The rights of women and Islam

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/one-giant-scar-on-mankind-20091115-igau.html?comments=33#comments

Quite involved, especially the comments!

SA euthanasia bill

There is progress on the validity of debate over the bill, rather than its content.

Watch your mouth

So a small-town councillor wants bands to stop musicians at concerts swearing. My immediate thought was bands would stop coming.

Cr Vern Veitch yesterday demanded a ban on profanity to be a condition of concerts at public venues such as Reid Park and Lou Litster  Park.

''I think there should be a condition placed on the use of the area, in particular the use of the amplification, that there are not any profanities used,'' he said yesterday.

The major bands, in particular the Potbelleez, continually screamed over the microphone 'are you f@%#!&g ready

Access All Areas Event Management director Jeff Jimmieson, who has booked some of the country's biggest bands including INXS, The Whitlams and Jimmy Barnes, said a ban on swearing was a big ask.

''I think it is a lofty ambition, and although I would have to agree with Vern, practically, it won't work ,'' he said.

Here is the rub:

''The rock band becomes famous for anti-authority and telling guys to not do it is as good as an open invitation to do it.

There are also plenty of comments at the bottom of story.

Drinking age to 21?

http://www.smh.com.au/national/call-to-lift-minimum-drinking-age-to-21-20091021-h92i.html

Smoking laws

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/10/20/2718978.htm

A woman has been convicted of smoking in a car with her child!

The X-rating dilemma in SA

http://leader-messenger.whereilive.com.au/news/story/adult-shop-raided-for-dvd-haul/

Ends with this:

State Attorney General Michael Atkinson's media spokesman Rob Malinauskas said it would be hard to change the law because it would require every state to agree to the legalisation of X-rated material.

The A-G fails to mention that it is he and he alone who is holding back the application of an R18+ rating for video games!

The fear of God

This opinion piece in The Australian ends thus: Jim Wallace is managing director of the Australian Christian Lobby. It is an expression of fear against any moves towards a charter of human rights. It is beyond my erudition to opinion on the merits pro or contra such a charter. I am simply looking at opponents' and proponents' rhetoric.

How then can the committee and the president of the Australian Human Rights Commission, Catherine Branson, come to the conclusion that there is a genuine national cry for a charter or bill of rights?

The answer is simple. They were duped by activist campaigns by GetUp! and Amnesty

Some of the pillars of his argument are:

First, a high proportion of the consultations were held during the day, when people other than activists were unlikely to be able to attend. It meant the public sessions could not be said to be truly representative of the public and therefore national opinion.

Amnesty had 10,488 submissions and a good number of those were made on postcards provided by the organisation. […]Then there were the 14,604 GetUp! submissions. Add them and the total comes to 25,092, which could be taken to represent a high proportion of the 29,153 recorded in favour of a human rights act, or charter or bill of rights.

He goes on:

The Australian Christian Lobby is as concerned about human rights as anyone and, like large parts of the Christian church, spends a good part of its time championing the cause of the persecuted and disadvantaged, in Australia as well as overseas.

However,

we have been forced to spend nine months defending their right to employ people who share their faith and values. Although the vast majority of Australians would support the need for church organisations to protect their ethos in this way, the Australian Greens and homosexual activists used the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities to try to remove this UN-guaranteed right, with both groups clearly operating on the basis of an ideological objection to faith and churches.

In conclusion, he wants a referendum:

Hopefully the government will dismiss the recommendations for a charter or bill of rights. It can certainly not implement them without putting the question to the Australian public in a referendum.

Language in public (retail) spaces

News.com.au reports that a woman and her 14yo step-daughter were in a city fashion shop when music with offensive words of the F variety started playing. What is a mother to do? And how should she have expressed her outrage at the scene and thereafter?

"I could have simply walked out. However, my children were in the changing rooms and that was not immediately possible."

Store manager Hussein Kaiser dumped the music, which he said was chosen by young sales staff. But Ms Sorensen said there was nothing to stop others playing it.

Perhaps the more astounding thing (in the sense that the authorities couldn't/wouldn't really handle the complaint) was the ensuing barrage of acronyms:

Victorian Consumer Affairs had referred her to ARIA (the Australian Recording Industry Association), which sent Ms Sorensen to AMRA (the Australian Music Retailers Association), which suggested the Australian Retail Association, which passed her on to the ACCC (Australian Competition and Consumer Commission), which suggested ASIC (Australian Securities and Investments Commission).

A spokesman for the State Government [of Victoria] later said offensive behaviour was covered by the Summary Offences Act, enforced by police and amenity laws administered by local government.

And then we get to the central concern, expressed as always with children's interest at heart:

There is obviously a gap in legislation, and authorities seem confused about who is responsible," the mother of seven said. "Vulnerable children should not be exposed to sexually explicit, violent material, anywhere, at any time."

And finally, a pressure group is referred to:

Kids Free 2B Kids director Julie Gale said it was ridiculous to expect busy police officers to be responsible for the unacceptable situation.

"What it shows is this is a big hole when it comes to looking after kids," she said.

There are comments after the story:

My God, Is this the womans first time out in public or something??? Please get a life lady...lifes is way too short to get all stressed out over something so unimportant as swearing in music lyrics. Mick

Posted by: Mick Johnson of Brisbane 8:47am today

Comment 3 Oh please. This woman is obviously another bored housewife. She needs to get a life!

Posted by: Darren of Brisbane 8:50am today
Comment 7 of 51

My personal favourite:

WONT SOMEBODY PLEASE THINK OF THE CHILDREN! Seriously? Are there really people like this?

Posted by: get a life 9:01am today
Comment 21 of 51

This one is more thoughtful:

Debra Sorensen should see the situation for what it was: a case of misjudgement in music selection. When you work in a shop that plays music all day, soon enough you don't actually hear the content of the songs. It turns into white noise. She complained to the manager who I am sure had it turned off immediately and probably profusely apologised for the error. No doubt the staff responsible has also been reprimanded. There is no need to waste precious resources on something that can be fixed simply by removing yourself from the area. Not to mention that many 14 year-olds already listen to that sort of music and that Sorensen's daughter has most likely heard it all before. The kid is 14, not seven.

Posted by: Erin of Melbourne 9:07am today
Comment 28 of 51

But she does have her supporters:

Its too late, the thin edge of the wedge is way past, when its funny to laugh at comediens using the F word, films, TV etc showing unecessary violence, sex and outright base behavour people with manners, morals and ethics are on the endangered list. If no one complains we are giving in to the "dark side" and what is next legal murder?

Posted by: Las Vegas 9:33am today
Comment 47 of 51

 

I fully sympathise with Ms Sorensen here. I generally just walk out of stores when I see pimply-faced teenagers running the show playing distractingly-loud music peppered with F-this and F-that. It is very frustrating. Ruins the shopping experience.

Posted by: Gracie S of Maroubra 9:29am today
Comment 49 of 51

And chillingly:

 

I think this article shows just how quickly the standards and morals are degrading in our country. I have no doubt there is no retail law to cover the problem, as quoted "the trouble is no one envisaged this senerio". Who would have thought in just a few small years (in the overall scheme of things) since the laws were witten we would ever drop this low. Even a trip to your local Harvey Norman can be a nightmare for a parent, M/MA movies playing or video games on display/being played. How about some family friendly accreditation / laws that stores have to ensure they maintain and adhere to.

Posted by: Brendan of Hobart 9:31am today
Comment 51 of 51

 

Drinking is bad for you

News.com.au has a report on the dangers of alcohol consumption.

On average, Australians down 773 standard drinks a year - the equivalent of 703 pots of beer, 552 stubbies, 93 bottles of wine or 39 bottles of spirits.

On average, each Australian drinks 9.8 litres of pure alcohol a year - more than Americans (8.4 litres), Canadians (8 litres), Swedes (6.6 litres) and Norwegians (6.4 litres).

If the average intake could be cut to 6.4 litres - about 505 standard drinks, or 459 pots - more than 380 deaths would be avoided each year.

The report also looked at smoking:

If the 23 per cent smoking rate were cut to 15 per cent, up to 5000 Australian lives would be saved every year, as well as 158,000 fewer new cases of tobacco-caused illness.

There would be almost $1 billion in economic benefits with the achievable smoking cuts, the report found. 

There are comments attached to the story:

 This is a nation of alcoholics. The problem is that the Australian male defines his masculinity on how much he can drink. Cultural catastrophe. As sick & angry country. Posted by: R. McIntosh of Melbourne 12:53am today

Australians love to yabber on about how we live in a free country. It's articles like this that show that many Australians don't want to live in a free country, they want to live in a fascist country. Posted by: Jaxtapose of Sydney 1:47am today

And similarly:

If anybody could possibly explain why Australians would prefer to live in a fascist country because of articles like this........ (@ Jaxtapose) Posted by: Dee of Far North QLD 3:58am today

Facebook is funneling young smokers

Kate Sikora reports that Facebook groups and Fan pages are being used to redirect young people to cigarette makers' own websites.

Cancer Council Australia has called on the Federal Government to intervene and ensure the sites are pulled down.

Marlboro has 5058 followers on Facebook while Benson and Hedges also uses the social
networking site.

"One of the most innovative marketing strategies was by the Camel brand, which engaged the online community to help design a new packet."

It seems to me a fine line between public health concerns on the one side and personal and corporate freedom.

Sexualisation of girls

So The Daily Telegraph leads pages 2 and 3 with this investigation about how increasingly younger girls are being increasingly sexualised by our consumerist society.

Experts said that by age six, girls needed branded clothes, at seven they wanted styled hair, by eight they were beginning diets, at nine they were styling their hair and by early teens were engaging in sex or sending sexually explicit text messages.

And further down,

Child advocate Julie Gale was outraged to find bras for toddlers on sale at stores including Target. Target defended the sale yesterday, arguing it was up to parents to choose whether they buy the baby bras. "It is totally unnecessary. A two-year-old doesn't need that," Ms Gale said. "They are tactically marketing eye shadows, make-up, nail polish and little bras. It is mini me."

The basic theme is one of robbing of innocence.

Today's editorial is in reaction to this report. It opens with

The sexualisation of children was bad enough when it focused on so-called "tweens" - those youngsters aged from nine to 12.

And closes with

The wrongness of this increased sexualisation of our young and vulnerable is self-evident. Everyone involved - particularly on the retail side - is implored to cease.