I'm learning a new skill! I've wanted to learn how do do practical stuff like knitting and crochet for a while now, but until recently I never had time to have a go.
While I'm job-hunting ("hah!" in the voice of Edna Krabappel) I've got time to learn new skills. I've never been terribly practical - I find learning hands-on skills takes me a long time. I tried a creative garment construction course some years back and was incredibly envious of the ladies who produced skirts and blouses seemingly effortlessly. I could design stuff ok, but making garments up was a different story. By the end of the course I still hadn't finished my first garment. Anyway, my mum can knit. My mum-in-law can knit and crochet. I wanted to be able to make stuff myself.
My beloved is teaching me how to do crochet. He's way better than me at anything practical. I did find a strange thing when I had a go - I can't get the hang of manipulating hook and thread left-handed. I am thoroughly lefty in everything but this it seems. Manipulating hook and thread right-handed was so much easier, but I can't do anything else right-handed without the most enormous difficulty.
So far, I can do single chains and I did a circle. I want to be able to make "granny squares" that you can stitch together into blankets/cushion covers etc, I want to make hats, scarves and flowers to decorate things with. Most of all, though, I want to make jumpers like Mrs Weasley's. I don't even know for sure if it's knitted in a lace stitch or crocheted. I'm planning on learning to knit at some point as well, just in case!
It's a hobby that you can take anywhere - on the bus, while waiting for your appointment at the doctor's, in boring meetings, while on set waiting to be called, halfway up a mountain (you never know when you might need an extra scarf!). And best of all, you're making something real and tangible that you can keep, or give away. Is there anything more gratifying than giving an unflattering sweater to an obnoxious and insolent teenage relative?
It's just so good to have useful skills and not be dependent on stores for everything. As I've said before, I'm not happy about the conditions so many people live and work in to produce cheap clothes etc that are imported for us to buy in our high street stores and supermarkets. I might not be able to make a huge difference, but I'll do what I can in protest.
Making your own things used to be a matter of pride. According to Alan Titchmarsh's autobiography, when he was young the only one of his family to ever have a bought coat was his dad. His mum made coats for the rest of the family. All those skills fell out of fashion and have been lost. Knitting and crochet have been in and out of fashion regularly so those skills are still there, but who could make their own coats these days? Stores have people over a barrel (suppliers as well as customers) because so many skills have been lost. Learning a craft and making your own is an act of rebellion. It's declaring independence, if only partially, from the Walmart empire.
Friday 18 January 2008
Friday 11 January 2008
What we need is Slack!!!
Who really likes their job?
I read two friend update things when I signed into MySpace today.
One said she "isn't sure why she's at work today" the other said "is at work" and mood was "sad"
It made me wonder how many of us really like our jobs and can get up full of beans and motivation even on a freezing cold January morning and not think "Oh crap, is it only Wednesday? I don't wanna get up. I don't wanna go to work"? I really hated my last job. Even on a lovely sunny spring morning it was still a chore to get up, get dressed in "work-acceptable" clothing and drive three quarters of an hour to work. I hated being there. I hated having to smile and be nice with the customers even when they were rude, surly, obnoxious, inconsiderate and abusive to me. I hated the long hours and the lack of holidays. We in the UK get the least amount of leisure in Europe (whatever happened to the three extra bank holidays we were promised by our elected representatives?). We're also the most spied-upon population in Europe - on a par with the USA and the old Soviet Republic. (How's that for losing the thread?)
On the subject of work and free time, I've just read a fascinating article by Rob Black on the Abolition of Work. He believes human beings in today's work-oriented society are little better than slaves and what we need to be fulfilled as individuals is play. The concept of "leisure" is insufficient - a paltry amount of time off to recover from work, to get ready for work, to travel to and from work, worry about work and try to forget about work. He reckons that a truly civilised and enlightened society should be aiming for full unemployment. This would allow each individual the freedom to explore their creativity and true talents: to do what they enjoy - but not all the time to the exclusion of all else which is what happens to the most fortunate of us at the moment. Everyone would be able to realise their True Will. Go look at his essay here http://www.whywork.org/rethinking/whywork/abolition.html it's really interesting!
I've been reading bits of my other half's e-books about work and the consumer society and wonder, how the hell did we get so screwed up. What happened to us to make us think we have to work in some boring unfulfilling job to make money so we can buy stuff? When did having stuff become the number one life goal instead of being happy and fulfilled?
If having stuff really made us happy and fulfilled why are so many rich buggers so unhappy? Why are shopaholics so miserable? There are plenty of preachers out there who reckon it's because we're not religious enough and it's all the fault of single mothers, delinquent kids from broken homes, sex and violence on TV and people not going to Church/Mosque/Temple enough.
Spirituality is one part of the picture for sure, but not the only thing. There are folks aplenty I'm sure who do go to Church and who have lots of stuff who are still deeply unhappy with their lives.
According to a review of John Bowe's book "Nobodies: Modern American Slave Labour and the Dark Side of the Global Economy" in the Texas Observer, (by all means check it out for yourself here http://www.texasobserver.org/article.php?aid=2654. It makes for disturbing reading and is a much needed wake-up call to all us overfed wage-slaves in the West) our consumer culture is ruining the lives of millions of people, particularly illegal immigrants and workers in poorer countries who work for little money in appalling conditions to provide the "stuff" that we're told we should have to be happy and fulfilled.
What we need is responsibility not what Bowe calls "plausible deniability." Instead of being apathetic (a don't know, don't care - it's not my problem attitude) about where our "stuff" comes from and how it's produced, we need to think about it and ask ourselves "Am I ok with this?" If you're concerned, instead of sitting back and thinking "well, I'm just one person, what can I do?" try networking - there are plenty of people who are thinking exactly the same. Find ethical producers or at least stop using the unethical ones (Walmart are one of the worst offenders), write to your elected representatives. The more people who make a stand and say they're not prepared to be responsible for the suffering of others, the more notice they'll have to take.
Think about downsizing - think about what "stuff" you really need and what you'd like to do if you weren't working a 70 hour week in a job you really don't like to have "stuff"
It's not easy. It won't be quick. Hell, I'm just as guilty as everyone else of ignoring the problem and shopping where it's most convenient instead of where it's most ethical.
But if society changed and ethical consumption became easy and convenient, we'd all be doing it. And that is part of the problem. The big corporations would be screwed if everyone went ethical. It would lead to massive haemorrhaging of profits, the economy would go into free-fall, millions would lose their jobs, there would be a complete breakdown of society.
Is that necessarily a bad thing, though? What is the purpose of society? Whom does it serve? Lets see. It provides systems and structures to organise communities and regulate people and their activities. It serves the big corporations whose profits come from rampant careless consumerism. It creates boxes to put people in and systems to keep them in their allotted places - selling dreams to keep people desirous of more and more stuff. Creating benefits and overpayment repayment systems to ensure that no matter how much your pay goes up, you are never actually any better off. You have to be an exceptional person to overleap your level in the social strata - and there are always famous faces - entrepreneurs who "made it big" with one brilliant idea for a new innovation. Lotteries, talent shows and the "celebrities" who achieved it to keep people dreaming that it could happen. Orwell's dystopian vision "1984" had lotteries in which the big prizes were never won by real people, but there were always plenty of small prizes so everyone knew someone who'd won a bit. Just like in real life - who knows anyone who's ever won more than a couple of hundred, two or three thousand tops?
Would it really be such a bad thing if something so limiting, uncaring and unjust as today's society got broken so bad we had to start over? A whole new society like Rob Black describes: a ludic culture. Maybe not to such extremes - after all, someone's got to keep the trains running - but a society that respects everyone's right to be themselves and allows us time to be ourselves just as hard as we can be.
How to get there from here?
Love and slack,
Lily the Pink
I read two friend update things when I signed into MySpace today.
One said she "isn't sure why she's at work today" the other said "is at work" and mood was "sad"
It made me wonder how many of us really like our jobs and can get up full of beans and motivation even on a freezing cold January morning and not think "Oh crap, is it only Wednesday? I don't wanna get up. I don't wanna go to work"? I really hated my last job. Even on a lovely sunny spring morning it was still a chore to get up, get dressed in "work-acceptable" clothing and drive three quarters of an hour to work. I hated being there. I hated having to smile and be nice with the customers even when they were rude, surly, obnoxious, inconsiderate and abusive to me. I hated the long hours and the lack of holidays. We in the UK get the least amount of leisure in Europe (whatever happened to the three extra bank holidays we were promised by our elected representatives?). We're also the most spied-upon population in Europe - on a par with the USA and the old Soviet Republic. (How's that for losing the thread?)
On the subject of work and free time, I've just read a fascinating article by Rob Black on the Abolition of Work. He believes human beings in today's work-oriented society are little better than slaves and what we need to be fulfilled as individuals is play. The concept of "leisure" is insufficient - a paltry amount of time off to recover from work, to get ready for work, to travel to and from work, worry about work and try to forget about work. He reckons that a truly civilised and enlightened society should be aiming for full unemployment. This would allow each individual the freedom to explore their creativity and true talents: to do what they enjoy - but not all the time to the exclusion of all else which is what happens to the most fortunate of us at the moment. Everyone would be able to realise their True Will. Go look at his essay here http://www.whywork.org/rethinking/whywork/abolition.html it's really interesting!
I've been reading bits of my other half's e-books about work and the consumer society and wonder, how the hell did we get so screwed up. What happened to us to make us think we have to work in some boring unfulfilling job to make money so we can buy stuff? When did having stuff become the number one life goal instead of being happy and fulfilled?
If having stuff really made us happy and fulfilled why are so many rich buggers so unhappy? Why are shopaholics so miserable? There are plenty of preachers out there who reckon it's because we're not religious enough and it's all the fault of single mothers, delinquent kids from broken homes, sex and violence on TV and people not going to Church/Mosque/Temple enough.
Spirituality is one part of the picture for sure, but not the only thing. There are folks aplenty I'm sure who do go to Church and who have lots of stuff who are still deeply unhappy with their lives.
According to a review of John Bowe's book "Nobodies: Modern American Slave Labour and the Dark Side of the Global Economy" in the Texas Observer, (by all means check it out for yourself here http://www.texasobserver.org/article.php?aid=2654. It makes for disturbing reading and is a much needed wake-up call to all us overfed wage-slaves in the West) our consumer culture is ruining the lives of millions of people, particularly illegal immigrants and workers in poorer countries who work for little money in appalling conditions to provide the "stuff" that we're told we should have to be happy and fulfilled.
What we need is responsibility not what Bowe calls "plausible deniability." Instead of being apathetic (a don't know, don't care - it's not my problem attitude) about where our "stuff" comes from and how it's produced, we need to think about it and ask ourselves "Am I ok with this?" If you're concerned, instead of sitting back and thinking "well, I'm just one person, what can I do?" try networking - there are plenty of people who are thinking exactly the same. Find ethical producers or at least stop using the unethical ones (Walmart are one of the worst offenders), write to your elected representatives. The more people who make a stand and say they're not prepared to be responsible for the suffering of others, the more notice they'll have to take.
Think about downsizing - think about what "stuff" you really need and what you'd like to do if you weren't working a 70 hour week in a job you really don't like to have "stuff"
It's not easy. It won't be quick. Hell, I'm just as guilty as everyone else of ignoring the problem and shopping where it's most convenient instead of where it's most ethical.
But if society changed and ethical consumption became easy and convenient, we'd all be doing it. And that is part of the problem. The big corporations would be screwed if everyone went ethical. It would lead to massive haemorrhaging of profits, the economy would go into free-fall, millions would lose their jobs, there would be a complete breakdown of society.
Is that necessarily a bad thing, though? What is the purpose of society? Whom does it serve? Lets see. It provides systems and structures to organise communities and regulate people and their activities. It serves the big corporations whose profits come from rampant careless consumerism. It creates boxes to put people in and systems to keep them in their allotted places - selling dreams to keep people desirous of more and more stuff. Creating benefits and overpayment repayment systems to ensure that no matter how much your pay goes up, you are never actually any better off. You have to be an exceptional person to overleap your level in the social strata - and there are always famous faces - entrepreneurs who "made it big" with one brilliant idea for a new innovation. Lotteries, talent shows and the "celebrities" who achieved it to keep people dreaming that it could happen. Orwell's dystopian vision "1984" had lotteries in which the big prizes were never won by real people, but there were always plenty of small prizes so everyone knew someone who'd won a bit. Just like in real life - who knows anyone who's ever won more than a couple of hundred, two or three thousand tops?
Would it really be such a bad thing if something so limiting, uncaring and unjust as today's society got broken so bad we had to start over? A whole new society like Rob Black describes: a ludic culture. Maybe not to such extremes - after all, someone's got to keep the trains running - but a society that respects everyone's right to be themselves and allows us time to be ourselves just as hard as we can be.
How to get there from here?
Love and slack,
Lily the Pink
Wednesday 9 January 2008
I'm a Reject!!!
I logged onto Yahoo earlier to check out my messages after I'd uploaded some pics onto Flickr and the first thing in my inbox was a message from Google Adsense telling me that they were "unable to accept me into Google Adsense at this time"
The reason given is because of "adult content" - This, apparently constitutes - and I quote:
"text or images that contain sexual, lewd or provocative content, and sites that require users to be at least 18, or that may not be safe for work."
I believe the rejection was probably caused by the top-free equality post, which was the most recent at the time I submitted my application to host Google Adsense on my blog. That's the most lewd or provocative thing that I've posted so far, with the lovely cute little Cretan Snake Goddess cartoon.
Now, what was it I was saying about nudity = sex?
Point proven, I believe!
The reason given is because of "adult content" - This, apparently constitutes - and I quote:
"text or images that contain sexual, lewd or provocative content, and sites that require users to be at least 18, or that may not be safe for work."
I believe the rejection was probably caused by the top-free equality post, which was the most recent at the time I submitted my application to host Google Adsense on my blog. That's the most lewd or provocative thing that I've posted so far, with the lovely cute little Cretan Snake Goddess cartoon.
Now, what was it I was saying about nudity = sex?
Point proven, I believe!
Saturday 5 January 2008
A Happy Half Hour - Creativity and Inspiration
If anyone's expecting a politcal rant or intelligent discussion after my last post - Ha!
No, I just wanted to talk about a really fun half hour or so I had the other morning before the kids were up.
I'd set up my blog (yes, this one) the day before but couldn't find a picture I liked, so I got up early to have a look for arty and interesting things on Google Image Search. I wanted something that would represent
a) my habit of wandering away into off-topic areas when in the middle of a sensible discussion
b) a devotion to one of my favourite Goddesses - Ariadne the Bold and the Beautiful who dumped/got dumped by Theseus on Naxos (the stories are a bit vague on what exactly happened between them there) and ended up becoming the consort of Dionysos (who I also rather like). I am working on an article/story but I want to get it straight in my head first before I go publishing anything.
I tried different keywords and looked through page after page but couldn't find a picture I liked. I searched under thread, wool, twine, Ariadne, labyrinth, skein, yarn but nothing jumped out and said "this the one!"
Then I got some Divine inspiration. Heck, why mess about trying to find a picture someone else created and then worry about getting sued for copyright violation when I can make it at home for free. All I need is my camera, a ball of string, a black sheet for a backdrop, some simple image manipulation software - oh and a small aubergine (kidding).
I had a brilliant time messing about with different lighting, angles, depth of field etc and then playing with my favourite images on the pooter changing hues, contrast, and brightness till I'd got some images I really liked. You can see the rest of the ones I was most pleased with on Flickr (just follow the link to my photos). The one I liked best of all (well, duh!) is the one at the top of this page.
I really enjoyed the creative process and all the work that went into it.
It's amazing what you can do with half an hour to yourself to concentrate, and a bit of inspiration - thanks!
No, I just wanted to talk about a really fun half hour or so I had the other morning before the kids were up.
I'd set up my blog (yes, this one) the day before but couldn't find a picture I liked, so I got up early to have a look for arty and interesting things on Google Image Search. I wanted something that would represent
a) my habit of wandering away into off-topic areas when in the middle of a sensible discussion
b) a devotion to one of my favourite Goddesses - Ariadne the Bold and the Beautiful who dumped/got dumped by Theseus on Naxos (the stories are a bit vague on what exactly happened between them there) and ended up becoming the consort of Dionysos (who I also rather like). I am working on an article/story but I want to get it straight in my head first before I go publishing anything.
I tried different keywords and looked through page after page but couldn't find a picture I liked. I searched under thread, wool, twine, Ariadne, labyrinth, skein, yarn but nothing jumped out and said "this the one!"
Then I got some Divine inspiration. Heck, why mess about trying to find a picture someone else created and then worry about getting sued for copyright violation when I can make it at home for free. All I need is my camera, a ball of string, a black sheet for a backdrop, some simple image manipulation software - oh and a small aubergine (kidding).
I had a brilliant time messing about with different lighting, angles, depth of field etc and then playing with my favourite images on the pooter changing hues, contrast, and brightness till I'd got some images I really liked. You can see the rest of the ones I was most pleased with on Flickr (just follow the link to my photos). The one I liked best of all (well, duh!) is the one at the top of this page.
I really enjoyed the creative process and all the work that went into it.
It's amazing what you can do with half an hour to yourself to concentrate, and a bit of inspiration - thanks!
Thursday 3 January 2008
Topfree Equality
I'd like to quote an article published on one of my favourite websites which sums up a lot of what I believe more eloquently than I can express at present. Feel free to check out the rest of the site at your leisure - just click on the Top Free Equal Rights link under Sites Worth Seeing. The original article is by Sanna Ferm and Frida Hellroth of the Bara Bröst Nätverket (the translation given by TERA is "Merely Breasts Network". I'm afraid my Swedish is too rusty to tell if that's accurate) and was written in protest at women not being permitted to swim topfree in public pools in Sweden.
"If the Equal Opportunity Ombudsperson had declined a case about a woman not being employed because of "prevailing norms" that say women get more parental leave, should that be accepted? Until the 1970s it was legal for men to rape their wives, quite in accord with "prevailing norms." Merely because discrimination has always existed is no reason not to fight against it!
Women's breasts are more sexualized than men's in today's society. The reason for swimming topfree is to desexualize and demystify women's breasts. At public swimming pools there is no reason for breasts to be sexualized, even if there are other circumstances where they may well be.
We are far from that situation today. Now breasts are considered only in sexual contexts whereas they are forbidden in all other contexts. Why is it okay to have bare breasts on the front pages of men's magazines but not in a swimming pool?
It isn't valid to claim that this is about women's breasts being bigger than men's. That varies with the individual, and there are many men who have significantly larger breasts than many women. Nor may it be claimed that women's breasts are more sensitive than men's, because that too is an individual matter.
Others claim that bare women's breasts in a swimming pool would increase sexual crimes. So it's claimed both that men can't control their sexuality and that women must cover up and take responsibility for men's supposed hypersexuality. These arguments are frightening and recall the claim that women in "provocative" clothing must blame themselves if they are assaulted.
No, that is simply not a sensible explanation why men and women should be treated differently. There are discriminatory norms that prevail in society. These norms for how men and women must look and act are problematic for both men and women."
The sexualisation of the female body, especially the breasts, is something I find disturbing. Mainly because what we're talking about here is the objectification of the female body, which goes back to some very outdated ideas about women. It's regarding us not as people but as property and no matter how far we think we've come if we can't have equal treatment in terms of what we can and can't choose to display of our own selves, we're still not being treated fully as people. Why shouldn't I go topless when it's hot in summer (covered in sunblock, though) if I want to without it being considered a sexual invitation? Why shouldn't anyone be able to go top-free if they choose? Why are we so uptight about nudity?
Let me tell you a story. Last summer there was a worldwide cycling event, with participants in major cities all over the world. The aim of the event was to protest against the oil-driven ecomony and society's dependence on the car - and to highlight the vulnerability of cyclists on busy roads. The event I'm talking about is the World Naked Bike Ride. A fun event which my beloved took part in. I couldn't join in last year due to the lack of a bike and well, someone's got to mind the kids. (Incidentally, as far as I know, the only city where the cyclists were told to cover up because of people complaining was Paris!) I told my friends at college about it and they were horrified.
"They were naked?" Yes
"At tea time?" Yes
"In the centre of Manchester?" Yes
"Where anyone could see them?" Yes
"What? They should be arrested! That's indecent exposure! Me and my kids were in Manchester that day, we shouldn't have to see stuff like that! You let your husband do that? Is he some kind of pervert?"
Woah, slow down here. The instant assumption was that there was some kind of sexual gratification going on, that "naked" equals "sex". And, despite the fact that they could have been exposed to unsolicited nudity, they didn't see any naked cyclists and had no idea the event was even taking place until I told them. I was surprised at their response, but I shouldn't have been. They're devout Muslims and were brought up in an extremely repressive culture. They had obviously never considered that many people just don't like wearing clothes, or that nudity can be used to make a political statement, or simply to promote equality. Everyone's equal without clothing - no labels, no brands, nothing to mark which social strata you belong to. The trouble is, that the majority of people seem to think that nudity always equals sex.
There are complaints about women who breastfeed in public. Why? That's what the things are for after all. My boobs belong to me, not my boyfriend: they're not intended to be sex-toys. Why is it ok to show women's boobs on the front pages of mens magazines on the top shelves in a newsagents, but not in the flesh in the shopping centre that the newsagent's shop is in? Why should it be ok to have top-free sculptures in parks and public spaces if it's not ok to walk round top free in our parks and public spaces.
There were plenty of complaints in the papers last year about men going top free on hot days - mainly complaining about saggy beer-bellies and man-boobs or men with pasty white skin and ribs showing thorough. Fair enough, but not everyone is built to the standards of a Bernini sculpture. Human beings come in a wide variety of shapes, sizes and shades. Not everyone finds the same things aesthetically pleasing anyway. If it's ok for a good-looking bloke to go top-free, it should be ok for any man. And if it's ok for any man, it should be ok for everyone. Either it should be ok for everyone or not ok for anyone. Lets have some consistency here.
Sadly, I think the spoilsports in charge want to make it not ok for anyone to reveal flesh. At the risk of offending people, I'd have to say NO! to the the folks who'd have us all wearing burkhas to avoid giving offence by showing unnecessary flesh. Breasts have only become sexualised because it's been a cultural imperative for so damn long to keep them hidden. Lets desexualise the body by showing it off! We're all made in God's image according to the Bible (if you believe in it) - so what's so dreadful about his handiwork that we've got to keep it covered?
Who's for going Cretan?
(Image posted with kind permission of Robin Ator - r8r's photos on flickr http://www.flickr.com/photos/r8r/75384073/). If you like this, please check out his other pics. His artwork is amazing)
Nude people smile more - spread some happiness!
"If the Equal Opportunity Ombudsperson had declined a case about a woman not being employed because of "prevailing norms" that say women get more parental leave, should that be accepted? Until the 1970s it was legal for men to rape their wives, quite in accord with "prevailing norms." Merely because discrimination has always existed is no reason not to fight against it!
Women's breasts are more sexualized than men's in today's society. The reason for swimming topfree is to desexualize and demystify women's breasts. At public swimming pools there is no reason for breasts to be sexualized, even if there are other circumstances where they may well be.
We are far from that situation today. Now breasts are considered only in sexual contexts whereas they are forbidden in all other contexts. Why is it okay to have bare breasts on the front pages of men's magazines but not in a swimming pool?
It isn't valid to claim that this is about women's breasts being bigger than men's. That varies with the individual, and there are many men who have significantly larger breasts than many women. Nor may it be claimed that women's breasts are more sensitive than men's, because that too is an individual matter.
Others claim that bare women's breasts in a swimming pool would increase sexual crimes. So it's claimed both that men can't control their sexuality and that women must cover up and take responsibility for men's supposed hypersexuality. These arguments are frightening and recall the claim that women in "provocative" clothing must blame themselves if they are assaulted.
No, that is simply not a sensible explanation why men and women should be treated differently. There are discriminatory norms that prevail in society. These norms for how men and women must look and act are problematic for both men and women."
The sexualisation of the female body, especially the breasts, is something I find disturbing. Mainly because what we're talking about here is the objectification of the female body, which goes back to some very outdated ideas about women. It's regarding us not as people but as property and no matter how far we think we've come if we can't have equal treatment in terms of what we can and can't choose to display of our own selves, we're still not being treated fully as people. Why shouldn't I go topless when it's hot in summer (covered in sunblock, though) if I want to without it being considered a sexual invitation? Why shouldn't anyone be able to go top-free if they choose? Why are we so uptight about nudity?
Let me tell you a story. Last summer there was a worldwide cycling event, with participants in major cities all over the world. The aim of the event was to protest against the oil-driven ecomony and society's dependence on the car - and to highlight the vulnerability of cyclists on busy roads. The event I'm talking about is the World Naked Bike Ride. A fun event which my beloved took part in. I couldn't join in last year due to the lack of a bike and well, someone's got to mind the kids. (Incidentally, as far as I know, the only city where the cyclists were told to cover up because of people complaining was Paris!) I told my friends at college about it and they were horrified.
"They were naked?" Yes
"At tea time?" Yes
"In the centre of Manchester?" Yes
"Where anyone could see them?" Yes
"What? They should be arrested! That's indecent exposure! Me and my kids were in Manchester that day, we shouldn't have to see stuff like that! You let your husband do that? Is he some kind of pervert?"
Woah, slow down here. The instant assumption was that there was some kind of sexual gratification going on, that "naked" equals "sex". And, despite the fact that they could have been exposed to unsolicited nudity, they didn't see any naked cyclists and had no idea the event was even taking place until I told them. I was surprised at their response, but I shouldn't have been. They're devout Muslims and were brought up in an extremely repressive culture. They had obviously never considered that many people just don't like wearing clothes, or that nudity can be used to make a political statement, or simply to promote equality. Everyone's equal without clothing - no labels, no brands, nothing to mark which social strata you belong to. The trouble is, that the majority of people seem to think that nudity always equals sex.
There are complaints about women who breastfeed in public. Why? That's what the things are for after all. My boobs belong to me, not my boyfriend: they're not intended to be sex-toys. Why is it ok to show women's boobs on the front pages of mens magazines on the top shelves in a newsagents, but not in the flesh in the shopping centre that the newsagent's shop is in? Why should it be ok to have top-free sculptures in parks and public spaces if it's not ok to walk round top free in our parks and public spaces.
There were plenty of complaints in the papers last year about men going top free on hot days - mainly complaining about saggy beer-bellies and man-boobs or men with pasty white skin and ribs showing thorough. Fair enough, but not everyone is built to the standards of a Bernini sculpture. Human beings come in a wide variety of shapes, sizes and shades. Not everyone finds the same things aesthetically pleasing anyway. If it's ok for a good-looking bloke to go top-free, it should be ok for any man. And if it's ok for any man, it should be ok for everyone. Either it should be ok for everyone or not ok for anyone. Lets have some consistency here.
Sadly, I think the spoilsports in charge want to make it not ok for anyone to reveal flesh. At the risk of offending people, I'd have to say NO! to the the folks who'd have us all wearing burkhas to avoid giving offence by showing unnecessary flesh. Breasts have only become sexualised because it's been a cultural imperative for so damn long to keep them hidden. Lets desexualise the body by showing it off! We're all made in God's image according to the Bible (if you believe in it) - so what's so dreadful about his handiwork that we've got to keep it covered?
Who's for going Cretan?
(Image posted with kind permission of Robin Ator - r8r's photos on flickr http://www.flickr.com/photos/r8r/75384073/). If you like this, please check out his other pics. His artwork is amazing)Nude people smile more - spread some happiness!
Wednesday 2 January 2008
Well (slightly breathless trill) Isn't this nice?
Hello, Welcome to my blog.
I'm not sure yet how public or otherwise this is going to be. Or how intellectual or otherwise.
I don't have anything in particular I want to ramble on about just now (good job as I've only got ten minutes till I've got to go do something less interesting instead). However, I figured if I waited till I had something pressing to say, by the time I'd got my blog set up with pretty pictures and the right fonts and some links to cool things, I'd have forgotten most of what was on my mind.
I'll mostly be talking about Pagan things, stuff that's happened, weird little synchronicitous things, random musings and whatever I'm inspired to write about at the time.
For those who don't know me, I'm a Pagan, I have a family, I'm trying to earn enough money to keep my family going without sacrificing my true self by doing something unfulfilling just because it offers security and regular pay. I'm exploring my interests in Heathen Paganism and in a couple of Classical deities who've tapped me on the metaphysical shoulder just recently. More on all this later, but right now I'm signing off.
May your God(ess) go with you
Love,
Lily
I'm not sure yet how public or otherwise this is going to be. Or how intellectual or otherwise.
I don't have anything in particular I want to ramble on about just now (good job as I've only got ten minutes till I've got to go do something less interesting instead). However, I figured if I waited till I had something pressing to say, by the time I'd got my blog set up with pretty pictures and the right fonts and some links to cool things, I'd have forgotten most of what was on my mind.
I'll mostly be talking about Pagan things, stuff that's happened, weird little synchronicitous things, random musings and whatever I'm inspired to write about at the time.
For those who don't know me, I'm a Pagan, I have a family, I'm trying to earn enough money to keep my family going without sacrificing my true self by doing something unfulfilling just because it offers security and regular pay. I'm exploring my interests in Heathen Paganism and in a couple of Classical deities who've tapped me on the metaphysical shoulder just recently. More on all this later, but right now I'm signing off.
May your God(ess) go with you
Love,
Lily
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
