase commodities.

I find it really hard to imagine a world in which women and men could access erotic imagery equally. I can't think what it would be surrounded with magazine ads and billboards using sexualised imagery of men to sell everyday products, from soap to hearing aids. I can't imagine striding unselfconsciously into the restricted area of the DVD shop to make my selection, or being part of a culture in which I felt entitled to scrutinise other people's bodies rather than be the subject of scrutiny. It would be a vast cultural change, and an equally big commercial change.

Presuming there's a demand for erotic imagery that appeals to women - and Filament's research is clear that there is - what would it take for the market to respond to this demand? Economics tells us that where there's a demand, an entrepreneurial soul will use it to make a buck, and it's usually true: someone like Steve Crow will usually step into the breach (and if the thought of Steve Crow near your breeches alarms you, I apologise for my choice of words). In Filament's case, the idea of women asserting their sexual appetites is so repellent to some that it outweighs the desire to profit from women who are both willing and able to pay.

It can, of course, be difficult for women to actually express consumer demand for erotic material. Last night's Simpsons rerun featured Apu urging his wife to take the children away from the shop - they were preventing the lurking male porn buyers from 'making their move'. If men find it difficult to counter the stigma attached to accessing erotic imagery, it's surely worse for women. I'd be interested to know whether the more 'discrete avenues' for porn - particularly the internet - are favoured by females.

The Filament issue raises a bunch of interesting questions. What would a market that met women's demand for erotic imagery look like? How could women articulate demand, what sort of commodities would women want, and who could best produce them?

The Unfortunate Experiment revisited

The tragic story of National Women's Hospital is being traversed again in a new book by medical historian Linda Bryder. The book has proven controversial because it calls into question the Cartwright inquiry, which found that patients at National Women's had been experimented on by Dr Herbert Green. Thirty women died of untreated cancer under Dr Green's care.

I'm embarrassed to admit that I know almost nothing about this important chapter in NZ women's history. Still, I thought it would be good to link to some key documents, and provide a chance for those who know more about it to share their views.

Anne Else provides a summary of events, and a critique of Bryer's book
Linda Bryder is interviewed on National Radio
A link to the 1987 Metro article which revealed the National Women's scandal are here

The Age of Stupid

I went and saw the documentary The Age of Stupid the other night. It is good. You should see it. And yes, I cried (for me it was the bit about the Nigerian village that did it). The film was at its best when showing how climate change is already affecting peoples' lives. The most shocking statistic for me was that while only 1% of scientists don't believe climate change is real, 60% of the general public remain unconvinced. (Interestingly, I read a statistic when I was in Australia a while ago that said that a large number of Australians do believe it is real, no doubt because people there are experiencing the effects on a national scale to a greater extent than elsewhere).

The film's Kiwi producer, Lizzie Gillet, had this to say in a NZ Herald review posted on the movie website:

"We wanted to make a film that had an impact," Gillett says "We didn't want to be preaching to the converted. More importantly, I think there is a lot of research out there and people know about climate change but are just not doing anything, so we tried to make a film that engages people emotionally more than intellectually ... to persuade them to do something about climate change.

I agree that the science is compelling, however, the one thing that disappointed me about the film is that it felt very light on what that something is that we need to do about climate change. We saw people from the rich world growing their own food, attending protests, thinking about how they can reduce their carbon emissions on an individual level. One man who was interviewed, the wind farm guy, referred to taking action on climate change as a "moral issue". I think that this misses the point; the best chance we have of addressing climate change at is by facing it as a political issue that can be addressed at the national level.

By talking about climate change as either an individual moral problem, or a global crisis, we miss the point that it is governments that will make a difference here with initiatives such as taxing pollution so that the real costs associated with production and distribution are being included in prices. Again, in Australia last week the news was full of the fact that food prices will be affected by their recently announced emissions targets and there was well-placed concern about the effect that this would have on the poor. To deal with this real problem the Rudd government announced that they would target social assistance to those families affected by increased prices. This is the approach we need to take here in New Zealand as well.

I recommend the film and hope you will have the chance to see it. However, changing behaviour on an individual level to seek to address climate change may feel good morally but what we need to do is to really make progress on this is to take this on collectively through our political processes.

Good things take time

I'm resigned to the fact that the pro-smackers are probably going to win the referendum, but I'm not particularly glum about it. In a few hours, I'll guess we'll know for sure.

Some years ago, I saw a documentary about (of all things) the history of road safety. For years and years, British drivers refused to wear seatbelts, or to make their kids wear them - my car, my kids, my private business, my right to do as I choose. Change came when the government ran a campaign, showing the horrific injuries which occur to unsecured children in road accidents, and the road toll went down accordingly. Thirty or so years later, most people would agree that those parents who don't ensure their children are buckled in are being negligent. The right of a child to be safe is considered more important than the right of the parents to call the shots. These days, if you argued that parents should decide whether their kids wear seatbelts, most people would probably think you were a bit bizarre.

Smacking is going the same way. The anti-smackers may have carried the day, but the trend is against them as the incidence of smacking declines - and if anything, I think they've hastened their demise with some of the strange comments that have been made during this referendum.

Many of those who support smacking are ordinary Joes and Joannes. I know some who've gone from being mildly pro-smacking to mildly against since section 59 was repealed. But those people who are zealous enough to lead a public campaign in favour of striking children are a different story. Sheryl Savill, who began the petition which initiated the referendum, expressed irritation on Campbell Live that the law prevents smacking a child for touching the remote control. Bob McCroskie has defended a father who repeatedly pushed his seven-year-old to the ground for refusing to play rugby. They have the Christian fervour of people who believe an invisible guy in the sky has instructed them to smack kids.* And they can hold whatever views they please; but their fundamentalist Christian beliefs aren't representative of the majority.

To give credit where it's due, the pro-smackers have campaigned effectively, and with the courage of their convictions. But, in the longer term, I think those who don't share the religious beliefs of the hard-core pro-smackers will continue to move away from smacking as a form of discipline. And those who continue to advocate smacking, in the face of all the evidence that it is bad for children, will in time seem like those who oppose seatbelts: slightly bizarre.

* The Family First website argues that marriage 'elevates and protects our sexual nature'. It features a picture of two wedding rings with the caption, 'For the best sex, slip on one of these'.

HRC moving on pay equity

the human rights commission has apparently put out a legal opinion today regarding pay equity investigations. i can't find the report on line, but could only find this:

“A legal opinion released by the Human Rights Commission today confirms that Chief Executives of Government Departments must act to overcome pay equity issues within their organisation.

“That legal opinion now raises serious questions about whether Tony Ryall forced Chief Executives to act illegally when he ordered them to scrap pay equity investigations for school support workers and social workers at Child Youth and Family....

and further progress is to be made, as can be seen from this press release:

A monitoring framework will be developed by the Human Rights Commission to ensure the health, education and public sectors take action on delivering pay and employment equity for all workers....

The monitoring framework would measure annually:
• the overall pay gap between men and women in each organisation,
• the number of women in senior management,
• the starting rate pay gaps between men and women,
• progress on pay and employment equity response plans,
• other employment equity initiatives.

it's great that we've got another organisation doing work in this area and holding government departments to account.

Dickishness

Germany's Green Party has come out with this particularly dreadful, racist poster. I'm not going to dignify it by putting the image here.

why do we need a new clinical framework?

soon after the election, the new government decided to change the composition of the ACC board. we've got a different group of people deciding who gets money for health services, and it seems that their priorities are not around sexual health. we've had the cuts to the auckland sexual abuse help line. and now, there appears to be a move that will result in cuts to counselling services to victims of sexual violence and abuse:

Sean Manning, President-elect of the NZ Association of Psychotherapists, adds that “ACC is in the business of addressing the effects of trauma, but the proposed process where a victim of sexual abuse will have to tell their story to three people before getting help, will actually be damaging. If you want to put people off asking for help, this is a good way to do it. It is a shocking way to deliver a supposedly rehabilitative service.”

“Other than an implied criticism that there are clients who are receiving ‘too much’ counselling we have yet to hear clearly from ACC what it is they believe isn’t working under the current system. Instead we’re seeing a set of changes hurriedly imposed that we predict will impact negatively on clients who are already distressed by experiencing difficulties with getting cover, unreasonable delays and the impacts this has on safe practice,” says Adrienne Dale of the NZ Association of Counsellors.

it's well worth reading the full press release, as there are some major concerns raised in it. as with the closure of the pay equity unit, there has been no consultation regarding this change. there has been no opportunity to have a discussion about the impact of the new clinical framework; there appears to be no research or evidence on which the changes are based.

all of which makes me wonder, who in the current government is standing up for women? who is advocating for services that are of crucial importance to women? there appears to be a total vacuum. for all the cries there used to be of "nanny-state" in the previous 3 years, we now have silence when the government is actually behaving in a dictatorial manner that is detrimental to the well-being of its citizens.

one final point. it's hard to see this as anything but another move to prepare ACC for privatisation. which will make it even more difficult for victims of sexual violence and abuse to obtain the professional services they need, because private providers will expect you jump through even more hoops before they'll accept your claim.

An ass out of you and me

On the weekend I ran into an old old friend, someone I hadn't seen, except in bad Facebook photo flashbacks, for at least a decade.

Wriggly and I were at the pet store* when I spotted Rose and said hello. I introduced her to my son, we exchanged some small talk, and asked her what she was up to these days. That kind of thing. Then she kind of assumed that as I had a kid I must not be working anymore. She didn't mean it unkindly, and I didn't take it that way, but it certainly reminded me of something I had started to forget, from largely interacting with people who know my family arrangements well.

When people see me out and about with Wriggly they think I'm a stay at home mum, because I'm a woman and he's little. When people see Wriggly's dad out and about with him they almost always conclude he's in paid work and having a day off.

Enlightened societal attitudes to sharing parenting? Nope, not there yet.

* And oh what a pet store - I heartily recommend Animates on Mt Eden Rd to anyone with a bored child and no money on a rainy day. Puppies, birds, fish, guinea pigs, oh it was heaven for a little boy who can say dog and cat.

Something smells fishy

National is looking a bit wobbly this week.

While Richard Worth is politically dead and buried after facing some serious allegations around harasssment of women, it appears their new President Peter Goodfellow is in come kind of strife, judging by Morning Report today. And Kanwaljit Singh Bakshi is in trouble about a possible immigration scam.

I imagine they're hoping pretty hard that this isn't a National party person...

Get your Yes Vote in the post soonest!

Votes in the Child Discipline Referendum need to be in the post tomorrow to make it on time, so make sure you find your orange envelope and do your democratic thang and vote.

Here at The Hand Mirror we made a conscious decision months ago to support the Yes Vote campaign. We've written about why we support a Yes Vote at some length.

For those who support the current law but think the question is ridiculous and are thus thinking of abstaining, please have a second or even third think about it. While we can't determine or change the question we can send a positive message about what we think of the law. Voting Yes says you support the modifications made to s59 of the Crimes Act, to give children more protection from violence.

For anyone still undecided I recommend this very simple presentation from the Yes Vote campaign. It's just a series of powerpoint slides, no emotive pictures of beaten children, and I think it's a credit to the Yes Vote campaigners that they haven't gone there at all. Anyway it's a very succint overview of how we got to here and why you should vote Yes:

Referendum 2009 - Unicef NZ

View more presentations from yesvote.

Post your vote today or tomorrow, otherwise your vote may not count and your voice may not be heard.

Quick hit: Consent FAIL

From the Taranaki Daily News, via Stuff:

A 26-year-old concrete worker told police he failed to check the age of the girl he was about to sleep with because the last time he had, the girl had left.

Billy-Joe Adam Healy, of Stratford, was sentenced at the Hawera District Court yesterday to 12 months' imprisonment for two charges of unlawful sexual connection with a 14-year-old girl.

...His lawyer Julian Hannam said Healy believed the girl had been over the age of consent and he had been caught up in the moment and not stopped to make the inquiry.

"It's not a clinical situation ... there was consent." But it was inappropriate given the girl's real age, he said.

The pair had been communicating over a period of time and she had made the initial contact, Mr Hannam said.

Judge Allan Roberts said Healy's explanation about knowledge of the girl's age was hazy. "You took no steps to check. You had done so once before and your girlfriend left. You weren't going to take the chance again."

Click through for the whole article (although this is most of it).

Point the first:
The impression I get here is that basically he had more than an inkling that the girl was underage.

Point the second:
Getting caught up in the moment apparently means that your brain completely turns off. Sounds to me more like he knew he'd missed out on sex when he did ask so he consciously decided not to ask this time.

Point the third:
Mr Hannam, there was no consent. They call it The Age of Consent because anyone under it is considered incapable of consenting under the law.

Point the fourth:
The fact that the 14 year old initiated the contact with the 26 year old is actually irrelevant to whether this was statutory rape or not.

Grrrrrrr!

Auckland Women's Fiesta this week

Thanks to Stephen for sending this event in.

Auckland Women's Fiesta, organised by the Tertiary Education Union.

Thursday 20th and Friday 21st August, at the University of Auckland, and featuring Dr Judy McGregor (EEO Commissioner), Metiria Turei (Greens Co-leader) and Professor Margaret Wilson (former Speaker of the House), plus what sounds like a fascinating talk from Professor Judith Pringle entitled "What if Women ruled the Universities".

All TEU women members from Auckland University, AUT, Unitec, MIT, Auckland Institute of Studies, Open Polytechnic and Massey Albany warmly welcome. Bring a colleague who is not yet a member!

Click here to find out more and to register for any or all of the events.

life pharmacy promotes beauty

i received an email from nicola skews, woman's representative for young labour, regarding a complaint letter she wrote to life pharmacy about a current promotion they're running. i'm reproducing her letter and the life pharmacy reply, with her permission. here is her complaint:

Kia Ora,

As the New Zealand Young Labour Women’s Representative, I am charged with representing many young women across the country. It is my job that their best interests are promoted, and issues that may be relevant are brought to their attention.

Yesterday I was appalled to pass a Life Pharmacy window display that advertised a venture by Life Pharmacy, Shiseido and WORLD to give away free tote-bags with slogans that said “If you’re good at anything, make it beauty” and “If the result is beauty the method is justified!”

Not only are these regressive in terms of promoting positive self image, the mentality behind the latter slogan could be harmful to women struggling with self confidence or eating disorders.

The idea that ‘if the result is beauty the method is justified’, is rather scary when you consider the following figures:
· In developed societies, anorexia nervosa is the third most common chronic illness for young females. It is ten times more common than insulin dependent diabetes.
· 15 – 19 year old females 0.5%; 20 – 24 year old females 0.25%
· Risk of successful suicide is 32 times that expected for same aged population.

These are only some of the statistics, for only one form of negative body image.
With a constant bombardment of images and expectations reinforcing a mainstream view of beauty, it is no wonder so many young women struggle with self confidence, which doesn’t always go away with age or remain a just an insecurity. Promoting slogans which imply anything you do for beauty is justified as long as you achieve it, is an unbelievably unhealthy message.

WORLD proudly states that they have a “take it or leave it attitude” in their merchandise, but the women of Young Labour (and no doubt other women) would hugely appreciate a company making a difference and taking a stand on body image and unhealthy slogans.

Please reconsider your current promotion, and make a difference to the self confidence of young women who are sick of being encouraged to achieve ‘beauty’ no matter what it takes.
Regards,
Nicole Skews
New Zealand Young Labour Women’s Rep

and here is the reply:

Dear Ms Skews

Thank you for your feedback on our current Shiseido / World Promotion and for taking time to present us with a very detailed commentary in support of your feedback.

Life Pharmacy and Shiseido brands are both very focused on the wellbeing of our customers and women in general. We contribute regularly and generously to many charity foundations to support New Zealanders in a wide range of health matters. In addition, the Shiseido philosophy centres around making the customer feel beautiful on the inside and outside [yeah? i've missed the beautiful on the inside promotion, where do we find that?]. We also mutually share the philosophy of ‘beauty at any age’ (meaning, look fantastic for your age, rather than trying to alter your age [what??]). With that background in mind we felt we could have a little fun with the World brand with the chosen slogans and that these would not be interpreted too literally.

To date, an overwhelming number of customers have chosen to freely participate in this promotion. The feedback to our store teams on the bag slogans in particular, has echoed sentiments of fun and light hearted frivolity. We do however understand that, as with any promotion, consumers may choose not to participate for a various number of reasons of which we greatly respect.

We apologise if you have been unintentionally offended by the slogans chosen and once again thank you for taking time to bring your views to our attention.

Yours sincerely
Jacquie Dabrowski
Merchandise Manager - Beauty
Life Pharmacy Limited

ah, the steve-crow-donate-to-marginally-related-charities defence, and the "it's just a joke" defence. not particularly original, and not particularly helpful. on it's own, the "if the result is beauty the method is justified" implied self-harm message is not a big deal, but when it feeds hundreds of messages women get every day that the pursuit of beauty is the only thing of value, yeah it has an impact. it seems that the main purpose of the beauty industry is to make women feel naturally ugly.

Disconnected

About a month ago I took a few days off work with Wriggly while my partner did some full-on work stuff. I had intended to blog, to clean, to bake, to do so many things while at home with my son, when he was asleep. I'd been working pretty hard in the build-up to my leave, to the point where what was originally going to be a whole week off gradually became only four days, then three and a half, and in the end I did a bit of work on the actual leave days too. When I officially returned to work I did nine days straight. Bad me, I know. I'm getting tougher on myself now - leave time and weekends should be sacrosanct.

Anyway what I wasn't expecting was the extreme feeling of disconnection that came with being at home. Work is rarely lonely, even when there's hardly anyone else in the office, as there will be phone calls, texts, emails. Almost everyone I encounter between 8am and 5pm on a normal weekday has more than eight vague word-type noises in their repertoire. When I connect an idea up I can share it with my colleagues and watch them marvel at my ridiculousness/brilliance, not just look blank and then go "ba ba ba" as a bus goes by outside. Showing my colleagues my spreadsheet mojo would not put said Excel masterwork at risk of #VALUE errors from errant button-pushing by a little boy with marmite hands.

That first day, a Monday, that I was off work I enjoyed the time with my son. And I looked forward to putting him down for his nap so I could have some time to myself, and turn off from being Mum for a while. After lunch we had cuddles and a little sing song, then Wriggly curled up with his blue blankie (or maybe it was yellow that week, I forget), while I prepared to shift roles.

But then I didn't shift. I sat on the couch and stared at the bookshelf. For quite a while. I figured I had a couple more days of being at home so I could just take it easy today, read a book on the sofa for a while. Which I started to do, except I fell asleep.

This happened again on the Tuesday. And the Wednesday. I felt quite alone and isolated, despite going out with Wriggly every morning. I couldn't drag myself to the computer even; trying to do it when he's awake is just asking for trouble, and when he was asleep I just ended up curled up on the couch reading, under my own blue blankie, and then napping too.

Perhaps I really needed the rest. Certainly being with Wriggly can be draining, in a physical way that my job rarely is. But I also felt my brain turning to cotton-wool each afternoon. For a while I blamed Robin Hobb, as it was her fantastic books I was devouring each day on the couch, before I drifted off. I still can't quite explain it.

Those few days served to underline to me that I am one of Those Women - the ones that have to work for their sanity. Maybe there'll come a time when I'm happier being at home, or even working part time. I kind of hope there is as I'd dearly like to be an active kindergarten parent when the time comes.

For right now though I need my job. And not just for the money either. I've stopped apologising for working, because it's not something that any parent should need to apologise for (unless they're a contract killer or work for Shell or something). There's a permanent promotion on offer this week at my work. I know I could do it, and the main reason I've been reticient about making a decision has really been, deep down, because I'm a mum now I felt maybe I shouldn't be going for it. I was worried about the judging, not the job. It seems like mums don't go for promotions, at least not until their charges are at school.

Well the judgers can do their stuff their way. I'm not listening anymore, and I'm going to try awfully hard not to even notice their quivering eyebrows and their slightly pursed lips. There's just three people I need to keep happy in this matter; my son, my partner and myself. I can't keep the others pleased if I'm not happy too, so it's yo ho ho off to work I go.

Grumpiness on a Monday morning

I read something yesterday that made me quite angry. I've quoted it below:

There is little doubt [Katherine] Rich will continue to have a flourishing career. As this book went to press, she had just accepted a high-profile lobbying role as CEO of the Food and Grocery Council based in Wellington. Her family will move to the capital, something she couldn't do as a politician with a constituency in Dunedin.
p110, Because We're Worth It, by Gill South. My emphasis added.

Now on a first go-round you'll probably be thinking, sheesh doesn't take much to rile Julie these days does it?

But consider this. Katherine Rich was a List MP. She was based in Dunedin North for National, although the seat itself was held by Labour's Pete Hodgson during the entire three terms Rich served. So why couldn't she have moved her family to Wellington?

Particularly when you consider her South Island colleague Bill English, who calls Dipton home, is the actual electorate MP for Clutha-Southland, but his family moved to Wellington several years ago, probably in 2003 if you go by when he and his wife bought the house in Karori, well before he was even a Minister.

How come English could move but Rich couldn't?

Just doing their jobs

This weekend has seen an odd sort of charm offensive by the legal profession, in the wake of the Clayton Weatherston trial. There was this article: Judith Ablett-Kerr - fervent defender of justice for all. And then there was another, describing an email to Ablett-Kerr from an Anglican priest which was released to the media. The email, which described Weatherston's defence as abusive towards Sophie Elliot and her family, was 'ignorant and idiotic' according to Greg King, who assisted with Weatherston's defence.

The tenor of these articles seems to be that anything done by a defence lawyer, within the confines of the law, is not just OK but noble - it's in the defence of 'justice', after all. This view absolves the legal profession of any ethical responsibility for considering the consequences of their actions. Defence lawyers can plough ahead like careerist automatons - any abusive or victim-blaming argument is dignified simply because it occurs in the context of a courtroom. Judith Ablett-Kerr is quite smart enough to know that the victim-blaming defence makes life just that little bit harder for any woman seeking to escape an abusive relationship.

Lawyers don't bear responsibility for the broad set-up of the justice system, but nor do they have exploit it. They are human beings like the rest of us, and they bear the same responsibility to act in ethical, socially responsible ways. There's an important societal debate to be had about the provocation defence, and its role in upholding violence against women and gays. Rhetoric from lawyers about the fervent defence of justice simply works to support a status quo which excuses violence against certain segments of our society. Here's hoping that
Ablett-Kerr and her colleagues can put aside this rhetoric for a time, and play an intelligent and ethical part in the provocation debate.

Women are small-minded, vain and jealous. There's a PhD to prove it.

WTF?, I said to myself as I read this Stuff article, Too much beauty may mean too few sales?

According to a PhD student in Australia (assuming Stuff isn't reporting her work disingenuously), women are biologically programmed to compete with one another, making ourselves ever more sexy to compete for men. I'm leaving aside the dubious 'science' of sexual selection for now, because the researcher's next claim is a humdinger: we buy less when we're served by beautiful shop assistants, because they intimidate us.

My experience of shopping is trying desperately to purchase something as quickly as possible that's suitable for work, before the parking metre runs out, while trying to prevent my fed-up children from wiping snot on the garments in the shop, while simultaneously feeling sympathy for the women behind the counter who have to put up with me and my kids for something barely above minimum wage.

I guess there's something wrong with my biological programming as a woman - nature has mistakenly equipped me with the capacity to think.

Disgrace

Warning: triggering material

The film discussion on another post reminded me of the film "Disgrace", which I saw recently. The movie is based on the novel of the same name by South African writer JM Coetzee which won the Booker prize a few years ago. The film addresses the topic of rape: there is the rape of the student by the Professor/protagonist Lurie (because this is what it is, is it not, even though reviews refer to it as "seduction"). There is also the rape of the Lurie's daughter Lucy, who lives on a remote South African farm, by three young men.

As the review from the Sydney Morning Herald puts it:

The aftermath of this catastrophe forms the moral kernel of the film. Father and daughter react very differently. His first instinct is a desire for revenge but it's complicated by her silences. For once in his life, his intellect is no help to him. He can't work out what she's thinking and she won't tell him. Then at last, he begins to realise the sacrifices she is willing to make and they appal him.

For those who have read the book or seen the film, I would be very interested to know how you reacted to the ending in particular as I found it absolutely awful and am still not sure what to think.

Steve Crow's philanthropy gets rejected

Steve Crow, pornographer and Boobs on Bikes organiser, has had his offer of a donation to the NZ Breast Cancer Foundation rejected. Magnanimously, Steve had offered the Foundation $5000 if he could get 100 ladies to take their tops off at the next BoB parade, and another $2,500 if 100 blokes would do the same. He didn't think to tell the Breast Cancer Foundation what he was up to; and when they found out and rejected his offer he publicly attacked them, implying they don't care enough about the women served by the Foundation. Cheers, Steve.

The rights and wrongs of porn have already been debated on THM. My chief concern with Boobs on Bikes is not to do with porn per se, but the fact that crowding a public place with topless women means that those women who don't like it can't escape.

Porn aside, there's another serious issue here: Crow has tried very cynically to buy legitemacy for his business ventures using the plight of women with cancer as a vehicle. And his public attack on the Breast Cancer Foundation shows just how deep his concern for these women runs.

Commenters on Stuff (in keeping with their proud redneck tradition) seem to agree with Steve, telling the Foundation to get off it's high horse. I find this really objectionable. I doubt very much that the Foundation have rejected Steve's donation lightly. My guess would be that they've weighed up the issues very carefully, and have concluded that they'd do more harm to the dignity and comfort of the women they support by accepting Steve's cash. I'm sure that, just like women in the general population, those with breast cancer feel divided on the issue of porn, and some will find it confronting, offensive or upsetting. When someone's got cancer, it's not a good time to have an argument about false consciousness and sexual repression with them.

Steve seems unperturbed by the rejection, though - he says he's going to donate to a UN organisation for halting genital mutilation instead. The horrific exploitation of female children will now buy Steve the street cred he feels he needs.

'Dead Girl': rape as entertainment

Warning: triggering material

I couldn't bring myself to watch the trailer for the movie Dead Girl. And I don't particularly feel I need to see a preview of a horror film about rape, torture, violence and murder of women to conclude that it's a vile piece of shit. Contexts, a sociological website, links to reviews of the film and gives a plot synopsis. The plot alone was enough to make me feel ill.

Favourable reviews of Dead Girl have included words like 'audacious'. Language like this dignifies the utter misogyny of this sort of shit - and the fact that those who enjoy it are the same kind of people who like the idea of snuff films. Cheap thrills for the lowest common denominator, contemptibly dressed up with words like 'edgy' to insult the intelligence of women, and give a veneer of respectability to the men who watch and enjoy.

The timeless irony applies. You complain about crap like this, and you give it publicity. But is that worse than allowing brutalisation of women to persist as a form of entertainment?

Following up on Fair Deal Friday

For those wanting to see for themselves what happened on Fair Deal Friday, seeing as how the media were apparently busy doing other stuff, there's a video featuring the march I went to in Papatoetoe, and way more photos too.

Fair Deal Friday featured a series of activities around Aotearoa New Zealand, focusing on Government MPs, and specifically asking them for a fair deal for school support staff in their bargaining round. The most recent offer they received was for a 0% pay increase, leading to widespread use of the snappy chant "Zero Percent Means Discontent".

The ball is now in the Government's court - fingers crossed it comes back to the table with a better offer for these workers, some of whom are on only $12.94 an hour yet working with some of our most vulnerable children. They are mostly women, many with families of their own to support. They don't do this work for the money, however they should be paid what they deserve, not the least that the Government can get away with.

You can find out more about the campaign, from the workers themselves, at their Ning site, www.fairdeal.org.nz.

Disclaimer: This has not been a post on behalf of my employer, NZEI Te Riu Roa, but in my own right as someone who cares about this stuff. I do not work in this area.

And in breaking news...

Widex has bowed to the pressure and decided to withdraw their sexist advertising campaign!

Here's a message from Leonie:

Please report on The Hand Mirror that the campaign that Stop Demand and
Auckland Women's Centre has been running against the Widex billboards has
been successful!

We are delighted that Widex have stated today that they are withdrawing the
billboards people took offence to.

This is proof that collaboration and organising brings results. Thanks to
everyone who assisted this campaign.

Big congrats to Stop Demand and the Auckland Women's Centre for coordinating the response. And kudos to Widex for taking the billboards down.

Quick hit: Working mums Q&A for bosses

Gill South's column in the Herald today addresses several questions about employing working mothers, such as:

Why should I look at employing a mother as opposed to any other kind of employee?

As many business managers can tell you, working mothers often make the best employees. They are loyal, focused and extremely conscientious. They don't like to move job often because their lives thrive on routine. If they have a system that works, they don't want to change it. They enjoy their time at work and want to achieve to the best of their ability. You will not find a working mother taking regular long lunches - they will be the ones working through lunch so they can get the maximum done.

Click through for the rest.

I'm very very slowly working my way through South's book, Because We're Worth It, which is about working motherhood. As with most of these books that I've perused so far it is irritatingly middle and high income focused, although at least it is honest about that and has mentioned the financial necessities of working for those parents on lower incomes.

UOA Women's Debate on Tuesday

Thanks to TT for sending this in:

"This coming Tuesday the Debating Society is holding its annual women's public debate. This features the best female speakers that the Society and the wider Auckland community debating whether or not corporate boards should have gender quotas. Speakers and judges include Sarah Kennedy, CEO of Vitaco (formerly Healtheries); Rhema Vaithianathan of the Business School; and Jacqui True and Kathy Smits of the Politics Faculty.

Entry is free to all and there will be a question and answer session afterwards as well as champagne and canapes beforehand."

Date: Tuesday 18th August
Time: 6pm
Venue: Gus Fisher Gallery, The Kenneth Myers Centre, 74 Shortland Street, Auckland Central

And there's a Facebook event page too. I'd quite like to try and get along to this, work and childcare permitting - anyone else keen to go together and maybe have a coffee somewhere afterwards?

sentencing guidelines for rape cases

i was listening to this item on morning report (radio nz, 8.36am) regarding sentencing guidelines for rape acting. apparently there's a case up before the court of appeal that is going to lead to some guidelines being set down, as there are for other types of crime.

i don't have the legal background to make any kind of proper analysis about this, but there seems to be some danger here that certain types of rape will be, well, trivialised in the process of setting guidelines. it reminds me of this excellent post which was in the 14th down under feminist carnival, and i'll post again the extract that i included in the carnival:

The perceived semantics and language of rape – witness the ongoing debate about “grey rape”, “marital rape” and “date rape” (with many pundits and politicians seemingly believing the latter two don’t even exist) – are doubly frustrating because the fact that we even need to argue about the impact of language in these situations demonstrates that the seriousness of rape is still doubted or misunderstood. If a man rapes me, no matter whether I am given a black eye, a slit throat, a drink laced with drugs, or a bunch of flowers afterwards, a man has still raped me. When will the wider community (and, importantly, the legal world) realise that the issue is not (primarily, at least) what happened before, during or after the rape, but the rape itself?

there will be 5 judges who decide on these guidelines. i don't how many of these will be women (2 of the current 9 judges are women), but more importantly, how they have ruled on rape cases in the past. in any case, my first reaction is that this is not a good thing, but i'd be interested to hear what more informed minds think about the matter.

Puku pride

Campbell Live rubbed me the wrong way this evening with yet another weight loss story. Tonight's was about getting rid of that unsightly tummy that pregnancy leaves in its wake. Some entrepreneurial doctor is pioneering a form of liposuction for the tummies of self-hating mummies. And Campbell Live helpfully offered the guy an informercial. Sigh.

I have a love/hate relationship with my tummy. Until I had kids (and more specifically, my second child) I didn't really understand that children change the shape of your body. Fat goes on - and stays - in places it hadn't previously. Sometimes, I feel a peculiar pride in the fact that my body looks 'lived in'. I'm kind of chuffed that I brought two new people into the world, having grown them inside my body. But other times, I just feel gross. The female bodies celebrated in the media are those of the young. They look untouched by life experience and age - those things that apparently make women undesirable.

The Campbell Live story didn't even question cultural attitudes to women's bodies. It started out from the premise that a flabby tummy is self-evidently ugly - but thanks to surgery, those of us who've 'failed' to restore our pre-pregnancy bodies with diet and exercise now have a chance to be presentable once more. I'm not so immune to cultural pressure that I feel completely comfortable about having a mother's body. But I refuse to think of it as 'failure'. On the contrary: my puku tells the story of the two greatest successes of my life.

Quick hit: Older women like sex. Film at 11.

From Reuters, via Stuff:

Women become less sexually active and less interested in sex as they get older, on average, but there are still plenty of women who continue to have sex and maintain their sexual desire into their 60s and beyond, new research shows.

And a woman's mental and physical health has more of an influence on her sex life than her age, according to the researchers.

Conventional wisdom holds that women's sexual activity and interest dwindles as time goes by, but research has shown that some women maintain satisfying sex lives well into old age, Dr Alison J. Huang of the University of California at San Francisco and her colleagues note in the Journal of the American Geriatrics Society.

...Forty-three per cent of the women overall said that their interest in or desire to have sex was "moderate to very high" over the past three months, while 60 per cent reported some sexual activity in the previous three months.

Click through for the whole article.

But before you make with the clicky try and have a guess which celebrity's picture they've used to illustrate the story. Go on, you know you want to...

Wellington Reclaim the Night event: how to get involved

Message from the VUWSA Women's Group:

We are planning a meeting for those interested in getting involved with Reclaim the Night this Thursday at the Railway Station around 5ish. When I find out which room we are in I will send around an email.

Basically what we will do in this intial meeting is:

• Discuss past Reclaim the Night Marches, the aims, goals and history of the event (briefly)
• What worked/what didn't with past marches
• To decide on a date of when we want to hold this event
• To decide what route to take with the event
• To decide what we want to do with the event

You can join the VUWSA Women's Group on Facebook to keep in touch too.

Good luck to the organisers :-)

how to pay less than the minimum wage

got this via email:

Ms Jewitt is training to be a hairdresser. It’s an entry course only but after three months she'll become a full-time student and she'll be eligible for the student allowance. But for now, she's penniless.

Recently she scored herself a retail job at Overland shoes in Hamilton. It earns her the minimum wage - $12.50 an hour. She travels in every Saturday from Te Pahu, 30 kilometres out of Hamilton.... After tax, Ms Jewitt ends up with $50 in her pocket.

All was going well until Ms Jewitt’s manager told her she had to start wearing new season Overland shoes. Not just wear them, the manager said she had to buy a new pair every three months. There’s nothing in her contract about it but the dress code in the Overland staff booklet says employees are expected to wear “current season footwear."

The discount policy in the overland booklet states when she buys her first pair of $300 shoes she'll receive 75% off which means the shoes cost her $75.00. After that first pair, the discount becomes smaller and smaller. It drops to 50% and then 25%.

The Manager told Ms Jewitt that she is on a three month probation period and by not wearing the shoes she was not committed to the job.

read the full story, it gets worse. this is an expected result of the "fire-at-will" law for the first 90 days of employment. it's an exploitation of young workers, placing unreasonable demands on those in a vulnerable situation. as the government is keeping no records or information around the effects of this law, there is no way to determine how many other workers are being fired for refusing to comply with unreasonable demands such as this.

basically, if the company wants their staff to be wearing their footwear, they should provide it free of charge. in the meantime, like ms jewitt, i'll be buying my shoes elsewhere.