RSS Feed

Author Archives: Meg Bignell

NATURE CALL

Posted on

You know when something rude makes you laugh and you decide to share the humour and tell someone else except they don’t see the humour, they only see the rude and they don’t laugh? When your laughter is suppressed to embarrassed chortles and then peters out altogether, there’s just silence and in the silence your brain screams, “AWKWARD” and there’s just you left, looking like a weird kind of twisted lewd person that people will whisper about and avoid?

I really hope this isn’t one of those times.

WARNING: contains content that could be offensive (particularly if you’re male) and women doing their secret business.

View directly on youtube if you’re having trouble with buffering - p://www.youtube.com/watch?v=485y_ssFEIw&feature=youtu.be

Brush Up On: TALKING WEATHER WITH SURFERS

Posted on

I am in regular contact with surfers. No I am not a surfer. Dude. I just live at the gateway to a bit of a surf break. One day recently when I was walking the dog along the beach, I was told by a pretty surfie chick in skinny jeans and ugg boots that our beach break (known to locals as Eagle’s Reef or North Marion) is FULLY SICK. That particular day there were twenty or so surfers on the reef and I thought it looked plain scary. If I’d been cast adrift out there I would have been fully sick too. All over the surf board.

Anyway, I should know more about when to predict upcoming fully sickness and when there might be mad surfers trying to get quick access through our private property to the waves. Then I could tell the children not to ride their bikes on the drive way. But I know squat. And this from a former weather girl. I know, shameful.

Here's one good reason to brain up on weather patterns.

Here’s one good reason to brain up on weather patterns.

Surfers, on the other hand, are addicted to the feeling they get when riding a wave, which means they are obsessed with finding a rideable wave, which means they are obsessed with watching weather patterns that may produce a rideable wave, which means they know their weather. They are also pretty cool dudes and if you want to impress them don’t make lame attempts at speaking their lingo, just talk weather like you know what they’re looking for…

It helps to know that Huey, the Oz god of weather (worshipped and berated by farmers and surfers alike) works the surf using pressure. Pressure turns into wind, then swell, then waves. To flesh this out a bit;

A combination of low and high pressure systems (measured in hectopascals on a synoptic chart and abbreviated to ‘highs’ and ‘lows’) creates constant air movement as air in a low rises and needs replacing by air from a high pressure area. This movement is commonly known as wind. The greater the difference between lows and highs, the stronger the winds. On a synoptic chart, lines that are close together indicate strong winds.

Low pressure systems are generally the swell forming kind. Wind generates swell, which turns into waves as it approaches the shore.

3 wind factors determine the size of the swell – the wind strength in a low pressure storm, the duration of the storm and the distance over which the wind blows (the fetch). Combine strong winds, a big ol’ storm and a long fetch and step aside grommets, the big fellas are comin’.

Swell comes in two forms – ground swell and wind swell. Wind swell is formed by short fetch winds near or at the time of observation. It can create messy, choppy waves and is generally uncool. Long fetch winds generate ground swell which can travel up to thousands of kilometres from their origin. Ground swell creates nice clean, regular waves with lulls between sets.

Waves vary in height and character according to many factors including seabed topography, swell size, water depth, wind strength

This 1967 long-fetch storm generated huge waves that washed away the beaches of the Gold Coast.

This 1967 long-fetch storm generated huge waves that washed away the beaches of the Gold Coast.

and land aspect. Plunging waves (as opposed to spillers) with a progressive break (as opposed to a wave whose entire length breaks simultaneously) are the highest and most thrilling to surf – a board can be maneuvered on the wave front just ahead of the break.

Other factors that will see surfers getting all horned up (excited) include:

  • open oceans – which get bigger waves due to the longer fetch
  • offshore winds – which blow from the land towards the sea, clean up the surface of the ocean and push up the face of the waves, giving them order. Onshore winds make for uneven swell and messy waves.

Crikey, no wonder surfers are always darting off at the most inappropriate times (like when their wives are in the early stages of labour or from the scene of a car accident) – ideal conditions appear hard to come by. This explains why surfing is more of a lifestyle than a hobby.

Rightio then, I feel like a bit of a wicked dude now. Also, I may no longer think of a bag of brightly coloured sweets when I hear the word ‘hecticpascals’.

Any surfie peeps out there – feel free to critique, add, subtract. I am no expert, and am starting to feel slightly, if not fully sick at all the talk of waves.

Take A Stance On: CIVIL LIBERTY

Posted on

395274-v-graphics-13-beforeandafer-boston-bombings-bomb1b-jpg

Are we so afraid of terrorists that we will terrify the innocent among us? Are we building a vast fortress to imprison ourselves?

                                                                                                      – Brian Doyle, The Oregonian

A terribly injured Jeff Bauman being taken for medical help.

A terribly injured Jeff Bauman being taken for medical help.

On the 15th April, two pressure cooker bombs were detonated near the finish line of the famous Boston Marathon, killing 3 and injuring 264. The two suspects (one dead, one awaiting trial) were evidently motivated by extreme Islamist beliefs. They were identified and captured quickly, in part due to the CCTV footage and in part to an amazing 27 year old named Jeff Bauman who watched a man drop a bag at his feet, look him in the eye and walk away. Two and a half minutes later the bag exploded, tearing his legs apart. When he awoke in hospital, Jeff took a pen and paper and wrote, “Bag, saw the guy, looked right at me.”

I feel compelled to note that on the same day, a string of terrorist attacks across Iraq killed 75 and injured about 350, but it was the Boston bombings – the random spread of terrorist activity – that brought the issue of security V civil liberty back to the fore.

Civil Liberties  are freedoms protecting the individual from government interference. They set limitations to safeguard against a government’s abuse of power. Common civil liberties include freedom of association (I can fraternize with any Arthur, Martha or Mustafa I want), freedom of speech (I could say that the PM deserves a Vegemite sandwich missile if I thought so – which I don’t), freedom of assembly (hang it, let’s get the Rastafarian club together), freedom of religion, due process, fair trial and privacy (I have 3 secrets I will never tell a soul and never have to).

Constitutions and bills of rights are designed to uphold civil liberties. Since September 11, the line between national security and civil liberties has become a bit blurry.

Liberty looks on

Liberty looks on

September 11 2001 was when 2996 people died as a result of 4 hijacked plane crashes – 2 into the World Trade centre in New York, 1 into the Pentagon and 1 which was bound for the US Capitol Building crashed in Pennsylvania as a result of a counter attack on the hijackers by the planes passengers. I know you know this.

Anti-Terrorism Legislation was adopted by Australia after the 2005 London Bombings (Richard and I were at Waterloo station when those ones happened by the way, it wasn’t dramatic where we were – just eerily quiet). The 54 laws making up the Anti Terrorism Act, 2005 affords unprecedented power to law enforcement – things like detention (with interrogation) for suspects for up to 2 weeks without charge or evidence, imposition of control orders (restrictions) on suspects for up to a year, electronically tracking suspects for up to a year, random stop and search powers, and the ‘shoot to kill’ clause which allows police to treat terrorism suspects the same way they would treat wanted criminals.

THE CIVIL LIBERTARIAN VIEW 

  • National Security will erode civil liberties and the world is over reacting to threats of terrorism.civil-liberties_copy-300x200
  • The war on terror must be waged only within the framework of existing civil liberties.
  • History tells us that governments and officials routinely exaggerate threats to national security.
  • The anti-terror legislation has a negative impact on Australia’s Muslim community, especially given the amendment from ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ to a ‘balance of probabilities’ – there is potential for racial profiling and stereotyping.
  • Counter-terrorism policy may generate widespread fear and paranoia – both within law enforcement agencies and the public. This could lead to further abuse of civil rights and an unwillingness to engage in political activism, thereby reducing the function of democracy.
  • ‘Reactionary’ counter-terrorism laws were formed all too easily and without thorough review. Australia formed new laws without reviewing the existing ones; the US passed a federal surveillance amendment with under an hour’s discussion.
  • It is possible that media coverage will be manipulated to suggest that non-violent, citizen-lead activist groups are potential terrorists.
  • Newly considered security tools such as wire taps, internet tracking, biometric (DNA) profiling and national ID cards are too easily abused and threaten public privacy.
  • Australia’s knee-jerk anti terror laws post 9/11 are widely (internationally) viewed as ‘hyper-legislative’ – Australia was unusual in its restrictive response and increased power to states.
  • The decision to go to war in Iraq is coming under fire and criticism – what other mistakes will be made in the interests of security?
  • All this extra security is bloody expensive and many of the laws have rarely been used.

THE PUBLIC SAFETY VIEW 

  • The benefits of greater security outweigh the costs of reduced liberty. Both factors are important, but their relative importance cctv changes according to time and situation.
  • Officials have in the past underestimated security dangers and as a result we are living in an increasingly violent world – the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbour, for instance, was a disastrous malfunction of intelligence and communication.
  • We are nations under law, but first we are nations. The law is a human creation that should evolve with our changing needs; it is not divine Gospel nor should it be set in stone.
  • It is a gross irony that the very laws we set in place to secure our welfare are inflexible enough to undermine that welfare.
  • The events of September 11 have made a decrease in civil liberties inevitable – it marked the beginning of contemporary terrorism in the Western World and what could follow? London, Bali, Mumbai  Boston… what next? It is common sense to take more secure measures.
  • Civil Libertarians claim that counter-terrorism measures are alarmist but they themselves are being alarmist by frequently crying Big Brother and claiming that the world is becoming a society of surveillance.
  • There is increasing evidence that terrorists are living ordinary lives, which means that law enforcement has no choice by to watch closely and treat every potential threat as suspicious.
  • It is reasonable to believe that a balance between public safety and liberty can be achieved so long as there is proof that new security laws are effective against terrorism and as long as they carry a sunset clause which enables the laws to be reconsidered in a few years should the crisis pass.

So are counter terrorism measures proving successful?

Well in Australia – at least domestically – it seems that not so many of the new laws have been used. And some have been used in a rather over-zealous fashion…In 2007, Muhamed Haneef, an Indian doctor living in Queensland, was arrested and detained without charge, suspected of terrorist involvement (mainly because he had a one way ticket and because his cousins were involved in the Glasgow Airport attack a few weeks prior to the arrest). In the end it seems he was heading back to India to see his wife and brand new baby daughter. He was substantially compensated for his troubles. Oopsie daisy.

In August last year, Julia Gillard announced that COAG would undertake a review of counter terrorism legislation (it seems that other countries have already done this and chucked out a few OTT unnecessary laws) to ”evaluate the operation, effectiveness and implications of key Commonwealth, state and territory counter-terrorism laws”. The review report was to be completed in 6 months – that was August last year, 9 months ago. The COAG website reports diddly squat. Come on dudes, pull your expert fingers out.

Meantime, the Law Council of Australia has been slogging away at trying to reform some of the more paranoidy bits of the legislation, without a great deal of success.

THE MEGORACLE VIEW 

Well we at Megoracle (OK, me, just that being a group or megoracle researchers seems so much more impressive and credible) me at Megoracle will be once again taking the idealist stance – a bit of everything please.

What concerns me most is the fear-mongery of all this surveillance and the impact on innocent Muslim communities just going about their business with no Jihaddy motivations or associations. It’s disturbing that random bags minding their own business while their owner is in the loo have the power to clear a whole concourse; and more disturbing  that innocent people could have a dodgy cousin and find themselves locked up and interrogated. We all have dodgy cousins. The lack of rubbish bins in public places is just a pain (but this is a mere trifle – if I had had my legs blown off by a bomb in a rubbish bin I wouldn’t complain that they are all gone. I don’t like trifle much though).

I somehow cannot believe (and maybe I’m young and naive, ok just naive) that our government could lead us into a stasi-like society where our smells are bottled and our houses wired if we are seen chatting to a friend from Bahrain. And all the CCTV cameras everywhere actually make me feel safe – if it hadn’t been for one of them, the lowlife scum who murdered Jill Meagher wouldn’t have been caught.

But to reach beyond the civil liberty debate, I have a nasty uncomfortable feeling that counter terrorism is in itself somehow rewarding acts of terror. By declaring war and fostering the inevitable panic that goes with war, are we not granting terrorists a hero status within their circles? Younger Muslim people (for instance) will want to follow in the footsteps of their ‘brave soldiers’ and forget the do-good and think-good lessons of Islam. They might decide that extreme Islamic beliefs like Jihad are very cool.

Maybe we’ve had enough time to be able to sort out which of these laws is relevant and which can go, and can get on with devaluing and belittling acts of terrorism using the (no doubt complex, ancient and inherent) ideologies that elevated terrorism to pop-combat in the first place.

Can’t someone get a group together to stage a wondrous conspiracy involving the discovery of a long lost chapter of the Koran, one that says Allah will not condone or forgive acts of violence?  Happy to help. I’m ok at calligraphy and don’t mind a bit of stirring oration – “It says SILENCE, you silly billies, acts of SILENCE”. Or is that all written in there already and needs to be unearthed and shouted from the rooftops?

Please note that I am not equating terrorism with Islam alone, just that Jihad has a lot to answer for. It should be as daggy as scrunchies. Maybe it should be called Jihasbeen.

cartoon

Look Back On: WORLD WAR ONE

FIRST-WORLD-WAR

I used to know the ins and outs of the first world war, because Mrs Sullivan, my school history teacher told me all about it and had me write an essay about it. Now, while I still can associate stuff like Gallipoli and the Western Front and the trenches with WW1, I have forgotten all the important details, which makes me a bit of a wally during the minutes of silence we do at ANZAC day services because I’m picturing the fallen soldiers in Hollywood movie sets rather than my solid fact filled visions; I’m reflecting feebly on things I don’t know enough about.  I only have a couple of days to get my minute’s silence sorted and I can at least cover the main bits and the Australian involvement in the first world war in that time (which is fitting given that ANZAC day originally commemorated the battle at Gallipoli during WW1) but only if I’m QUICK. Here goes…

When was it (I need dates)?

The first world war (world war one, the great war, the war to end all wars, the war of the nations) raged from July 1914 to November 1918. There was a temporary truce called over the Christmas of 1914, when opposing sides ceased fire, sang carols and exchanged gifts.

What lead to the declaration of war?

Well in simple terms, the Superpowers of Europe were getting a bit big for their boots, enjoying a resurgence of imperialism – controlling countries politically from afar as per the days of colonialism. European power bearers were introducing imperialism into their foreign policy to increase trade, capital and industrial potential. As a result there were some grumpy little Davids (particularly in the Balkan states) aiming their rocks at Goliath’s balls, but more significantly, there were other already established Goliaths getting unsettled:

France and Britain aligned themselves as the “Entente Cordiale” to slow the growth of the newly unified German Empire with its grandiose designs on trade and expanding military force. This was a reluctant alliance given a long culture of hostility between France and Britain, but it was practical as many of their colonial holdings were geographically close. France was already aligned with Russia. These alliances were tested and tensions stretched in 1905 when Germany tried to take Morocco (the Moroccan Crisis) in a bid to break the alliance and provoke a crisis.

I’m thinking that Kaiser Wilhelm 2 was partly to blame for the tensions in the lead up to war – the Moroccan Crisis was his doing. He appeared to have been pointlessly power hungry, keen to play dangerous games of one-upmanship and judging by the way he expanded his naval force, probably had a very small penis.

What was the ultimate trigger (pardon the pun)?

So in June 1914, Austrian Archduke Franz Ferdinand and his wife Sophie were assassinated in Sarajevo, the capital of Austrian-Hungarian province Bosnia-Herzegovina. They were shot by a member of The Black Hand, a secret society fighting for Serbian Nationalism after the annexing of Bosnia-Herzegovina by Austria (imperialism at work). The Black Hand had 7 (some say more) assassins assigned to the task that day.

I felt very sad when I read about this event; when the pregnant Sophie was shot she fell onto her husband’s knees and he (mortally wounded himself) said, “Sophie dear, don’t die, stay alive for our children.” And (because I’m on a tangent now) the 3 children were raised by relatives and loved long lives – anyway why I’m getting hung up on one tragedy when I’m about to delve into about 9 million of them I don’t know.

One month after the assassinations, Austria declared war on Bosnia. Russia, defending Serbian independence, mobilized its forces and refused to respond to German demands to demobilize. On the 1st of August, Germany declared war on Russia and then things got very globally chaotic.

I think I need a timeline

Ok…1914 chaos broken down:

  • June 28 – Sarajevo assassination of Austrian Archduke at the hands of Serbia.
  • July 28 – Serbia refuses to agree to 1 of 15 terms of an Austrian imposed ultimatum, so Austria declares war on Serbia.
  • August 1 – Germany declares war on Russia after Russia refuses to stop getting all bristly over the threat to Serbian nationalism.
  • August 3 – Germany declares war on the Russian-allied France.
  • August 4 – Grumpy Germany invades little weenie Luxembourg and then neutral Belgium. Britain says ‘fair play old boy’ and declares war on Germany. Australia follows the mother country and declares war on Germany, so does Canada and New Zealand.
  • August 23 – Japan declares war on both Austria-Hungary and Germany. The two became known as the Central Powers.
  • September – A unity pact is signed by France, Britain and Russia. They became known as the Allied Forces.

These were alliances formed decades before, now formalised at war. Via their colonies, the battle for the balance of power was to spread  throughout the world and involve more than half the globe.

It is interesting to note that some scholars see WW1 as the first phase of a 30 year long conflict that ended with WW2 in 1945.

What’s the Western/Eastern front business?

Germany intended to storm easily through Belgium to deal a knockout blow to the French before facing the more slow to warm up Russia. But they faces unexpected resistance in Belgium even before Britain jumped  in to defend the neutral country. Russia mobilized surprisingly quickly and attacked Germany in East Prussia, forcing some German troops to be diverted. This allowed Britain and France to halt Germany’s advance on Paris in the Battle of the Marne. With this battle, the fighting became entrenched here in central France and became known as the Western Front. The attacks on Germany and Austria became the Eastern Front.

Two split the fighting into two fronts was never part of Germany’s plan.

How did Turkey get involved?

Late in 1914, the wily Germans tricked the Ottoman Empire (Turkey) into thinking that Russia had attacked them. The result was Turkey joining the Central Powers and fought for the Russian territories as well as the Suez canal – the crucial communication line between Britain and India. This meant that in 1915 Britain sent troops to a new front in the South at Gallipoli and Mesopotamia.

What happened in Gallipoli? 

The allies had already launched a failed attack on Turkey in the Dardanelles. Their next effort was to take Constantinople (capital of Turkey) via the Gallipoli Peninsula. The fighting began in April 1915 when Australian and New Zealand troops arrived at the beaches of the Gallipoli Peninsula by boat and ended in stalemate that December when the allies evacuated. Around 180,000 allied troops were killed, 8,141 of them Australian. It was here that New Zealand and Aussie troops fought side by side in the trenches and the ANZACS were born. Lone Pine is a well known part of the Battle of Gallipoli. But it was a pointless campaign that left us with 8,141 less Aussies, some oaty biscuits and a public holiday every April 25th (the day the Gallipoli campaign began) so that we can stop and remember those who never came home.

In the trenches at Gallipoli

In the trenches at Gallipoli

But perhaps it wasn’t so pointless. The Turks claimed victory and huge triumph over the campaign and there is no doubt it was a tragically bad plan on the part of the Allies, but as the first major battle undertaken by Australia and New Zealand, it is considered by many to be the catalyst for national consciousness and mateship for both these countries. Of course we wish it had never happened but it would be nice to think that those young men gave their lives for something.

And here’s some stuff to help with the moment of silence visuals; picture this - Extracted from the diary of Australian Signaller Ellis Silas (who survived Gallipoli):

Pope’s Hill – daybreak – down in the Valley, in the midst of this frightful hell of screaming shrapnel and heavy ordinance, the birds are chirping in the clear morning air and buzzing about from leaf to leaf, placidly going about its work, is a large bee – to think of what might be makes me weep, for fighting is continuing in all its fury. Our signallers have been nearly all wiped out – I suppose I’ll get my lead pill next. It has now been a ceaseless cry of, ‘Stretcher bearers on the left’ – they seem to be having an awful time up there – one poor fellow has just jumped out of his dug-out frightfully wounded in the arm; I bound it as best I could, then had to dash off with another message. All along the route, scrambling along the side of the exposed incline, my comrades offered me a dug-out for me to take cover as the snipers are getting our chaps every minute, but as the messages are important I must take my chance. All along the route I keep coming across bodies of the poor chaps who have been less fortunate than I.

The complete diary is heartbreaking. The trenches were damp and rat infested and the decaying bodies of fallen men lay everywhere.  As Silas said, “the snipers are just the natural order of things…as much a part of the landscape as the clouds”. The youngest soldier to die at Gallipoli was just 14 years old. I feel the need to use an emoticon here but it seems direspectful; silly little things they are. Anyway, anyone who didn’t die suffered terribly from delirium and shell shock.

Australian Light Horsemen, 1914

Australian Light Horsemen, 1914

The backup of the cavalry (horse mounted soldiers) did little to advance things, the Australian Light Horses and NZ and Canadian Mounted Rifles were originally used for shock tactics and fast advance. But their weakness in the face of machine guns shone through in WW1, particularly in the more significant battles such as Gallipoli.

And here’s another picture I found by chance – a group of Tasmanian nurses who were recruited to work at the hospital at Lemnos, located 110 km from Gallipoli to take the casualties.

Tasmanian Nurses at Lemnos

Moving on from Gallipoli…

Oh yes, there was more to the war of course. Right. Well the trench warfare seen in Gallipoli became the norm for the battlegrounds of the middle part of the WW1 (1916-1917). On the Western Front alone there were about 15,000 km of trenches and 800,000 soldiers at any given time. Each battalion (of about 1100 men) held their section of the front for about a week before moving back to support lines, then reserve lines, then a week ‘out of line’ before returning to the front.

The Quagmires of Passchendaele

The Quagmires of Passchendaele

The Battle of the Somme was fought on the Western Front out of the trenches. As is usual for trench warfare, there was huge loss of life on both sides by no real progress for either. 20,000 British soldiers were killed on day 1 of the Battle of the Somme (1st July 1916). All up, the battle resulted in over 700,000 allied casualties and 650,000 German. The Battle of Passchendaele in Belgium on the Western Front was fought later that same month in unimaginable conditions, again with huge loss of life and little progress.   

When did things start to progress?

Well even the German’s use of poison gas against the Russians and liquid fire against the British, followed by the British introduction of tanks (I am somehow reminded of little boys with toys here) did relatively little to progress things other than waves of panic. It was when the battle took to the skies rather than under the ground that things finally started to move forward. In the Autumn of 1915 some pretty primitive forward firing planes were released by Germany, then in July 1917 they sent bombers over London as well as bomb laden zeppelins (big gas balloony things).

Zeppelin - clumsy looking thing

Zeppelin – clumsy looking thing

Then came the wrath of the German U-boats (derived from the word unterseebooten, which shouldn’t make me smile so much). These submarines were brought in against Allied merchant shipping in certain key waterways. But it was the sinking of the American passenger liner, The Lusitania on April 6th 1917 that really set things in motion.

Progress on the Eastern Front

Meanwhile, Germany was making inroads in the East as the Russians struggled to infiltrate East Prussia. In August 1915, Poland fell when the Germans captured Warsaw and later in December 1916, the Germans helped the Austrians take Bucharest (capital of Romania). Russia was further weakened by internal unrest, fueled by the Tsar’s indifference to action on the front and the general incompetence of imperial rule. Conservative noblemen murdered the notorious Rasputin – a favourite of the Tsar – and things in Russia got altogether hectic – ie the Russian Revolution of 1917, a Bolshevik uprising which is another story to delve into another day. The upshot was that Russia was forced to withdraw from the war.

Come on, wrap it up Meg. How did the war end?

Well on April 6, 1917, a fed up and pissed of United States declared war on Germany and sent a fleet of warships to join the British Navy. Later they sent troops in to assist the allies on the ground.

On March 21st 1918, Germany launched a major offensive against the allies, using new tactics involving stormtroopers to storm the trenches using creeping barrages (eek). This was do or die for the Germans. Troops on either side were exhausted and the impending arrival of fresh US troops on the allies’ side meant the Germans had to give it their all. They brought in new long range cannons and with them were able to shell Paris from 74 miles away. 250 unsuspecting Parisians died on 23rd March as a result. Even more significantly, as the Germans stormed the Somme the Allied front line was broken.

The Battle of Lys a couple of days later resulted in more casualties on both sides, further exhaustion and very low morale, particularly amongst the Germans. In May 1918 the US troops finally arrived and claimed vicort on the Western Front at Somme. From then on, the Allies were able to hold their lines, with help from counterattacks from ANZAC and Canadian forces when Germany launched offensives. By July, the allies were back on the offensive. Their attack at Amiens on August the 8th using tanks and causing mass German confusion was described by a German official as “the blackest day of the German army”. The US launched their own successful offensive while the Italian army launched attacks on the Austrio-Hungarian empire. Phew.

Meantime, Turkey was weakened by Arab revolts and large British offensives which claimed Baghdad and Mesopotamia. The Eastern front collapsed, the Western front was collapsing and Germany was surrounded.

armistice

Armistice Joy

229945_f260On October 3rd 1918, Germany requested a ceasefire. Turkey and Austria-Hungary had followed suit by November. Fighting ceased with an armistice signed by all parties on November the 11th and at 11 am that day, hostilities officially ended (aha - Remembrance Day).

What happened to Germany after the war? 

The Treaty of Versailles which was signed after long and convoluted diplomatic negotiations on June 28th, 1919 was a day of utter humiliation for the German Empire. The country was required by the terms of the treaty to accept territory losses including Poland and Alsace-Lorraine. THey were also obligated to pay impossibly huge war reparations (that subsequently took fifty or so years to fulfill) and to admit full responsibility for the entire war (which was actually not quite right and very difficult for the Germans to swallow). After previous European wars, both sides had accepted responsibility, dealt with their losses, shaken hands and moved on. In this case, Germany copped it and the results of this harsh treatment was a bitter, impoverished country that would teeter on the brink of violence for decades, leaving it wanting for change and open to the influence of Nazis. And we all know the consequences of that (shiver). An even nastier war.

A Few Final Facts

The first world war began with a cold blooded murder, some imperialist argy bargy, a puffed up kaiser who wanted more boats that the Royal British Navy and an eagerness, even excitement to test out new weaponry and associated technology. It ended with over 16 million military and civilian deaths and a further 20 million wounded, many of whom had no understanding of what it was they were fighting for or what they were innocently caught up in. Entire countries were in ruins and economies in shambles.

When we remember the fallen, with thanks and sadness, we must also give thanks for the relative peace most of us live with now and remember how important is it is avoid such conflict at all costs.

cemerety

So, I now have my minute’s silence all packaged up and ready to go just in the nick of time (missed the dawn service, going to one shortly, hence the slightly rushed ending bit and possible multiple typo’s – sorry). Actually I have enough imagery to fill many, many minutes of silence. Underscoring it will be the sense of how damn lucky I am not to have experienced anything like this in my lifetime, and the hope that one day people will just bloody well stop killing other people.

What do you see during the silence of ANZAC and Remembrance days?

Click here if you’d like to read up on the Vietnam War.

And here’s the poem I wrote on ANZAC day last year:

A Million Stories

Against the red of rising sun,

A million stories, more

Whisper to bring the years undone,

Call back a dreadful underscore.

`

Talk to me, I’m listening,

Bring anger, tears and shame,

Let your toils rise up and sing,

Cry pain and shout your names.

`

Today our peace is piercing, loud;

Our comforts now abrasive

As fury builds and sorrow shrouds

For what you had to give.

`

These memories don’t belong to me

Yet I will make them mine

You are those I’ll never see

Yet long will thanks enshrine.

red poppy

My Gay Marriage

wedding

Marriage is on my mind today, so I thought it opportune to see what was happening with the same sex marriage thing.

What’s the Latest? 

Well yesterday, South Africa celebrated its first ever traditional gay Zulu wedding – a huge thing for a largely conservative population despite progressive post-apartheid reforms. Good one. [Is it tasteless of me and contrary to my support to point out that one of the groom's name is Thoba Sithole?]

In America, the supreme court has just heard two cases that could help to change the definition of ‘marriage’ in favour of the gay community, and even the Republicans are about turning to support same sex marriage.

In Australia, this weekend just gone, 2 of Tony Abott’s daughters voiced their support for gay marriage and last year Joe Hockey openly stated his opposition but said it made no difference because a re-definition of marriage is inevitable.

Here at Megoracle, I think that gay marriage opponents are posing such a DUMB argument.  There is nothing ‘natural’ about the institution of marriage whether it’s man and woman, woman and woman, man and man or woman and monkey. Cave woman didn’t prance about in white dresses getting all ‘me me me’ on everyone’s arses and claiming they need a solid bedrock of marriage to raise healthy children, did they? No, they shagged about (on their bedrocks) according to the laws of attraction and basic instinct. Even monogamy – at 20,000 years old or thereabouts, is young relative to the age of human kind.

But choosing ‘the one’ can be lovely – unless you choose the wrong ‘one’. It is special and meaningful and practical and helpful. It’s nice to be in partnership with someone (even if they do have an aversion to hanging clothes on lines), nice to trust and be working with, keeping secrets with, sharing burdens with, having babies with, sharing habits and homes and hormonal upheavals with someone you know better than anyone else in the world. They, to me, are good reasons for marriage to be a common practice. Reasons like religion or duty or tradition are not strong reasons to bind yourself through matrimony to someone. And it is these rhubarby reasons that some grapplers use to oppose same-sex marriage. Well WHAT A LOAD OF PHOOEY. EVERYONE, except maybe Pol Pott and Hitler and other foulsome examples, has every right to be happy and if for some people, happiness means being legally wed then LET EVERYONE DO IT.

I for one would like everyone to feel as happy as I did on my wedding day. It was lovely, it really was. But I didn’t do it because I thought I should or because I thought society or God or my family or tradition dictated it. I did it because I loved the bloke and I thought it would be nice to have dinner with him every night. And because I knew I didn’t want to be with anyone else. Ever. (Except maybe the vet on McLeod’s Daughters. He’s lovely too.) Well why – just because I chose a fella – was it so celebrated? If I’d fallen for a woman I would like to think all the doors – chapel or registry office or reception venue – would be flung open in the way they were for me 9 years ago.

Yep that’s right, it was 9 years ago today that my Dad walked me up the aisle of the local church and handed me over (possibly with a sigh of relief) to my husband. It was a traditional wedding, I followed all the rules (except the wearing of knickers because my dress was  unforgiving even to seam free undies). And the day was seamless too. A dear friend sang to us in the church, a string quartet played in the garden, the sun shone and there was joy in the air, I know because I put most of it there. Just as much joy as when, years later, my husband and I attended the ‘commitment ceremony’ of that same dear singing friend when she formalized her love for her lovely bride.

I just don’t understand how we should be allowed to place boundaries and rules on love. The very idea is a load of TWAT (a bit like the situation under my wedding dress).

And, by the way, I strongly suspect that a large portion of the gay community consider marriage – in any form – outdated and unnecessary and don’t think it’s a point worth arguing anyway. But if they would like to be legally wed, then by crikey they should.

Anyway, with that, I’d like to say a very happy ninth anniversary to my dear, long suffering husband, with whom I have a marriage that is happy and very gay.

Here’s my tribute to you (quickly recorded because I forgot to buy you a pressie and won’t be anywhere near a shop today sorry Dickie)…

It’s a bit blurry, I had the dryer going and the lens must have fogged up. Oh and here’s a link to the words, as I wrote them last year…

 

Little Miss Sook Head and Captain Courageous

Posted on

Easter was slightly underwhelming for us this year, mostly because the smallest and noisiest presence in the house succumbed to a nasty tummy bug on Thursday afternoon and proceeded to vomit on and off from then until Monday, when the Easter break was pretty much over and the chance of recovering some holiday cheer and bounding off on a family adventure was nil. I emerged tired, grumpy and worried that she hadn’t even sniffed an Easter egg or anything else for the better part of 4 days.  I felt as though everyone but us had found a patch of sun and reveled in family love and chocolate while I was mopping up vomit, washing sheets and screeching at the ones I love (it all unfortunately co-incided with one of my now rare hormone ravaged rampages – I blame the full moon).

Anyway, unerpinning it all was the uncomfortable thought that I am a giant SOOK and that feeling bitter about the loss of my Easter is PATHETIC given that I knew Lucie’s illness would have an end and there would be other and better Easters ahead. It is awful having a sick child and it seems never-ending but for the most part it is only actually a few days. A dear friend of mine has been in hospital with her baby girl for 7 WEEKS due to a rare genetic disorder and the need for a bone marrow transplant. She has – for the time being – lost her whole way of life. Easter Schmeaster. And even that loss is nothing compared to what she could lose if the transplant (God forbid) proves unsuccessful.

There are many families out there suspended in the nightmarish world of the sick child, hovering apart from everyone else’s world of daily grumbles and pedestrian complaints. For them, a fever free day or a smile from their baby is a triumph, worlds shrink into the small spaces allocated to them in a hospital – often in literal isolation, daily catch-ups are with medical professionals and places like facebook and instagram (where people like me thoughtlessly post showoffy pictures of their free lives) are almost unbearable to visit.

It sometimes amazes me, with all the intricacies of the human body, that there are so many healthy children born. But then when I look at the statistics, I am also somehow amazed at how many families must adapt to life with illness. According to the most recent figures, around 25% of children under 5 and 41% of the 5 to 15 age group suffer from chronic illness of some kind.

This is one of the best examples of how unjust life really is. I have a theory that these kinds of illnesses and disorders should – if they must happen – only be inflicted upon people who have done the wrong thing – abused the privileged ability to make babies, hurt others, ignored warnings… Never should they happen to people like my beautiful friend, who fought for conception in the first place, enduring years of IVF before giving birth to her precious girl only to find the biggest battle ahead of her. It’s very hard, with this in mind, to swallow the idea that God loves us all, even with a choccy flavoured Eastery-Jesus’-Sacrifice chaser.

Anyway, the purpose of this post is not to question Christianity, but to stop a moment and spare a thought for those families whose lives have had to find a different kind of normal – one of lowered expectations, simple pleasures, inward focus, higher pain thresholds and incredible courage. They all say things like, “I have my bad times but mostly we do it because we just have to. I can’t break, I have

Broken Easter Megg

Broken Easter Megg

to be strong for (their child).” Well, I say to them, I probably would have long ago shattered like a large hollow, cheapish Easter egg. You are amazing and I take my hat and everything else if necessary (no not necessary Meg, bad visuals) to all you mothers and fathers caring for (make that living for, crying for, praying for, not sleeping for, waiting for, holding on for, being strong for, sacrificing everything for) your darling children (the courage of these little ones is a-whole-nother post). I hope you know that your love and what you are doing for your babies is every bit as life-giving as what is in those tubes they are hooked up to. Fate can be a complete fucker sometimes and I know it’s no consolation but you will be able to conquer the world with the strength you have mustered.

And another thing – if you feel as touched by these families as I do – there is something you can do, at least for some of them. I have too

Captain Angus Courageous and his mum Superintendent Jessica Courageous.

Captain Angus Courageous and his mum Superintendent Jessica Courageous.

many germs, too many hooligan children of my own and not enough knowledge or skill to provide my friend and her family with any useful support. Mostly I have just given my thoughts and love, with a kind of guilty helplessness. So it was quite serendipitous that I came across a truly wonderful foundation called Captain Courageous. (click on this sound cloud link and play the song while you read this please – I want maximum effect). This project has been initiated by Jessica Bond, the mother of a little boy named Angus who suffers from a Bone Marrow Failure disease – one of a group of very rare diseases that are life threatening and incurable. The extra problem with rare diseases is that because they are rare, they don’t attract the research dollars and so families are either praying for miracles or raising funds themselves.

In this instance, Jessica’s friends – possibly feeling helpless like me – have come on board to help Captain Courageous cause, using their passion for food. Kirsty Willows and Helen Burge have produced a beautiful cook book called “After Dinner Mints for Breakfast” that anyone can buy – all profits going to the Captain Courageous Foundation. I bought one immediately. Admittedly – given my distinct unpassion for cooking - I did it just to support the cause but this really is a great book – not too scarily big, filled with real recipes, no jus or goose liver, nothing too complicated and really very inspiring. I have actually used it – even opened my closed meal repertoire to let in a few new dishes, much to the delight of my husband’s bored but surrendered taste buds. I mean it, get the book, it has lovely pictures and stories behind the recipes too. You can have a preview of it here. And you MUST buy it here.

Here's my copy

Here’s my copy

And finally – to those of you who have healthy children (including me) – give them a big hug, tell them you love them, shut up about dirty uniforms and nits and thank your blessed stars. ( I say ‘blessed’ because it is an amalgam of my children’s names – Bess, Ed and Lu – I know, possibly a bit OTT with the saccharin but hey, I am feeling blessed).

Other organisations set up to assist sick children and their families include: TLC for Kids; Make-A-Wish; VarietyStarlight Foundation.

Proof that I have used my cook book - Vietnamese Poached Chicken Salad. It's a winner.

Proof that I have used my cook book – Vietnamese Poached Chicken Salad. It’s a winner.

Love you F, E & O. xxxx

Catch Up On: US GUN LAWS (By Request)

640671_370

Unless you’ve had your head up an Ostrich’s arse (have I got that analogy a bit skew?), you will know that the US have some seriously cocked-up gun laws – i.e. having a gun readily available or even in your handbag is pretty normal for every Tom, Dick, Randy, Chuck and Harry. There are some truly heinous manifestations of these dickbrain laws, the most recent of which include:

- Last week’s discovery of a man in his dorm at University of Central Florida, Orlando. He was dead by self-inflicted gunshot wound but with him were four home made bombs, a handgun, a tactical assault rifle and 1000 rounds of ammunition. A plan to press an alarm and open fire on evacuating students was also found. A plan that would have been put into action had his room-mate not called 911. The arrival of the police meant that the madman executed not his plan but himself.

- The deaths of 28 people, including 20 small children, were shot dead by a gunman APTOPIX Connecticut School Shootingcarrying 4 weapons at Sandy Hook Elementary School, Newtown, Connecticut. I will not give the fuckwit gunman any post-humous (he turned the gun on himself as police arrived) satisfaction by naming him or showing his weird-arse fugly face but it turns out he had been plotting the massacre for years and collected articles about other mass shootings. He also shot his mother before leaving for Sandy Hook School. E.Vil.

- Last year’s Colorado cinema shooting in which a gun man shot 12 people dead and injured 58. Had his semi automatic weapon not jammed, it is almost certain that more lives would have been lost. The perpetrator owned an array of weapons and had with him 1,000′s of rounds of ammunition.

This is just the recent ones. Two thirds of all murders in America involve guns; last year alone guns claimed 9,000 lives in cold blood. Each year in the US, around 30,000 people die as a result of gunshot wounds.

lennon-glasses-353-300x0Yoko Ono recently and poignantly tweeted her support of tighter gun laws. The tweet was  illustrated with a photo of Lennon’s glasses, smeared with blood and captioned: “Over 1,057,000 people have been killed by guns in the USA since John Lennon was shot and killed on December 8, 1980.” And you’d think that the tragic demise of the genius who wrote “Imagine” would have stopped the madness once and for all.

Regardless of who the perpetrators are or why they committed such unthinkable crimes, the question has to be – and is being – asked, why are these horrific gun-toting, cold-blooded massacres happening in the US so regularly? Why are guns so freely available?

How Freely Available?

Each state is different but basically any law-abiding citizen over 18 is allowed to buy a gun. In Colorado, Kansas and Louisiana, you don’t need a permit to get yourself a gun. Yep, you just mozie on in, ask, show proof of age and pay. In Arizona you can legally carry a concealed weapon. What for – oh, yep of course, just in case some other bugger is carrying a concealed weapon and decides to pull it on you, you can pop yours out and have a gun fight in the street.

NYC is now one of the hardest places to buy weapons – you have to apply for a permit and the licensing authority may order you to do firearms training and education. The authority can also decide the conditions under which permit holders can possess handguns or carry a concealed weapon.

However, the firearm industry can go largely unregulated because there is a loophole that allows gun owners to sell their firearms to an unlicensed person in the same state. Plus there is always the online option – the Florida University would-be gunman bought his military-standard weapons online for $700 with no federal regulation whatsoever. And while ammunition purchases are restricted in most states, transactions are not recorded so any old maniac can just shop-hop to get the amount they think they need.

In 2007, 270 million of 317 million people owned civilian firearms.

So what’s with the gun culture?

Well waaay back in 1791, an amendment was made to the US Constitution in response to a war of independence where citizens were compelled to revolt against an oppressive state. It is now known as the 2nd Amendment. It is this:

“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

Which means, in my terms, that an armed population will be safe from any bugger thinking he or she might become a tyrannical dictator, that loose gun laws will keep the government in the hands of the people.

Those who still believe in the 2nd amendment evidently believe that the risk of tyranny at the hands of rulers is very real and that politicians who take an anti-2nd amendment stance have tyrannical motives. Their response to the Newtown tragedy was to suggest that armed security guards be placed in schools. Eeek, paranoid people with guns.

In 1871, the National Rifle Association (NRA) was founded “to promote and encourage rifle shooting on a scientific basis”. WTF is scientific shooting? Rhetorical question ‘cos I can’t answer that one.

Why hasn’t the amendment been amended into oblivion?

Well the NRA and the belief in the 2nd amendment has over the centuries become very powerful, to the extent that the right to bear arms is utterly ingrained in a large portion of the US population. This means that any political candidate to voice anti-2nd amendment beliefs would be facing certain death at the polls. For last year’s presidential election, neither Mitt Romney nor Barack Obama made gun control a priority in their campaigns.

The NRA is very wealthy and – as is the way – money translates to power. They – together with other poxy pro-gun groups like the Gun Owners of America (GOA) have the power to mobilise voters and politicians to stand firm behind the 2nd amendment and rail against the anti-gun lobby groups. They use arguments like “Americans are the most free people in the world because of the 2nd amendment”. Right, also the people most likely in the western world to get popped in the head just by going to school.

In 1994, a 10 year ban was placed on possession of magazines holding more that 10 rounds of ammunition. In 2004, congress allowed it to expire. In 2008 a handgun ban enforced in Washington was dismissed.

Is anything being done now?

Michael Bloomberg, Mayor of New York, has just yesterday announced he will put $12 million of his own money (blimey it pays to be mayor) toward a TV advertising campaign for tougher gun control laws in the hopes to get voters to back more comprehensive background checks on gun buyers. Congress will be voting on the issue very soon. Pro-gun control lobbyists claim that 92% of the population support detailed background checks and that the NRA’s arguments consist of scaremongery and conspiracy theories.

Last week – 8 months after the cinema massacre – Colorado changed its gun laws to include mandatory background checks as well as a limit on magazine capacity to 15 rounds or less. Already there is noisy opposition to this, and 2 ballot measures have been tabled to undo the new restrictions.

On 16 January of this year, in response to the Sandy Hook School shooting, President Obama announced plans for improved gun control. His proposal—demanding background checks for all gun sales (not just those from licensed dealers) and a new ban on assault weapons—would need new laws passed by congress, where Republicans (traditionally more gun happy than democrats) have a majority. Already the renewed ban on assault weapons has been dropped because of lack of support. Piss weak if you ask me.

obama on newtown

So even if the President waxes lyrical about change – and even if he means it – he alone can’t make it happen. In the US, love for arms and the “God given” right to self defence by fire power is deeply rooted into society. And deepy rooted. Period.

When I grow up I want to be a...

When I grow up I want to be a…

Post script: Given that I live a half hour drive from Port Arthur, the scene of the world’s largest gun massacre by a single person, I want to make it clear that I know too well that people are capable of these terrible crimes anywhere, even here in the sleepy peaceful place so dear to my heart. But the difference is that here in Australia, while our politicians had long chucked stricter gun laws rhetoric about but didn’t act for fear of electoral backlash from the gun lobby, we ended up with a leader who evidently didn’t give a shit about political ripples or even threats of violence. In 1996 Prime Minister John Howard brought the states and territories together and cut a deal for stronger, nationally uniform firearm reform. Since then, a study by Harvard University on the impact of our reforms concluded that, “”The National Firearms Agreement seems to have been incredibly successful in terms of lives saved.” That is, we’ve had no gun massacres (more than 4 people die in one rampage) since 1996, compared with 13 massacres during the previous 18 years. In the early 1990s, about 600 Australians a year were killed by gunfire; that figure is now fewer than 250.

SO GUN REFORM WORKS DERRRBRAINS.

Catch Up On: ANTI-AGEING (and a tribute to my grannies)

AGE has hit my agenda, for a number of reasons:

1) Although I still have 2 grannies (a bit of a rarity among my friends), they are not so spritely as they once were. One in particular is very frail these days and while she is fully marbled-up, she has had to move into a nursing home and well, things are just failing her and she is frankly sick of still being here (“Human’s live far too long, darling”).

2)I am in the second half of my 30′s, which means that I am (eeeek) approaching 40.

3) I have wrinkly eyes and unless I go about with a scary deadpan look on my face, they are not fine lines but WRINKLES. Recently a local newspaper published a full page picture of my wrinkles – the rest of me was just a background photo bomber. They were so prominent that I felt sure they’d been photoshopped in. But then I smiled widely into the mirror and unless it was some kind of miracle photoshoppy mirror, I saw them with my own wrinkly eyes. Then I didn’t smile. (Note to self – smile into the mirror more so that I at least know what everyone else is seeing).

4) My husband has stopped laughing at my getting old concerns, instead has taken to sighing and saying, “just go with it baby”. We all know what that means.

Most days I at least fleetingly wish my skin time can be turned back and as a result I have a large collection of ‘miracle’ remedies and regimens into which I invest time, money and beauty hopes, none of which have been realised.

Sucker

Sucker

I keep getting suckered in by marketing, even when I know I’m being suckered in by marketing. Serums, creams, oils, supplements, whatevers – all beaconing their own ‘miracle discovered in the highlands of Outer Crapolia’ type story. Can we believe any of it? Sometimes – like when I smile in the mirror or guiltily sneak another elixir into the bathroom – I really hope so. Other times – like when I see Tracy Grimshaw’s lips or Demi Moore’s knees – I think we should all just accept ageing for the natural thing it is. But maybe I can’t accept aging if I’m constantly being told I don’t have to, if I still believe that the cure is lurking somewhere in the Priceline aisles and if Nicole Kidman at 46 looks about 26. So, it’s time to take a sensible look, and wow, there is so much written about this and so much product spin disguised as facts that I think I have developed another wrinkle just reading it all. Here’s my precis:

Do non-invasive anti-ageing potions really work?

Dermatologists say NO.  They say the best I can do for my skin now as far as lotions and potions go is a good moisturiser and sunblock. Ohhh, I knew you were going to say that you pooper dermatologists. We all know that keeping the sun’s rays off helps our complexion stay young but it’s a little late for me. I grew up in the eighties ok, when tans were as trendy as the Ken Done sunnies we wore them with and sunscreen was coloured zinc used as decorative daubs.

What about Ponds – they even have an institute? And Skin Doctors? Cosmedics? Cosemceuticals? Are they all just Ponds Cold Cream with a phony honours degree on a credibility campaign? Are they stitching me up?

Well the World Health Organisation projects that the global Anti-Ageing industry will be worth $291,9 billion by 2015 so it looks like its worth finding a good sales pitch. But surely, I think desperately, it’s in the industry’s interests that their products actually work? Well the scientists say that most of the products just moisturise the skin – which does improve feel and appearance and that for the most part the other claims are codswallop. There are a few reasons for why these products are not ‘miracles’ in a bottle:

  • There are many different factors that cause ageing; addressing one or two of these factors will make a barely visible difference.
  • Everyone has different skin – no one product can help everyone.
  • There is every chance that the miracle ingredient, while works in a test tube, doesn’t even penetrate the outer skin layer. You can’t for instance, bung a dollop of collagen (the protein that helps keep our skin elastic) into some oil and expect it to sink in and work miracles. It can’t.
  • Many products only use very low – sub-therapeutic – levels of the active ingredient.

If I were to list all the ‘It’ products, endorsed by celebs that don’t work, we’d be here all day, so I won’t. But just so you know, the ones I’ve tried myself without effect include SKII (I was so convinced by Cate Blanchett and her luminous face), Olay Regenerist and Dr Lewinn’s Line Smoothing Complex. Please note that I am saying they didn’t work for me – maybe they will for you (and your flying pigs).

Are there any exceptions? Please?

Meet Tretinoin. It is a Vitamin A (retenoid) product that dermatologists evidently recommend. It reportedly stimulates collagen production, increases blood flow and helps shed old skin cells. It’s products are called Retin-A or Retrieve and to get them you need a prescription and no history of eczema (rules me out). And get this peeps – it is $40 a tube – such a cheapie compared to those minuscule portions of bullshit extract you buy for about $300 per gram.

There is some evidence that AHA‘s, which are naturally occurring acids from sugar cane, milk and fruit also stimulate collagen and hyaluronic acid production, clear pores and slough off sold skin. But to be effective it the AHA has to be a greater than 10% concentration in the product. If the label doesn’t tell you how much AHA is in it – it will be less than a bee’s sniff.

Please note, that AHA’s and retenoids can serve to aggravate the skin and that it’s benefits just stem from  the resultant puffiness that smooths wrinkles and flakiness that speeds up cell renewal. Guess you can only try them and weigh up the pros and cons yourself.

What about microdermabrasion, laser, peels and stuff?

“Skin Resurfacing” is a deeper removal of the outer layers of skin than the bit of exfoliation I do once a week (well ok, when I think of it).  Ther remaining dermis (skin) effectively heals and supposedly results in ‘fresher, healthier, more radiant skin’.

  • Chemical Peel: A variety of caustic (eek) agents are available including TCA (trichloroacetic acid), phenol and croton oil. The chemicals actually burn the outer layers of skin. Different concentrations will cause varying depths of skin removal. (“Hi, I’m looking for a 3rd degree peel, I just want a fresh start”)
  • Dermabrasion: A mechanical removal of the outer skin layers achieved by a rapidly rotating cylinder or dome covered with diamond chips or wires. Ooouuuuch.
  • Laser: Uses beams of concentrated high intensity light to accomplish the removal of skin layers. It hurts like hell and leaves you looking like a raw prawn for a few days.

Apparently choice of resurfacing depends on the person and the problem so you need to talk your local skin stripper-offer before choosing what’s best. None will get rid of the fairway divets around my eyes, but they might all leave me feeling fresher and more rejuvenated. Plus if you follow it up with some skin pampering, moisturizers and toners will work better on the new cells. I wouldn’t say no to that.

And Botox? 

Well yes it does get rid of wrinkles – basically it means that I would be injected with a small dose of Botulinum Toxin, which is lethal to

Oops I slipped and fell on a bunch of botox needles.

Oops I slipped and fell on a bunch of botox needles.

humans in high doses, but which in small injections will effectively weaken the muscles around my eyes so they can’t crinkle up into crow’s feet. Botox has many other noble medical applications but I’m not interested in them unless my vagina suddenly goes into spasm (which sounds quite nice actually but would no doubt get annoying). No one has ever died using botox cosmetically, but a lot of people look like dead wax people. I do suspect, though, that there are some people out there using it in modest amounts with good results. I’m not opposed to this one but given I an eternally emerging (try hard) writer with no real job, I can’t justify the cost. You fork out $300-$400 and it lasts only 3 to 4 months.

Fillers?

Oh dear

Oh dear

The idea behind dermal fillers (think Juvederm, restalyn, fortelis) is that as we age, our faces lose volume, resulting in skin sagging and wrinkles. An injection of a substance derived from hyaluronic acid (a natural acid in the skin) will attract water to the area and plum it up, ironing out wrinkles. I really hate the idea of these for some reason; I suspect they may be the culprit behind that weird swollen look we see on the telly.

I would love to hear from anyone who has had an anti-aging procedure or who has found something that really works – but appreciate that you might like to keep it quiet. I will endeavor to keep you posted if I do ever take the plunge. But I can’t promise. I might just pop up one day looking sensational. Or (as my 3 year old would say) frozed.

What else helps combat ageing?

Sleep. We all need to getting the right amount of sleep for our age to maintain as fresh a face as possible. Ideally I should be having 8 hours sleep per night. Oh, well that explains it. I’m lucky to have 7.

Genes. As I said, I still have my grandmothers, so that’s got to be good doesn’t it? And they are both lookers even now.  My Mum still looks great too – she still has more brown hair than grey and her bod is smoking hot for a woman in her mid 60′s.

Actually I just want to pay tribute to my dear Grannies – my children’s great grandmothers. They are both in their mid 80′s, both fully marbled and both very glamorous. They have both battled cancer and other health problems, both had 3 children (two boys and a girl) and strong marriages.

Granny M still lives independently and drives herself and many of her younger friends about. My sister and I grew up with her next door to us on the family farm and her home was a warmer, better stocked with bickies extension of our own. We were welcome anytime and allowed to drink dry ginger ale from metal goblets. There was a large jar of pickled walnuts in her kitchen which in my mind was to be avoided at all costs. She is known for her beauty – still clearly there – bright blue eyes and generous, patient, caring nature.

IMG_2662

Granny M and my dashing Grandfather

Granny P is a bridge champion with a wicked sense of humour and a great love for books, diamonds and the Adelaide Crows. She speaks fluent prickle, appreciates good fashion and good grammar, “It’s not fuckin’, darling, it’s fucking”, and doesn’t suffer fools. She once told her (overweight) doctor that him telling her not to drink wine is like her telling him he can’t eat. She dislikes obese people, particularly men “Eww, imagine the tiny penis”. She always has good hair, good coffee and tim tams for visitors. She has the most stylish and impeccable taste I know – I really mean that. She is the least prudish, most new-age granny I know.

Little Granny P with her mum - I know, she's another story.

Little Granny P with her mum – I know, check out the genes!

I am very proud of both of them. I would be proud to be like them when I am their age. I still think of them as the strong, caring women they were when I stayed with them – often – as a child. The ones who buttered my toast in clumps and sugared my apple and soothed away my fright after a teenage seance (I thought) brought the spirit of Ricky May into my bedroom (don’t ask). But when I see a wobble in their step, the easy-come bruises on their skin or horror of horrors, when I see them fall, their fragility hits me right in the guts and really hurts.

I want someone to tell me that a good moisturizer and some sun screen will keep them here forever.

Catch Up On: DARFUR

Posted on

I first took notice of Darfur when George Clooney wore a sexy tight t-shirt monogrammed with, “Not On My Watch”, which on further investigation turned out to be the project he founded with other hotties such as Brad Pitt and Matt Damon to, “focus global attention and resources towards putting an end to mass atrocities around the world”. Swoon.  At that stage their focus was on Darfur and the “unimaginable suffering” going on there. I’m still not 100% clear on why that suffering was going on, and I sure as hell don’t know if it’s still happening today.

I do occasionally hear Darfur mentioned in the news, and Sudan all the time. The other day I noticed Darfur mentioned in that popular tome, “50 Shades of Grey” (I haven’t read it from front to back, just a few smutty bits before I got irritated by her saying, “Holy crap!” all the time and referencing her inner Goddess – I feel the need to clarify this). So why is broody Christian getting all noble over Darfur? What did happen over there and is it still happening?

When I look into it I see that the conflict is now exactly 10 years old, but first things first…

Where is Darfur?

It is a region about the size of Spain in Africa’s Western Sudan. It borders Libya (ooh that sounds like a barrel of laughs), Chad and the Darfur_mapCentral African Republic. Sudan (known as The Sudan prior to 1975) is the largest country in Africa. It lies south of Egypt on the Eastern edge of the SaharaBeing at the crossroad between Africa and the Middle East, its people are a mix of Arab and Black African (in the south). It is a mostly Muslim country with some Christianity and tribal religion. Sudan was officially a British colony under Egyptian leadership until 1956 when it was granted independence.

What’s wrong over there?

Well in short, the place is a disaster and the Sudanese leader is a complete knob…Darfur has basic infrastructure and next to no development. Its 6 million (predominantly Fur or non-Arab) inhabitants are among the poorest in Africa, existing on subsistence farming or nomadic herding. They have long claimed decades of neglect and oppression from the Sudanese government in Khartoum, as well as facing tensions with Arab herders over land and grazing rights. On top of this they have endured drought, famine and conflict. Sudan’s major resource is oil, but it appears that only the country’s military and an elite few gain benefit from oil export revenue.

Why Conflict?

The current conflict (which was supposed to end in 2005 with a peace agreement) began in 2003 when 2 rebel groups within Darfur – the Sudanese Liberation Army (SLA) and the Justice and Equality Movement (JEM -made up of mostly non-Arab black African Muslims from various tribes) orchestrated an uprising against the Sudanese government and its leader Omar al-Bashir. These 2 groups, fed up with their beggarly resource and land allocation in comparison to the Arab population, conducted a series of ‘hit and run’ raids using Toyota Landcruisers to speed in on and attack government targets. The initial uprising went largely unchecked, partly because the Sudanese army was mostly deployed to the south where the 2nd Sudanese civil war (another Arab Gov’t Vs non Arab Gov’t conflict) was in its final throes, but it has been alleged that al-Bashir lazily chucked a pile of weapons and a few tactical tips in the direction of some disgruntled Arab speaking nomadic tribes known as the Janjaweed, which translates to ‘devils on horseback’, and no, I’m not talking slightly foul but benign bacon wrapped prunes. The Janjaweed are a pack of unspeakably brutal arseholes.

Full Scale Humanitarian Crisis (i.e. GENOCIDE)

The Janjaweed proceeded to wipe out entire Fur villages (leaving Arab ones untouched), destroyed food and water supplies and murdered, raped and/or tortured hundreds of thousands of Darfuri. The Sudanese government long denied any alliance with the Janjaweed, promising to disarm them but never did. Darfuri claimed that the Janjaweed onslaughts were often followed by bombing raids from government aircraft.

09_helicopter_north_darfur_children_2007_large

The violence, disease and starvation has lead to as many as 480,000 Darfurian deaths (mostly reported at around 300,000 but who really knows) while 2.8 million live in internally displaced person (IDP) camps. The displaced relied solely on the UN and other humanitarian organizations for food, water, shelter and healthcare. Those civilians who remain in their villages lived in constant fear of raids, often in the form of aircraft disguised as UN aircraft – a blatant violation of international humanitarian law. Hey, if they’re going to rape and murder they’re not going to take note of  a few rules written on bits of paper in some high up far away place, but somehow this takes it all to a new level of wrong – villagers could never know whether an approaching plane was coming to save them or slaughter them.

Is there much foreign aid going on, other than Brad, Matt and George etc?

Well for a while the safety of the 1 million Darfuri who hadn’t fled was in the hands of 7,400 African Union troops who were charged with the job of reporting ceasefire violations, but not preventing them. Brill, thank you so much, says no Darfuri ever.

There was a peace agreement imposed by the US government and signed by Sudan and the SLA. But JEM and other rebel groups refused to sign and the situation worsened.

In 2006 there was a UN security resolution to send a 22,500 strong peacekeeping force to relieve the AU. But Sudan leaders shat on that idea by refusing the UN entry and only allowing the deployment of 200 UN advisors. In 2007 the peace talks were supposed to begin, but most of the major players didn’t bother to show up.

crisis_in_darfur3Meantime, the US officially named the whole catastrophe a genocide and imposed sanctions on the Sudanese regime. Still there was no co-operation from Khartoum, only the scoffing claims that it was just a big beat up by Darfur and the humanitarian movement and actually not many people had died after all. The Sudanese government evidently became experts at playing games with envoys and peace instigators, thereby delaying action. They also worked hard at limiting world awareness by restricting access into Darfur by diplomats, humanitarian workers and journalists.  Well that’s all over buds because Megoracle is so onto you. Maybe I can’t get over there to bust your arses just yet, but we’re talking huge exposure, HUGE.

In 2007, Oxfam, the British aid agency helping over half a million people in Darfur and Chad announced their permanent withdrawal after one of their workers was raped, another beaten and others subjected to mock executions (jeez, how terrifying). None of the perpetrators were held to account.

Why don’t they just sack the dickhead president?

Something Stinks

Something Stinks

Well in March 2009 the International Criminal Court (ICC) issued a formal arrest warrant for al-Bashir for 5 counts of crimes against humanity and 2 counts of war crimes in Darfur – the first time ever that a sitting head of state has been charged. Genocide was never mentioned and HE IS STILL IN POWER. In April 2010 he was declared the winner of the presidential elections with 68% of the vote. A few months later a second warrant was issued by the ICC against al-Bashir, listing 10 counts against him.

But, the wanker continues to travel about on invitation from places like Egypt, Qatar and Libya, in between signing death warrants for Darfurie rebels and giving the general bird to the UN. The only spot of hope it that it has been reported by a party official that he will not be seeking re-election when Sudan next goes to the polls in 2015.

And in Darfur today?

Well the war is now a decade old. There are reports just today of the conflict intensifying as Sudan deploys warplanes and rockets, attacking villages in Darfur. The government denies this, saying the aircraft are to protect troop convoys and that the reports are simply spin on the part of activists.

The displaced Darfuri live in camps under huts of hay and plastic. They have limited schooling for their children, food, clean water and Darfur_IDPs_children_sittinghealthcare but no sense of home, future or security. Tribal skirmishes (because they just don’t want to be chucked in all together) amongst the Darfuri add to the violence.

I’ve just read that Darfuri children are being born without eyes – possibly due to the bombs and other children are dying due to drinking water polluted by the shelling.

This week, a group of pollies from the UK, the US and Australia have written to foreign secretaries to work harder toward an end to the violence in Sudan. Read their letter here. China has just sent the third installment of a humanitarian donation of irrigation equipment and farming machinery, which will help provide a means of living so that the displaced can return to their villages.

But also this week, on Sunday a Darfuri woman in a camp was critically injured when (allegedly) government officials beat and stabbed her before attempting rape. Eight homes in her village were burnt that day.

That same day, a displaced Darfuri man in a West Darfur camp took his own stand against the violence by setting himself on fire. Before he died, he told his family that ”the earth would be more merciful to him than to watch his brothers and sisters suffer every day from the abuse by pro-government militants; plundering, raping, killing…” According to the relative he added: “everybody is watching and nobody is doing anything.”

So do something dudes. I know there’s a lot of shit stuff going on and it’s hard to help every cause. But just share this post, talk about it, join a group, write about it, like the Facebook page, wear a Save Darfur T-shirt,  give al-Bashir a big old al-bashir on the head, whatever, anything to get it into and keep it in the collective consciousness.  PLEASE.

darfuri child

SWEET LITTLE CHILDREN

Pondering on: SUGAR IN MY CHILDREN’S DIET

Yesterday I took the children to another bush fire fundraiser in Dunalley (I know, the combined generosity of pretty much everyone is incredibly incredible). I was looking forward to catching up with friends and seeing the children have a bit of fun. We arrived shortly before 10 am and by about 10 : 37 am Lucie spotted a lollipop and struck up her little grizzle concerto (think 3 year old playing a violin badly RIGHT IN YOUR FACE). 161

I hate this about sweets – they mostly make everyone grumpy even before they are consumed. “I wanna lollipop” was the refrain on loop whilst I cheerily pointed out a clown, a free sausage sizzle and a person dressed up as a duck. When none of this worked I thought, “Oh fuck it alright it have a fucking lollipop – every other kid seems to be having one”. I found a nearby corporate tent handing out lollipops to poor whingy children who must surely need a bit of free confection because their town had burned (but who actually at  this point couldn’t give two shits about any fire or any subliminal advertising, they just wanna lollipop  nooooooow), shoved it in her gaping whinge hole and there was relative peace for a while. Lollipops are henceforth known as Shutupachups.

But wait there’s more. Another generous bunch of people turned up with a truckload of goodie bags for the school children which contained – amongst some interesting bits and pieces including a picnic blanket, a pair of sunglasses with flashing lights and quite the most peculiar looking dolly I have ever seen – a baggie of sweets. And while I was distracted by some cheerleaders bouncing about in a very impressive fashion, the small whingy one – already cheered by one hunk of sugar – ate the whole lot. It wasn’t a large bag – kind of standard sized for a bag of mixed sweets, but she’s only 3, which means for her little system it was the equivalent of a great big bag.

Within about 15 minutes we found ourselves caught in a chunderstorm, after which she lay across my knees and fell asleep. I carried her to the car and drove home wondering whether I was in for another joyous weekend of gastro and was slightly relieved when an hour or so later she woke up and asked for a sandwich and I found the empty sweetie bag caught up the peculiar dolly’s hair.

Eeeeek!

Eeeeek!

But then I felt disturbed. What had happened to her little system to cause such a reaction? I mean we all know that sugar is feared by parents for its ability to turn small placid beings into rabid feral knob-heads. But what is the sugar actually doing? And what made my little one sick?

Well first up it’s interesting to note that science disagrees with just about every parent in the western world – objective clinical trials have not shown any link to food additives or sugar increasing activity in children. Scientists believe that the subjective results (i.e. parents reporting idiot behaviour post birthday parties) is environmental (showy off children) and psychological (we see what we believe). Oh great, so what I thought was a chemical reaction that sparked arseholiness in my children is actually all in my head and they are just plain arseholes some of the time.

But wait, there are proven links between a decrease in attention span and high levels of sugar. This is thought to be because sugar is rapidly absorbed into the bloodstream and the increase in blood sugar levels can trigger adrenaline production, which manifests itself in symptoms similar to hyperactivity and Attention Deficit Disorder – AKA The Sugar Rush. Well in my way of thinking, if there are symptoms similar to hyperactivity, then the children are hyperactive aren’t they? Let’s not pussyfoot about with precise definitions – surely if sugar causes a rise in adrenaline and a decrease in attention span, then its causing behaviour that is at best irritating and at worst destructive? Don’t mess with my head science ok, I love you mostly but in this case you are being slightly nit-picky.

What about the technicolour yawn all over the lawn? Well too much sugar causes nausea because YOU ATE TOO MUCH OF IT YOU IDIOT. If small amounts of sugar are causing nausea every time then you should probably see your GP in case you have diabetes or something, but generally speaking, if you eat a huge bag of doughnuts in a short time your stomach will say ‘hell no’ and push them out again. And if it is a sugar hit,  blood sugar levels will go right up, kicking your pancreas into its insulin secreting role. Insulin is a hormone that absorbs sugar from the bloodstream. When the bloodstream is overloaded with sugar, insulin is secreted in higher levels which removes the sugar very quickly, resulting in a “sugar low” which can manifest as nausea.

And why did she go so floppy and, well, asleep? There are a few reasons why sugar can cause tiredness: 1) because insulin, down the track, also triggers the release of serotonin, which is the neurotransmitter that can make us feel relaxed and happy (well she looked well beyond relaxed and far from happy). 2) Consumption of sugar inhibits oroxin levels, which regulates things like fatigue and hunger. It is interesting to note here that this effect can be negated by eating protein at the same time as the sugar (does this mean ice cream and choccy is ok?). 3) The ‘sugar low’ or the rapid removal of sugar by insulin can manifest as fatigue. And, finally – 4) maybe there has been so much running about like dickheads as a result of the adrenaline thing that they are worn out.

So there you have it, from now on I will be carrying hard boiled eggs in my handbag to administer each time we encounter treats; never mind that wherever I go people will think I just farted. I can blame the kids. And I think I’ll empty out the cannister reserved for confiscated sugary notions of dubious chemical make up. Some of them will still be in perfect condition in the year 2167 if I don’t dispose of them now. This is a big thing for me – I love fake jelly things, even the unloved green jelly babies and those funny teeth. But the milk bottles can stay can’t they? They must have protein.

IMG_2552

Confession: I ate a strawberry and cream. And a jelly baby. Then I threw them in the bin. Well I thought about throwing them in the bin but didn’t. But I will.

You all know this anyway but I feel obligated to add that a diet high in sugar can also result in nasty brown teeth and more of those fatsos that clog up the health system.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 114 other followers