#Also does anyone actually know what Brexit's official title is? | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

bloggerblagger · 8 years ago

Text

77) M’aidez, M’aidez, May-day. (But, seriously, do you really think she is going to help?)

Unmoored.

That is how Trump and Brexit have made me feel. The old certainties that tied me to a place of relative safety are being wrenched away. It may sound daft and melodramatic but I have a very definite image in my mind. I am on the prow of a small boat tied up to a quay; the wind starts to blow, a storm whips up, and the sky suddenly turns menacingly dark. I hear creaking and banging and the screeching of birds and the deck starts to rock. Then, one by one, the ropes that tie us to the pontoon start to snap under the strain, and, before I know it, it’s too late to get off. We are loose, drifting and lurching towards to the choppy, frothing open sea. And here’s the worse part: I do not have a clue how to sail this boat. Not a fucking clue.

Religious types like to preface announcements of their hopes and plans with ‘Please God’ or ‘God willing’ or ‘Inshallah’. ‘We’re going on holiday to America next year, please God.’ ‘My son will be going to Oxford in September, Inshallah.’ Silly superstition to me, hoping to ward off the evil eye, and being a modern, atheistic, hard-core rationalist, you never hear me say things like that.

Only I haven’t evolved quite as far as I would have liked. I’m still just as prone to a bit of OCDish touching of wood as the next person. So I have my own Godless version of those pointless little mantras, and, in truth it means the same thing. I always say that I am going do such and such, ’All other things being equal’.

But, of course, now, all those other things are not equal.

I went to see ‘Jackie’, the other day, Natalie Portman’s tour de force as the wife of the assassinated President. Almost the first thing you see is a title saying ‘1963’. 54 years ago this year, comfortably more than half a century and, although it shocks and pains me to say it, ah yes, I remember it well.

For my generation it was the dashing, glamorous Kennedys who did so much to give us such an absurdly romantic idea of what America was. A Technicolor wonderland full of skyscrapers, and ludicrous, enormous cars with tailfins inspired by cartoon spaceships, and surfers on beaches full of gorgeous Californian girls, and the wild West and the Rockies and Marilyn and Elvis and Haight Ashbury.

Everything in America seemed bigger and brighter, and I, and most of my generation I think, totally bought into this romantic idea of brand America. By and large, we turned a blind eye to the mad religiosity, and the insane gun toting, and the fact that between the supposed nirvanas of New York and California lay vast tracts of flat, dead boring country full of fat, dead boring people.

Now the romance is over. Every day, several times a day, we are tweeted to a display of mindless vulgarity, of pointless, petty, puerile offensiveness that makes complete fools of those of us who were once in love with the idea of America. How blind we were. America was always like this but we chose not to see.

The will of (a minority of) the people.

Laughably this has all come about in the name of democracy, that noble concept that America claims to be so wedded to.

Democracy? When the winner can be outvoted by more than three million votes.

Democracy? When the least populated state, Wyoming, has an officially recorded population of 582,658 and and has 3 votes in the Electoral College, making 1 vote per 194,219 people, and the most populous, California, has a population of 39,250,017 and 55 votes in the Electoral College making 1 vote per 713,637.

Yep, that’s democracy in the good old US of A*, where, in a Presidential election, the vote of a citizen of Wyoming is worth nearly 4 times as much as that of a citizen of California. (3.67 times to be exact.)

Still there are always the fabled checks and balances to this bullying in a China shop President. (And - so far - in a Mexico shop, an Australia shop, an Iran shop, and a Muslim shop too.)

Surely the Legislature, that is to say, Congress, can reign him in? Except that, of course, both houses of Congress, the House of Representatives and the Senate, are now solidly Republican, supposedly the party of Trump.

The Senate, by the way, is even less democratic than the Electoral College and even more hopelessly skewed in the direction of those who live in the back and beyond. (Aka Trump voters.) Every state gets two senators, so in Wyoming that’s one Senator per 291,329 voters and in California it’s one per 19,625,009. Which means that a vote in a US Senatorial election from a Wyomingite is worth a whopping 67.36 times as much as that of a Californian. ( 68.2% of the Wyoming popular vote went to Trump, you won’t be surprised to learn, whereas in California 61,5% of the popular vote went to Mrs.Clinton.)

And the judiciary?

Can it really be independent when Federal judges - that’s not just Supreme Court justices but also Courts of Appeals judges and District judges - are appointed to their office by the President of the United States? (The Senate has to approve them it’s true, but you know which way that is going to go.)

Yes, the brave chap in Washington is currently sticking two fingers up to Trump over the immigration issue, and apparently this case is going to go all the way to the Supreme Court, but when push comes to shove, don’t we know from experience - the hanging chads experience - that the Supreme Court votes along party political lines?

Americans can blather on about the sanctity and durability of their Constitution as much as they like, but somehow I don’t think it frightens the Orange One one little bit.

(Not that, as I have pointed out before - see blog post 69 - our so-called democracy is any more convincing. Far from it. Even if a Californian’s vote in a Senate election counts for so little, at least they get a vote. Whereas with our equivalent, our Upper House, the House of Lords, we just have to take what the great and good decide we should be given.)

The headmistress will see you now.

Has there ever been anything more nauseating than the sight of Theresa holding Donald’s hand?

But if it turned your stomach, I’ll bet that’s nothing to how it made her feel. Kitten heels notwithstanding, she is the very model of prissy, churchy, English modesty and restraint. Can you imagine anyone who would instinctively repulse her more than the bragging, vainglorious, vulgarian with the silly hair? Give Mrs.May her due: just the act of not actually publicly vomiting was a sacrifice way above and beyond the call of duty.

Of course, having just cut off our nationalist nose to spite our economic face - or was it the other way around - what choice she did have?

Even if our goods sold in the USA under EU rules do, currently, only face an average 2%** tariff, so that the very best deal she could ever get - no tariff at all - would barely make a difference, she is still forced to go grovelling to Trump, in order to be able to pretend that she is doing something other than sticking her head in the sand and praying that Brexit is all just a bad dream.

Mrs.May, being very tall and thin with rather stick-like legs and a beaky nose, and often awkwardly bent slightly forward, does, in fact, look quite ostrich-like, don’t you think? Or ‘struthious’ which, I have just discovered via Google, is the proper word for being ‘of or pertaining to ostriches’. The struthious Mrs. May ….remember you saw it here first.

But actually I prefer another image of her. I see Mrs. May as the headmistress of a private girl’s school facing hard times. (Those of us who have daughters who have been to private girls’ schools will know that she is perfect casting.)

Her secretary rings through to her office on an Intercom that wasn’t even the last word in high tech modernity three headmistresses before.

“Mrs. May, Mr. Trump is here.”

Beat pause, then Mrs.May takes a deliberate deep breath before replying.

“Give me a moment please.”

Mrs.May stands and walks across to the mirror on the wall. She glimpses the wallpaper peeling behind it and the damp patch it reveals. She hopes he won’t notice it but is quite certain he will. She looks in the mirror and pats down her hair. She stares at what she sees and grimaces slightly, shaking her head. Her face says it all.

So this is what it has come to. St. Boadica’s so desperate for money that she has to admit the wild child daughter of this dreadful man, this hideous, lecherous, ghastly buffoon. Worse still, if she is to squeeze out of him a desperately needed donation to the ‘St.Boadicea’s Repair the Roof’ fund she is going to have to shake his sweaty little hand, feign laughter at his terrible off-colour jokes, and try, pathetically, against the all the odds, to appear coquettish when he squeezes her hand just a little too tight. She shudders visibly.

Mrs. May turns back to her desk, opens a little drawer and takes out an old silver hip flask. She tips her head back and takes a good, hard unladylike swig, and then puts the flask back in the drawer. She reaches down to the intercom to press down the ancient Bakelite switch so that she can ask her secretary to show the odious Mr.Trump in. But as she leans down, her eye catches sight of her well-worn blouse. She pauses for a moment, considers, then lifts her finger from the switch and undoes the top button.

’Oh well’, she reasons silently to herself, ‘In for a penny, in for a devalued bloody pound.’

* http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/11/7/12315574/electoral-college-explained-presidential-elections-2016

** http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/uk-us-trade-deal-donald-trump-theresa-may-meeting-benefits-eu-single-market-small-upsides-bank-of-a7546866.html

2 notes · View notes

biofunmy · 5 years ago

Text

What to Know About Prince Harry and Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, Stepping Back

On Wednesday, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex made a big announcement. We are still figuring out exactly what it means.

What exactly are Prince Harry and Meghan doing?

It’s not fully clear and it depends whom you ask.

In a message posted to both the couple’s Instagram page and their new stand-alone website (one of two websites they have introduced in the last few months), the Duke and Duchess of Sussex announced their intentions to “carve out a progressive new role within” the “institution” of the British monarchy; to “step back as ‘senior’ members of the Royal Family”; to “work to become financially independent while continuing to fully support Her Majesty The Queen”; to “balance” their time “between the United Kingdom and North America”; to “honour our duty to The Queen, the Commonwealth, and our patronages”; to launch a “new charitable entity”; and “to collaborate with Her Majesty The Queen, The Prince of Wales, The Duke of Cambridge, and all relevant parties.”

The message seemed to suggest a desire to relinquish some (public) lifestyle funding in order to be less beholden to the strict protocol and de facto traditions of the royal family without sacrificing titles, influence or access.

According to a frosty statement from Buckingham Palace, this is all still being negotiated:

“Discussions with the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are at an early stage. We understand their desire to take a different approach, but these are complicated issues that will take time to work through.”

No bad ideas in a brainstorm.

Is “senior” royal a job?

No. It’s a designation applied to those adult members of the royal family closest to the throne in the line of succession, and their spouses, who tend to carry out the majority of public engagements alongside and/or on behalf of the queen. It currently refers to Queen Elizabeth II and her husband, Prince Philip; Prince Charles and his wife, Camilla; and Prince William and his wife, Kate. One could argue that, since Prince Harry has neither removed himself from the line of succession nor given up his title, he and Meghan remain senior royals.

Announcing a plan to “step back” from being a senior royal is sort of like declaring an intention to recuse oneself from being famous.

Why are they stepping back?

Specific reasons mentioned on their website include enabling themselves “to earn a professional income, which in the current structure they are prohibited from doing,” and handling their own media relations. On that second point, they particularly emphasized their decision to operate independent of the so-called Royal Rota — a key feature of royal family press relations that grants perpetual special access to journalists from seven British publications, including some tabloids.

Harry has long been critical of the British press. In October, he and Meghan initiated legal proceedings against the publishers of multiple British newspapers. He explained their decision in a statement posted on one of the Sussex websites, in which he excoriated the media and drew a connection between the royals’ treatment at the hands of the press and his mother Princess Diana’s death.

And let’s not forget the 2017 interview with Newsweek in which Prince Harry mused, “Is there any one of the royal family who wants to be king or queen? I don’t think so, but we will carry out our duties at the right time.” Not a glowing endorsement of the enterprise.

Has anyone in the royal family ever done this?

Not exactly. The last couple to reject senior royal life was Edward VIII and Wallis Simpson, the original divorced American duchess for whom he relinquished the throne in 1936. But he was, you know, the actual head of state, so the decision prompted a full-blown constitutional crisis.

Other family members have also scaled back their public duties for a variety of reasons. Prince Philip retired from public life in 2017, at the perfectly reasonable-to-retire age of 96. After her divorce from Prince Charles, Princess Diana gave back her HRH title and quit her role with 93 charities. And this January, Prince Andrew stepped back from public duties after an interview with the BBC about his friendship with the convicted child sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

What does the British public think?

More Britons currently appear to have a view on Megxit than they did on the royal wedding itself.

At first, there were clear and loud rumblings of support. Then a few questions arose about cash, given that quite a lot of it had been thrown about in the last few years. The wedding. The house. The bodyguards.

What really roused Brits was the statement from the palace, which implied that couple had not fully discussed their retreat from royal life with the queen, whom we love. How dare they?

The tabloids, however, had a field day. “They didn’t even tell the Queen!” fumed the Thursday front page of the Daily Mirror. “Queen’s fury as Harry and Meghan say: we quit!” read the lead headline of the Daily Mail. (Other institutions got in on the drama, too: Madame Tussauds in London separated its wax figures of Harry and Meghan from those of the rest of the royal family.)

The term “Megxit” got a lot of airtime. “Harryverderci” has yet to catch on.

What was public sentiment toward the Sussexes like before “Megxit”?

Mixed? Very positive around the birth of baby Archie. Less positive around all the private jet hopping last summer. But most Brits haven’t been paying much attention. Between the recent general election, Australia being on fire and Brexit, the prospect of Megxit had not crossed many people’s minds.

Please tell me no one’s birthday was ruined because of this.

Harry and Meghan made their bombshell announcement on Jan. 8. Seeing as Jan. 9 is Kate Middleton’s birthday, and multiple members of the royal family were photographed arriving at Kensington Palace, for what multiple British websites described as a planned birthday celebration (in the middle of the day, on a Thursday), we cannot state with full confidence that no one’s birthday was ruined.

How many royals does one royal family really need?

Some say: not so many. Last year, the Swedish royal family streamlined its ranks; the king announced that five of his grandchildren would no longer bear titles or be expected to carry out royal duties. They would also no longer be paid the sum royal family members receive each year.

Being royal is expensive, and income inequality is a hot topic. The idea of trimming the royal fat, if you will, is to keep the focus on those in the direct line of succession and minimize the degree to which the family can be criticized for using public funds.

How much does the British royal family cost taxpayers?

Members of the British royal family are fond of sharing the following statistic: The contribution from U.K. taxpayers toward the full overhead of the British monarchy is equivalent to approximately £1 per British person per year.

For argument’s sake, one could note that the French royal family costs French taxpayers nothing, because it was abolished. One former royal palace became the Louvre.

Will Harry and Meghan keep their titles?

They have expressed no intentions to relinquish their titles. Their new website consistently refers to them as “Their Royal Highnesses The Duke and Duchess of Sussex.”

Where will they live?

According to their statement, Harry and Meghan will split their time “between the United Kingdom and North America.”

Earlier this week, the couple visited an official Canadian residence in London “to thank the High Commissioner Janice Charette and staff for the warm hospitality” they enjoyed on a private vacation over Christmas, according to their Instagram page. The caption of the post included multiple neutral statements about Canada seemingly intended as compliments: “The Duke and Duchess have a strong connection to Canada. It’s a country The Duke of Sussex has visited many times over the years and it was also home to The Duchess for seven years before she became a member of The Royal Family.”

For those reasons, and because it’s part of the British Commonwealth, Canada seems like a safe bet for a North American base. There is also speculation that the family could spend more time in Meghan’s home state of California, where her mother resides.

This story will be updated.

Sahred From Source link Fashion and Style

from WordPress http://bit.ly/2NrgaSP via IFTTT

#IFTTT #WordPress

0 notes

theconservativebrief · 6 years ago

Link

Prospect magazine’s Jonathan Lis has a piece titled, “36 things that will happen if Britain crashes out of Europe with no deal,” that I, an American who has been casually but not obsessively following Brexit, found extremely helpful.

Let’s back up a second: In 2016, the British people narrowly voted to exit the European Union. British Prime Minister Theresa May has proposed maintaining a free trade deal with the EU after leaving, but hardliners in her party like Boris Johnson and Jacob Rees-Mogg have strenuously objected, leaving it an open question whether she’ll remain in office or, if she does, if Britain will be able to leave the EU with any kind of deal to cushion the blow.

So what happens if May leaves without that kind of deal? That’s what Lis’s piece addresses. Here’s one of its extremely normal paragraphs:

4. Food will rot. We import about half of our food and feed, and 70 per cent of that comes from the EU. The bosses of Calais and Dover have warned of 30-mile tailbacks and possible infrastructural collapse. Experts have already warned that supermarkets will soon run out of supplies. (Hence the stockpiling.)

Stockpiling! A cursory look through the British press reveals that the entire nation of the United Kingdom is acting like a town on the eve of a massive blizzard. “Stockpiling is the talk of Britain!” the Economist proclaims, while raising doubts about whether people are actually piling up the food or just talking about it to be trendy. The Guardian asks readers, “What would you stockpile to prepare for no-deal Brexit?” and columnist Ian Jack observes, “As Brexit looms, stockpiling food seems the only sensible response.”

Dominic Raab, the new Brexit secretary, has explained that he doesn’t really think the government needs to do much (“It would be wrong to describe it as the government doing the stockpiling”), but the Guardian’s James Ball explains that the alternative, private-sector stockpiling, is all but impossible. The UK’s food sector is so tightly integrated with continental Europe that it relies on daily shipments of food, and UK food suppliers don’t have the inventory or warehouse space to store up reserves in anticipation of a hard Brexit.

In the event of a no-deal Brexit, food imported to the UK would be hit by big tariffs (about 22 percent on average) as well as non-tariff barriers on food which could reach as high as 29 percent.

But in the near-term, as Lis says, planes would stop flying: “Aviation is currently governed by the Single European Sky, European Aviation Safety Agency and aviation single market. You fall out of those, and pilots and planes lose their certification overnight.” EU agreements even govern UK/US air travel.

The end of a customs agreement with the EU means more inspections for ships coming in with food as well; British Retail Consortium leader Richard Pennycook, hardly a disinterested party but still, has said, “It is likely that we will see food rotting at ports.”

When it’s hard for any food to arrive in the first place, the UK will have to rely on the half of its food it produces domestically (and maybe some additional food it would ideally export but now cannot). That means shortages and massive price hikes, with the poorest Britons probably the worst off. “There have also been suggestions that the Ministry of Defence [sic, British] has been looking into how the armed forces could be deployed to carry out various civil functions, including using RAF jets to transport food supplies across the country,” The Guardian’s Pippa Crerar reports.

The country won’t literally starve. But hunger will increase. Poor people will skip more meals. (One in four Britons already say they do.) Middle-class families will see their standard of living fall as more of their budgets are eaten up by food costs; currently Britons spend 11 percent of their income on food (the poorest spend 16 percent), and that share is sure to increase after a hard Brexit. In the initial shock of leaving, without enough stockpiling, there could be shortages affecting people across the income spectrum.

This is the point in the story where it’s necessary to take a step back and acknowledge that this is madness. An extremely rich developed country is very close to deciding to voluntarily deprive itself of its food supply because 51.89 percent of voters in a referendum two years ago voted the wrong way.

And in spite of the fact that the country is having public discussions about the propriety of using the fucking air force to airdrop food to people, no one in power wants to stop this process! Both May and her main rival, the Labour Party’s Jeremy Corbyn, have decided to treat the referendum result as reflecting the will of the people and have rejected the idea of doing another vote, even though government officials are now questioning if the country will have enough food to feed itself and enough medicine to stock its hospitals.

I like to think of myself as a small-d democrat, but this is why responsible countries rely on representative institutions, not referenda. An 18th-century French viscount arguing for the preservation of absolute monarchy couldn’t have imagined a democratic straw-man sillier than, “51 percent of the public should be allowed to vote to destroy everyone’s food supplies if they feel like it.” (The viscount would instead think he should do the starving himself, because French nobility and what have you.)

The most bizarre thing about watching this from afar is the sense that it’s inevitable, that there’s no turning back. You can turn back! May could decide to hold a vote on just canceling the whole thing, and if a majority of parliament goes along with it, it would be over. Would it end her political career? Probably. Would a majority of parliament vote for it? Likely not — but again, that’s exactly what’s bizarre and upsetting about all this. It’s like watching a guy slowly demolishing all the houses on his block with a sledgehammer because he lost a Twitter poll, and all his neighbors are like, “Yep, that seems appropriate.”

Look, I’m an American. I know exactly who we elected president and what he’s up to, and I’m in no position to judge anyone. But I want to lay down a marker and say that it is entirely possible for rich countries to not purposefully destroy themselves. And that while RAF supplying food made total sense in 1940s Holland, Adolf Hitler is dead, the war is over, and Great Britain is perfectly capable of supplying adequate amounts of food to citizens. It should maybe do that.

Original Source -> Now that the UK is stockpiling food, maybe it’s time to admit Brexit is a mistake?

via The Conservative Brief

#IFTTT #The Conservative Brief

0 notes

nikkifinnie-blog · 7 years ago

Text

Hardcore punk band, War On Women release new album, Capture The Flag!

Taking their name from a phrase first coined by feminist writer Andrea Dworkin to describe certain Republican policies, US feminist hardcore band War On Women were formed in 2010 by Shawna Potter and Brooks Harlan, they released Improvised Weapons in 2012 and their debut album in 2015 on Bridge Nine Records. Their new album, Capture The Flag, has just been released to positive response with Pitchfork.com commenting ‘War On Women state the facts. They are self-righteous. They point fingers. Activism is prominently at the heart of their screeds against the systematic plagues of patriarchy, racism, and capitalism. The enemy is everywhere. War On Women prioritise taking it down (1)’. I was fortunate enough to witness War On Women live in the summer of 2016 and wrote at the time…’Shawna Potter’s experience in drama means the lyrics are delivered within an unusually full spectrum of communication as she commands your attention with her stage presence...To be honest I don’t think I’ve seen a better front person.’ That opinion still stands! With a new album out and an extremely tumultuous last 18 months in the USA and Europe it seemed a good move to catch up with Shawna (via email) and find out how things have been going for the band. It was summer 2016 when we last spoke, a lot has happened in under two years! Let's start with band changes! You, Brooks (Harlan) and Sue (Werner) are still there and have been joined by Jennifer Vito on guitar and Ben Jones on drums (2)-what sort of new resources have Jennifer and Ben brought to the WoW sound? Have they bought new styles and influences into the mix? Has the WoW sound changed from the first album at all? We're really happy to have Jennifer and Ben in the band, they're great players and great people, so it's made the transition easy for sure. Capture the Flag was already being written and recorded before they officially joined, so while this record is the next step/progression for the band, I'm also excited to see what our next album sounds like with them more involved. Three years on from your eponymous debut album you have released Capture The Flag, I would understand the title to imply a cultural struggle over who defines the USA and it's trajectory-is that fair? Definitely. Who gets to call themselves a patriot? Who has a right to this land? What does it mean to be American? I think these are things we need to think about and agree on if we're ever going to avoid another regime like our current one. On previous releases you have dealt with important issues from a feminist perspective; rape, toxic masculinity, the gender pay gap, the disappearance and deaths of women in Mexico, objectification, sexual harassment. What sort of subject matter have you engaged with on Capture The Flag? I never want to make the same record twice, and that includes subject matter, so I find that limitation can inspire some creativity - how do you talk about reproductive rights after writing ‘Roe V World’? I did it by taking a different angle, what happens if you do end up giving birth? The GOP only cares about your kid when you are the incubator, just another excuse to not give women full autonomy as human beings. Always putting someone else first. Did the Republican victory in the Presidential elections change your lyrical perspective at all? I think I mean did the structures of oppression come more clearly into view as systems reproducing themselves through the lives of individuals? It did affect me, but in the sense that I felt overwhelmed and exhausted. I've been working on these issues and singing about them non-stop for years, and yet here we were. And frankly looking at 45's face was making me feel sick. So while I took in as much as I could about current events, I think I wanted to avoid writing anything that was too topical, that would be dated by the time the record came out. So while I did end up writing a bit about Trump, the song "Predator in Chief" can be about any man in a powerful position that uses it to abuse others. Great cover by the way, I liked the intersectionality... is that Angela Davis depicted? No, I don't believe so. But I'm very grateful to our friend Ryan Patterson (Coliseum/Fotocrime/Shirtkiller) for doing the design. After getting the first pass I definitely said "Less white ladies!" It's important that the album cover reflects a nod to history, who has been fighting and who is now fighting to actually make this country great. I read that you have an educational resource/work book based around Capture The Flag's lyrics, can you tell us a bit more about that? Was it a response to how the first album was used (3)? Yes, there were a few tags on social media that mentioned teachers and professors using our lyrics in class. I thought, why not encourage that more by making it easy on them? So I worked with a few friends to come up with a pdf booklet that includes our lyrics, back stories, quotes, resources, and prompting questions for each song. Anyone can download it at the Bridge Nine Bandcamp page,https://bridge9.bandcamp.com/album/capture-the-flag. I read an article where you commented that you knew you were going into a sexist culture when you did the Vans Warped Tour last year-and that was exactly why you did it, to let some light in (4)! How did it go? Were you pleasantly surprised, did the other bands get on board? Yes, there were plenty of supportive bands that "got it," and I'm sure the ones that didn't just avoided us. There were no arguments backstage or anything. A volunteer we brought out with us to run the Safer Scenes program, Kira-Lynn Ferderber, taught a bystander intervention class off hours for any bands and staff that wanted to show up. Major shout out to all the bands that attended. Overall, the entire experience was good and I'm glad we did it. I make it a point to say every festival can do better, and frankly as audience members we have a lot of power too. If anyone out there cares about making the festival experience a welcoming and non-rapey one, then take a bystander intervention class! How did generally young, straight, white male crowds respond-were they able to grasp what was going on as you presented a feminist perspective, challenging sexism and taking apart their sense of entitlement!? Having seen you live I imagine they must have been terrified! Ha! I don't know about terrified... well, every now and again someone would tell me they were simultaneously afraid and turned on, which I actually really love. I am happy to confuse, if nothing else, and I know I am (or can be) a sexual subject on stage, never an object. But I think any men that really didn't care or get it would just watch something else, there is no reason in the circus that is Warped Tour to keep standing there if you're not into something. So for that reason, we might have avoided some run of the mill heckling. But there were plenty of men and boys who told us they were surprised to realise that they liked our band, and even "got it" after seeing us play live. I don't think even I'd be interested in watching a band of feminist killjoys if the music sucked, so we've got that going for us. Did you get much feedback from women and LGBTQI+ people-they must have been really encouraged!? Yes! All the young trans- and non-binary people, some out and some not out and/or still discovering themselves, they made a point to come say ‘Hi’ to us and talk with us and that was always really wonderful. For some, not only might Warped have been their first show ever, but then to have an overtly trans-supportive band they can watch and feel comfortable in the crowd with? That's a beautiful thing that I feel lucky we could share with them. On the Warped Tour you took a couple of people along to educate in preventing sexual harassment and in bystander intervention (3), did they have positive interactions? I only know what they told me, since I couldn't table all day or I'd lose my voice. They told me of mostly positive interactions, just teaching people basic bystander skills they could use that day at the festival if something came up, or back home the next time they were in a public space. There were some negative experiences, as in someone would come over and question the importance of what they were doing, but the positives far outweighed the negatives. OK, time to talk about the elephant in the room (lame political symbol joke)! The Republicans won the 2016 election which means the USA has Trump as President. Over here we had our version with Brexit. The Leave result seemed to emboldened some racists and xenophobes, what sort of cultural effect did the Trump win have in the USA? Has there been any experiential shift? Same, the bigots are emboldened for sure. But everyone else is a little more awake now, too, realised that they have to fight for what they believe in, it's not just a given anymore. So I have a ton of people approaching me for safer space workshops, who want to learn bystander intervention skills. It's a great way to take control of your own little corner of the world, when everything else seems too overwhelming to handle. Apart from college educated women, the majority in all categories of white voters seemed to have voted Trump including 62% of non college educated white women (5)! What did you feel that revealed about white American identity and white female self esteem that they voted for a man who had been caught boasting about sexual assault? Internalised sexism is a hell of a drug. I mean, people really think they can get ahead as an individual if they rally around the ones oppressing the group they belong to. You see it with sexism, racism, etc. People will tie their worth to the nearest white male, hoping some of that privilege and confidence and ease of moving through the world will rub off on them, and maybe it does for a time, but at what cost? And what happens when things inevitably go south? They will choose their own, these white men, they won't have the back of any women or men of colour when it comes down to it. In January, a year after Trump was inaugurated, there were still big protests in the USA for women's rights and against misogyny and racism (6), has Trump's presidency united feminists and created a lot of male allies-a 'If not me who, if not now when' moment? Yes, it has. We must keep moving toward a non-violent society, but we're on our way. Victims are being believed more and more, abusers are being taken down, and while keeping all that up the next step is actual accountability and rehabilitation for the ones who have caused harm. All while we avoid creating "untouchable, all-powerful men" by diversifying every meeting, company, board room, movie, etc etc. And has it led to alliances of resistance with other groupings of people? It seems like people get it, that marginalised groups of people, if we fought together, would greatly outnumber the supposed "majority." I feel it in the workshops I run, people know that they must stick up for each other, because who else will do it? You had Kathleen Hanna join you on vocals for the track 'YDTMHTL', did that have a sense of joining the dots, linking up with another artist whose music has also been about female empowerment and challenging gender stereotypes? For me, I just felt lucky enough to work with someone I have admired since Junior High. Really, it was surreal. I must confess, I was being selfish and thinking more about the joy of recording with her than what it might mean for others to hear us link up! What current bands should we be checking out? Krimewatch, Downtrodder, Gouge Away, HIRS, Sick Shit. What plans do WoW have for the rest of 2018? Any trips to Europe? Definitely some touring, and if we can't come to Europe this year then we'll see you next year! Big thanks to Shawna for time, thoughts and words. Photos courtesy of Bridge Nine Records. Bibliography. (1)Pelly, J. (2018), War On Women, ‘Capture The Flag’ https://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/war-on-women-capture-the-flag/ (2)’War On Women’, http://www.bridge9.com/waronwomen (3)Westcott, L. (2018), ‘Punk Icon Kathleen Hanne Has Something To Say About Being The ‘Right Kind’ of Feminist’ https://www.popsugar.com/news/Kathleen-Hanna-Interview-April-2018-War-Women-44715727 (4)Potter, S. (2017), ‘Let’s Not Mistake The Dickies’ Onstage Warped Tour Rant For Anything but Misyogeny’ https://noisey.vice.com/en_us/article/mbaa4q/war-on-women-on-the-dickies-warped-tour-rant (5)Henley, J. (2016)’White and wealthy voters gave victory to Donald Trump, exit polls show’ https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/nov/09/white-voters-victory-donald-trump-exit-polls (6)Buncombe, A. (2018) ‘Women’s march: Thousands protest against Donald Trump’s ‘racism’ and ‘misogyny’’ https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/womens-march-donald-trump-racism-sexism-washington-dc-protest-latest-a8170171.html Read the full article

#Bridge9 #feminism #punk #Rock #Waronwomen

0 notes

wheelswithinreels · 7 years ago

Video

youtube

‘The uncanny valley, at the end of the day, is the gap between seeing and believing.’ Bruce Carter, at the Animal Logic animation studio in Sydney.

We all hate politicians. But why? Isn't that weird? Throughout history, we haven't always hated our leaders. So why do our politicians, these days, seem so alien, so strange, so... uncanny?

...Maybe an obscure Japanese roboticist's theory holds the answer. A video essay. Part one of two!

Ah, politics. (Cue ~80% of my readers switching off in disgust.) Actually, since right now I don't have any readers, that's fine, you can't divide by zero. Unless you're Ted Chiang, in which case they'll probably seize your book with glee, hose you with money and make a movie about it.

...Anyway. Politics.

This one I wrestled with for a bit; not least because I'm not all that comfortable with writing a piece of genuinely venomous criticism. You'll notice as we go that I tend to review things I love, and that when I do criticise, it's with the intention of making something awesome even better. I just enjoy what I'm doing more that way.

And it's not just because I'm a spineless jellyfish (although I am, wibble) - it's because on the whole, there ain't no accounting for taste and one man's trash is another man's treasure, etcetera. (Incidentally, that last one - awful way to tell your kid he's adopted.) But, yes, to each his own, say I, and all the more for me - if I don't like something and you do, that's totally cool, you do your thing and I'll do mine. It's all just opinions in the end.

And to be honest, I reckon there's very little to be gained by hurling bags of shit at things/people/art you don't like, on the whole; yes, it might be funny, yes, it might feel cathartic, but if the target of your shit volley ever actually reads it, it's more likely to upset them quite badly than anything else. Which, well, probably outbalances those flickers of amusement and the momentary release you get from ripping seven shades of shit out of them.

I dunno. I don't mean to get on my high horse, and I look rubbish up there anyway, but... I'm with Michael Keaton in Birdman, on the whole, when he rails against hatchet jobs. 'You write a couple of paragraphs and you know what? None of this cost you fuckin' anything!' Art's hard. Compassion's easy. (Most of the time.) As someone's old Welsh grandmother is no doubt still muttering, 'if you can't say anything nice, SHUT THE FUCK UP, ARSEHOLE.'

...You'll see this come up a couple of times in upcoming videos, I reckon. Hey, it's an interesting subject. And I certainly haven't always practiced what I preach... I probably laughed harder and longer at das-sporking's savage Twilight recap than anything else in 2009. Still. (The infamous Charlie Brooker wrote an excellent and thought-provoking piece about exactly this in 2010, if you're interested...)

So, why break my own rule? Well, it comes down to this, I reckon.

Bad art doesn't hurt anybody. (Define 'bad', anyway.) From a formal literary perspective, my 13-year-old fanfiction might well have been an enormous steaming heap - but at the time, it helped me hone my craft immeasurably, put me in touch with a small but close-knit group of sweet, supportive readers who reviewed each other and built up each other's confidence, and helped me grow up.

Put it this way: if you'd left me a bad review at age 13, I can guarantee I wasn't mature enough to handle it. (Hey, people saying my shit stinks still hurts.) All you'd have accomplished would be to upset a kid, and probably drive them off the internet for a few months. It's hard to see how that's a net positive.

But while bad art, generally speaking, doesn't hurt anyone, bad politics does. More specifically, bad politicians do. In all sorts of ways - from dementia taxes, to food banks, to the more insidious problem of receding trust in our democracy - from Nick Clegg's continued insistence that he shouldn't have to apologise for betraying every student who voted for him (ahem), to Theresa May's cowardice concerning debates, to her apparent inability to answer any question, at all, like a human being.

And when we see shit like this going down, we should start getting annoyed. We should stand at the back and heckle. We should make our arguments heard. Otherwise more bad things will happen to more good people.

So the reason I've made an exception for Theresa May - and every other politician who's traded in their authenticity for a slicked-back PR guru - is that, well, she's a politician. More than that - she is, for now at least, the leader of my country. And yet she pulls stunts like these, in broad daylight...

Plymouth is feeling the effects of military cuts. Will she guarantee to protect the city from further pain? "I'm very clear that Plymouth has a proud record of connection with the armed forces."

How will your Brexit plan make Plymouth better off? "I think there is a better future ahead for Plymouth and for the whole of the UK."

Will you promise to sort out our transport links? "I'm very clear that connectivity is hugely important for Plymouth and the South West generally."

- Sam Blackledge, The Plymouth Herald

I go on about this kind of shit at quite some length in the video, so I won't repeat myself too much, but... seriously? Is this how stupid you think we are? Whichever parasitical sycophant convinced Theresa May that the electorate will swallow this kind of gubbins needs Domestos-ing, stat. The Great British public rather dislike being patronised. As they recently proved.

...So, even though I felt uncomfortable titling the video 'Why You Hate Theresa May,' and I still feel uncomfortable having a video on my channel with a title like that, I think it's justified. Hey, put it this way: if I was a politician who was honestly trying to do some good for my country, and a video popped up titled 'Why People Fucking Hate You', I'd be upset, sure - but I'd want to watch it. Just to see whether they actually had a point. Just in case I'd fucked something up badly. I'd want to see.

The video isn't really about hate. I don't want people to hate their prime minister, and if she ever changes, you bet I'll make a video expressing my delight and appreciation. I just wish she'd understand why, right now, they're justified in doing so.

Anyway, this video was 90% finished a month or so ago, in fact; then I sort of moved countries, and forgot about it, until the UK election campaign brought it squarely back into focus. (That's why poor old Ed Miliband comes in for the brunt of the bollocking in this first part; Theresa May hadn't really got going with 'strong-and-stable' yet.) But I was seized with a sudden urge to dig it out and finish it because, well, it seemed so relevant to why she'd lost.

...Also, I'm still a baby channel and, well, I'm as keen to capitalise on current events as the next guy. So, sheer good luck and timing that I had a video almost done.

And now for something completely different: I just wanted to address the fact that most/all of you probably saw this video pop up first as an ad. Yep, a paid one. Via Google AdWords. I'm officially a heartless, soulless business.

Or not, since I'm also broke as shit, and my AdWords campaign is presently set to run for TWO WHOLE DAYS at a cost of roundabout £15. Yeah. I do slightly sadden myself sometimes.

I did have some severe doubts about advertising on YouTube... for one thing, everyone hates adverts. How dare I waste people's time? Well, here's how I justified it to myself:

Like I said, baby channel. Tiny. Insignificant. When 300 hours are uploaded to YouTube every minute, frankly, I'm screwed if I can't get the word out somehow. At least at the start.

You can skip my ads, 'cos I'm way too poor for the mandatory 30-second ones, har har. (Also, I'd never make an ad unskippable. Fuck that shit.)

I can count the number of ads I've actually enjoyed and/or watched to the end on one hand, but... there have been a few of them. Some showing me videos I might never otherwise have seen. If my crappy little ad campaign nets me one person who genuinely enjoys my stuff, and watches it, and thinks it improved their day, well... it'll be money well spent.

<sanctimonious-soapboxery>When you think about it, it's actually my money that's helping out those poor creators who do rely on monetisation, so good for them, I say. Poor sods.</sanctimonious-soapboxery>

Having said all that... I'd rather you watched the AVPM video, frankly. It's way more representative of what this channel's going to be about. But hey, this is something I felt strongly enough about to pour hours of research (read: watching politicians lie on YouTube) into. If that's not enough to make you pity me, well... may God have mercy on your twisted little walnut of a soul.

And on that note...

#politics #uk politics #theresa may #election #video essay #uncanny valley #spineless jellyfish

0 notes