Same sex, Same rights.

August 1 is a National Day of Action for Same-Sex Marriage.

You can make submissions on why rights in regards to same-sex marriage are important to you (Or not, if you're opposed, I guess) to the Senate Inquiry into the Marriage Equality Amendment Bill 2009. A link to Equal Love's Online Submission form is here.

And here is my submission:

"I write to express my support for the Marriage Equality Amendment Bill 2009.

The definition and tradition of marriage in Australia and most of the Western world has changed in the last century. 58 percent of Australians now believe that it is time for change. It is time to remove the discrimination in the Marriages Act 1961.

Law has always kept pace with the morals and attitudes of society. A majority of Australians no longer believe that discrimination
should exist within the Marriage Act 1961, and that everyone, regardless of sexuality and gender identity should be afforded the same rights to have their marriage and relationships acknowledged by the Commonwealth.

In most areas of law, same-sex relationships are afforded the same rights and responsibilities as a heterosexual relationship.
Centrelink - a Government department - now recognises (and penalises) couples of the same-sex.

When even government departments have kept pace with the attitudes and morals of society, it is time to ensure that attitude in regards to removing discrimination is carried through all sectors of legislation.

Same-sex marriages WILL be legal in this country at some stage. Whether that happens under this proposed amendment or the next is up to you. You can choose to do what a majority of Australians would have you do as their elected representative, or we can acquiesce once again to the demands of a minority opinion steeped in discriminatory thinking and baseless prejudice.

There is no sound, logical reason for the discrimination against same-sex couples to continue under the Marriage Act 1961. I implore you, do what is right, and what is just."

We elect representatives to carry our voices to the Senate and various Houses of Parliament. Sometimes, that isn't enough. Make your voice heard.

EDIT: Changed the wording of "union" to "marriage" in the third last paragraph.

Yes, something about this IS unacceptable

I have not the words:


Acceptable? Scrap that. I have the words, but I won't use at least one of them on this blog.

And this, from the article:

"Do you think female presenters carry as much authority as their male colleagues, or will they always be mere Barbies in the chair?"

Mere barbies in the chair? Fuck you, Herald Sun. If you're trying to manufacture a contraversy with your outrageously sexist, insipid comments on this one, well done.

Scarier is the thought that the person who inserted those comments could be serious. And scarier that I have no faith that they weren't.

Killer Queen

So. I've had my first incident in the car. And it was completely my fault.

I've started practising playing pool again, with my mate A (of the swimming in a bra whilst we were camping fame), and that means driving to his house twenty minutes away and driving back. No big deal, but this particular night, it was dark, wet and windy.

And more importantly, I was listening to Queen.

I don't know about anyone else, but when I listen to Queen, I don't listen to it quietly. Especially not Bohemian Rhapsody, and particularly not the rockier parts. Which was one of the parts I was at when I got back in the car and turned the stereo on.

I'd parked dead straight in the driveway, but I thought I was a bit close to the bushes, so I'd correct on the way out. Because somewhere between parking dead-straight and coming to reverse, I lost my tiny little mind.

Honestly. What happened next I cannot excuse and cannot explain away. I corrected what I thought was the right amount, and because the metal fence A's place has as the other side of the driveway was in shadow, I Scaramouched right along it.

Except, because of the volume of the music, I didn't realise until the mirror on the passenger side bent backwards.

Jeremy was thankfully not too annoyed (It was, after all, his car), and the car is not too damaged.

But I think I'm going to ban myself from listening to Queen in the car from now on. At least when I'm reversing.

Insomnia Playlist

So, with the new phone, I've got a new late-night playlist. Mainly because I sometimes have trouble getting to sleep and Jeremy decidedly doesn't. But I was interested to see some of the new stuff that's crept in since my last playlist, and what's been retained:

Back to the Start - Lily Allen - I've gotten more and more into Lily Allen in the last few months, and this is one of those songs that I don't love, but still makes the cut.


Spaceman - The Killers - I've been playing this with alarming (for Jeremy, anyway) regularity since I first heard it late last year. I love it. I cannot get enough.

I can't Decide - Scissor Sisters - Oh, I love this song. It's so upbeat, yet so macabre. And sometimes I forget just so dark it is. I've had it as my main ringtone since I got the new phone, and it's really only now striking me just how wrong that is.

Doomsday - Murray Gold - From the new series' of Doctor Who. I love this theme.

My Freeze Ray - Neil Patrick Harris - All the geeks will know where this and the next song are from, and if you don't know, you should.

My Eyes - Felicia Day & Neil Patrick Harris - Second verse, same as the first.

Stoned - Dido- It's about now I usually fall asleep, because the songs are so familiar to me. If I'm not asleep by now, the next few songs - all Dido songs will do it.
See you when you're 40 - Dido

Sand in my Shoes - Dido

They Live in You - Samuel E Wright - From the stage show of The Lion King. Which I've never seen, but have heard a lot about. If you haven't heard this song, I recommend you look it up.

I don't Believe Anymore - Icehouse - I toss up constantly as to whether I prefer this version or the Whitlams version. They are very different versions of the same song. This one seems to be a bit more peaceful though, so it makes the cut.

What songs put you to sleep?

"Asking for it"

A story has been made public after remarks by former Carlton President John Elliot stating that during his time with the club, several women were paid off by the club who had made allegations of being sexually assaulted by Cartlon players. Elliot also said he had concerns that one of the women might not have been just after the money.

Disturbing enough? I thought so. But it gets worse. The following comments on a board I frequent staggered me:

"Dredging up the past is ridiculous "

"women throw them selves at footballers and say that they have been sexually abused to get their 15 minutes of fame and get a story on a current affair."

"It never fails to frustrate me when females think they can pull the wool over the eyes of everyone and cry rape etc, when is was consensual, and now they've decided they want some quick cash or a turn in the spotlight, but where do we draw the line at who to believe?"

"I'm not saying rape isn't wrong, but if a woman is asking for it, I have no sympathy"

What really got me - to the point where I felt almost physically ill - was that these comments were all on a board that is a forum for women; a female footy fans forum (If that isn't enough alliteration to choke on) I won't name the forum, but these are by-and-large intelligent, seemingly caring women, and most of the attitudes range from "it doesn't matter, it was years ago" to "she was asking for it"

To which I replied:

Let's get one thing clear right now. NO-ONE ASKS FOR RAPE. Rape is a criminal offence, a violation and should never be tolerated or apologised for with remarks like "well, she asked for it" Wearing a short skirt is "not asking for it". Deciding you don't want to go through with something at any stage is not "asking for it". The only determining factor as to whether something is rape is whether the person consented - and changing your mind before or during removes consent. What they are wearing, how they act or whether someone considers that person a tart do not enter into the equation.

The response?

"aren't we being a bit sterotypical by saying that men are wrong for raping women- which they are but what about women who rape men, isn't that the same thing."

Riiiight. Because referring to specific allegations against AFL footballers - who, correct me if I'm wrong, are men - in the masculine pronoun negates your comment saying that women are "asking for it"?

I'd make some sensible points about women being our own worst enemies sometimes, the "she's only saying it because he's famous" defence and why we still have a long way to go on our attitudes to rape victims, but I'm too bloody furious right now.

**EDIT** Tweaked a sentence in one paragraph so it actually made sense, and changed the spelling of forum from "Fourum" I have no idea what a "Fourum" is, unless it's an obscure alcohol measurement.

Geek Heaven

So, I've been meaning to post for the last two or three days, but I've been distracted. Mainly by this:



HTC Magic running Android OS.

One of the things I love most about this phone is the features. Both whats included, and what you can download almost instantly from the Android Market for free. Like Google Sky. I open Google Sky, point my phone at a patch of the sky, and it tells me what constellation I'm looking at. I've got my Google Reader pointing at my phone, Twitroid set up for all my twittering needs, Gmail straight to my phone - in a format that isn't more difficult to use than a PC.

It's glorious. I'm in heaven. And it shits all over the iphone.

2001: A Space Wankfest

Another in the series of movies I apparently "HAVE to see", which, on reflection, I could have lived without.

Here's pretty much a faithful run-down of how it went:

(Jeremy, voice-over guying): After all the space-type music, and the cover for this DVD, you might be expecting a space-ship. And what do you get? Guys in Ape-Suits!

Me: Monkeys?

J: It's the Dawn of Man

Me (Seventeen minutes of monkeys later): It's seventeen minutes of monkeys.

J: It'll all make sense later

Me: You mean there's a point to the monkeys?

J: To the Monolith.

Me: That couldn't possibly have been condensed from seventeen minutes of monkeys? And why, after the monkeys start bashing them with bones and eating them, do the Taipirs still hang around the monkeys?

J: They're stupid?

Me: You are.

(One hour and forty minutes in, the scenes with HAL)

Me: So what happens with the Doctor who made that call to his daughter?

J: Nothing.

Me: Nothing?

J: Yeah.

Me: Then what the hell was that all about? Why did they try and make us care about the character and then ditch him?

J: He was in that part of the movie

Me: Did someone lose the keys to the editing suite?

(Two hours and oh-my-God make it stop minutes in, the psychedelic light show):

Me: I get it. Colours.

J: He's going through a gateway.

Me: I get that, but how many times have we seen that same shot of his eye?

J: How freaked out would you be if you go through all that and you end up in a hotel room?

Me: I'd be pretty relieved.

J: And now they're fucking with his head

Me: What the hell is going on now?

J: He's ascending.

Me: He's a fetus.

J: It's called a Star Child.

Me: There is absolutely no way you could possibly know what's going on in this part of the movie without either someone telling you or reading the book. That's incredibly wanky.

And that, in a nutshell, is my problem with this part of the movie. The part with HAL and Dave disconnecting him (An excellent metaphor for a lobotomy) I liked. The parts that could have - and should have - been chopped to the minimum required to tell the story? Not so much. I understand that a lot of this technology would have been new at the time, so the tendency to play with it would have been high, but that doesn't make a five minute psychedelic light show meaningful. And I do like a film that makes you think. But a film where the ending doesn't make sense unless you either make something up or read the book that - co-incidentally - the film-makers wrote? That gives me the screaming shits.

When I compare this movie with Dr. Strangelove - also a Kubrick film - there's no question which movie I prefer. Dr. Strangelove every time. And that isn't just because of Peter Sellers. It's because Dr. Strangelove made you think about the futility of nuclear armament. And gave you an insight into the attitudes of the time the film was made.

2001 merely made me think that Kubrick was one of those film-makers who feels he has possession over his scenes, and refuses to let them go - even if that's to the detriment of the entire project.

And that's sad, because the what for me was a film that had merit in parts - the HAL parts - lost much of that to an impenetrable story line that went nowhere.

Three and a half stars for the Hal portion of the move. Minus five for all others.

Bleurgh

I know I should blog something, and I do have a few things in the works, but last week I had a stomach bug all week (Fun, when your partner has a head cold), since Sunday I've had a head-cold/throat infection combination. My attention span is not that great.

I'll try and get something up soon, but at the moment, I just don't have the stamina.