22 - We Have Something We Want to Salient

Hayley Adams Sally Anderson Auntie Sharon Michael Boyes Louise Burston Barney Chunn Paul Comrie-Thomson Constance Cravings Uther Dean Asher Emanuel Gen Fowler Ally Garrett Michelle Ny The Hawk of Liberty Adam Goodall Haimona Gray Elle Hunt Mikey Langdon Molly McCarthy Ollie Neas Sam Northcott Selina Powell Zoe Reid Conrad Reyners Carlo Salizzo Chris Salter Fairooz Samy Sophie Turner Doc Watson Daniel Wilson Ben Wylie-van Eerd

pg. 11 pg. 12 pg. 13 pg. 14 pg. 15 pg. 16 pg. 17 pg. 18 pg. 19 pg. 20 pg. 21 pg. 22 pg. 24 pg. 26 pg. 27 pg. 28 pg. 29 pg. 30 pg. 31 pg. 32 pg. 33 pg. 34 pg. 35 pg. 36 pg. 37 pg. 38 pg. 39 pg. 40 pg. 41 pg. 42 pg. 43

2

Salient Vol. 74

SECTION ZERO & UNIVERSE IN ASSOCIATION WITH VUWSA PRESENTS

IN THE BIG

NEW ZEALAND ADVENTURE SUPPORT FROM

GOMORRAH, JORDAN HIGHAM & MITCH LOWE TH

WED, SEPT. 28 HUNTER LOUNGE R18 / TICKETS AVAILABLE FROM WWW.1-NIGHT.CO.NZ/FEEDME

3

Issue 22 opinion

The Team

Editors: Uther Dean & Elle Hunt editor@salient.org.nz Designer: Dan Hutchinson designer@salient.org.nz News Editor: Stella Blake-Kelly news@salient.org.nz

itter! on Tw !

We’re tmagazine n e @sali

Chief Reporter: Natalie Powlesland natalie@salient.org.nz Feature Writer: Selina Powell selina@salient.org.nz Feature Writer: Zoe Reid zoe@salient.org.nz Chief Sub-Editor: Carlo Salizzo carlo@salient.org.nz Arts Editor: Louise Burston arts@salient.org.nz

Like Salient on Facebook ! 19 people can’ 92 t be wrong!

Contributors

Hayley Adams, Sally Anderson, Auntie Sharon, Alex Braae, Michael Boyes, Seamus Brady, Rhiannon Buttenshaw, Barney Chunn, Paukl Comrie-Thomson, Constance Cravings, Martin Doyle, Asher Emanuel, Genevieve Fowler, Ally Garrett, Haimona Gray, Adam Goodall, Jason Govenlock, Ben Hague, Ryan Hammond, The Hawk of Liberty, Russ Kale, Robyn Kenealey, Vincent Konrad, Michael Kumove, Mikey Langdon, Sarita Lewis, Eden Lloyd, Molly McCarthy, Callum McDougal, Eddie Manco, Ludi Meyer, Ollie Neas, Sam Northcott, Michelle Ny, Charles Panic, Conrad Reyners, Chris Salter, Fairooz Samy, Rachel Stephen, Ihaka Tunui, Sophie Turner, Doc Watson, Daniel Wilson, and Ben Wylie-van Eerd

Contributors of the week

Everyone who got their piece in on time and without going over the word count.

Prez Col

About Us

Salient is produced by independent student journalists, employed by, but editorially independent from, the Victoria University of Wellington Students’ Association (VUWSA).

Salient is a member of, syndicated and supported by the Aotearoa Student Press Association (ASPA). It is printed by APN Print of Tauranga. Opinions expressed are not necessarily representative of those of ASPA, VUWSA, Printcorp, or Shaun Ritchie, but we of Salient are proud of our beliefs and take full responsibility for them.

Contact

VUWSA Student Media Centre Level 3, Student Union Building Victoria University PO Box 600, Wellington Phone: 04 463 6766 Email: editor@salient.org.nz

Advertising

Contact: Howard Pauling Phone: 04 463 6982 Email: sales@vuwsa.org.nz

Other

Subscriptions: Too lazy to walk to uni to pick up a copy of your favourite mag? We can post them out to you for a nominal fee. $40 for Vic student, $55 for everyone else. Please send an email containing your contact details with ‘subscription’ in the subject line to editor@salient.org.nz This issue is dedicated to the bundles of last week’s issue that some douche tried to put in the bin so they ended up water logged and ruined. We miss you, our print children, taken from us so cruelly.

And some advice: when you write an editorial about how the men’s rights movement is redundant, don’t be surprised when a bunch of misogynist trolls start tearing you apart on the internet.

The News starts on page 6 The Opinions start on page 11 The Notices are on page 44 The Letters are on page 45 The Puzzles are on page 46 The Comics are on page 47

Seamus Brady president@vuwsa.org.nz vuwsa.org.nz facebook.com/vuwsa

The last week of campaigning in the VUWSA General Elections has been really enjoyable to watch.

Last week’s Candidates’ Forum, in particular, was very successful, with a great turnout and a large majority of candidates making solid election pitches. There are short summary clips—check them out through the video on the Salient Facebook page.

It’s awesome to see so many people running for election in 2012. This year we received 28 nominations, one of the highest numbers in recent years. Better yet, the calibre of the candidates has been excellent.

VUWSA operates on the fundamental basis of students representing students. We believe that students’ voices are essential for letting us know what services students wish to receive, and how much they want to pay for these services, and as an active part of VUWSA’s representation of students. It’s for this reason that the best are elected to lead VUWSA in 2012.

Electing good candidates is a crucial part of ensuring that the interests of students—quality education, fair decision-making, and adequate student support—are protected. It’s important that you take time to read up on and research those running, to ensure that VUWSA remains a powerful force in ensuring your time at Victoria is the best it can be—both academically and socially—especially with Voluntary Student Membership looming.

For the first time when you’re voting online you will be able to access the candidates’ manifestos. If you

haven’t yet decided, these are invaluable in guiding you towards deciding which candidates are best for VUWSA, and ultimately, best for you. By now, you will have received an email to your student email account that provides you with a link to the relevant voting page—it’s a very easy process, which will only take a couple of minutes at most.

But wait, there’s more! After you’ve voted for your preferred Executive, you’ll be contributing your opinion on our proposed Strategic Plan—a document which outlines VUWSA’s overarching goals in the long term. It is the result of many months’ work, countless drafts, arguments over choice of words, and extensive consultation with almost all representative groups and student representatives. We’re now ready to extend it to you before it is formally adopted at the next General Meeting.

This Strategic Plan is a key aspect of our ongoing programme of professionalising and invigorating your students’ association. It will ensure that you always receive an outstanding level of service and a strong student voice across Victoria year-to-year. You can find a copy on our Facebook, website and attached to the online voting system.

So please, make sure you vote!

Have a great week.

*

salient.org.nz

4

Salient Vol. 74

YOUTHLAW

TINO RANGATIRATANGA TAITAMARIKI

0800 UTHLAW | youthlaw.co.nz | info@youthlaw.co.nz

VICES R E S L EGA FREE L FOR UNDER 2

5s

YouthLaw is a free national legal service for under 25s. Contact us for free on 0800 UTHLAW (884 529) or info@youthlaw. co.nz for help with almost any legal problem.

Each issue we answer your questions on a particular area of law. This issue; young people and alcohol.

Can I drink in public?

You can only drink in public if there isn’t a liquor ban in place. In Wellington there is a complete liquor ban in the Wellington Central Area, Oriental Bay, Mt Victoria Lookout, Aro Valley, Central Park, Mt Cook and Newtown. This means that you cannot drink in public in these places, even if you are in your car!

What happens if I am caught drinking in a public place where there is a liquor ban?

The police have the right to search you for alcohol, take the alcohol off you and tip it out or make you tip it out. They can also give you a fine of between $200 and $2000 BUT before they do so they must warn you and give you the opportunity to leave the area or tip your alcohol out.

ID’s and bars Do I have to have an ID to get into a bar?

You must have a photo ID to be able to get into a bar. This can be your passport, New Zealand Drivers Licence, or Official ‘Hospitality Association of New Zealand’ 18+ Card.

Can a bar turn me away for being too drunk?

Yes a bar can refuse to let you in and serve you alcohol for being too drunk. If they are caught serving intoxicated people then they can face huge fines.

What happens if I get caught with a fake ID? If you use a fake ID this is considered ID fraud. If you use someone else’s ID you could face a fine of up to $1000. If you alter your own licence the fine can be up to $2000. Using a fake or someone else passport is even more serious, the penalty extends up to 10 years imprisonment.

*

SEND US YOUR QUESTIONS If you have a legal question, email it to ben@youthlaw.co.nz. We may not print each question, but we will always reply. Printed questions will be vaguely related to issue themes, as far as possible.

Exercise

—why you should just do it!

Rachel Stephen, Ludi Meyer & Eddie Manco

4th year Physiotherapy Students at Victoria Physiotherapy Clinic

You’re tired from study or work – it’s been a long day. You know you should probably make the most of that gym membership or Zumba session card or even head out for a jog, but nah, maybe you’ll get up nice and early tomorrow morning when the weather’s a bit better…Or maybe tomorrow evening instead...

When the outside temperature is less-than-balmy, the wind howling or the rain thrashing the motivation required to get that body movin’ can be somewhat in lacking. We all know exercise is pretty good for us, right? Aside from the obvious effects of fitness and weight reduction, did you know that exercise can also help you with: Your bowels: A recent study has shown that increasing one’s physical activity levels can be effective in decreasing the severity of irritable bowel syndrome (Johannesson et al. 2011). This is a chronic condition which causes discomforting symptoms such as abdominal pain, constipation and diarrhea. If symptoms persist—make an appointment with your doctor.

Pain control: Physical activity produces those good chemicals called endorphins in the brain. These are so strong that they decrease pain perception levels in the brain, i.e. acting as the body’s natural painkillers particularly for musculoskeletal conditions such as low back pain (Linton, Hellsing and Bergström, 1996).

Your mood: Being at university can be tough at times and stress can play a big part in the life of a student, whether from assignments, exams or home-sickness. In addition to acting as a healthy distraction, exercise can lift low moods and assist with the relief of depression. This is due to the release of endorphins, and other feel-good chemicals such as dopamine, serotonin and adrenaline.

In some instances, exercise can be as effective in treating depression as medication (Stein and Motta, 1992).

For women—Menstruation symptoms: A study involving 250 University students has indicated that 90 minutes of exercise, twice per week at 50-70 per cent of maximum heart rate can be effective in reducing symptoms associated with menstruation. These included psychological and physical premenstrual symptoms and menstrual cramps (Jahromi et al., 2008).

The general rule for adults to maintain health is 30 minutes of moderate exercise per day. heartfoundation.org. nz/uploads/A5_Physical_Activity_08_06.pdf . Some sources recommend 20 minutes of vigorous activity three days a week, plus muscle strengthening exercises at least twice a week.

5

Issue 22 opinion

Hopefully the above evidence can provide a little extra motivation to get you going on those days when you just don’t feel like it.

How to increase your activity?

• Do your own thing - go for a walk or a run, or race your flatmates around the block or up the stairs.

• Check out the Recreation Centre on the Kelburn or Pipitea campus union.vuw.ac.nz/reccentre The friendly staff members are there to help you if you need it!

• Health/Counselling/Recreation Centre offer a supported exercise programme for students with low mood and motivation – ‘Lifting Our Spirits’ victoria.ac.nz/st_services/counselling/resources/ healthy-minds-at-vic.pdf

Ngāi Tauira

Rep’n it up: From the outside-in Eden Lloyd & Ihaka Tunui

• Join one of the many sports clubs on campus vuwsa.org.nz/clubs/clubs-directory/

Opinions can become strong

If you have any questions about previous injuries or your ability to exercise contact us at the Physiotherapy Clinic on Level One of the Student Union building.

*

References: Jahromi, M.K., Gaeini, A. and Rahimi, Z. Influence of a physical fitness course on menstrual cycle characteristics (2008). Gynecological Endocrinology, 24 (11), Pages 659-662.

Linton, S.J., Hellsing, L.A. and Bergström, G. (1996). Exercise for workers with musculoskeletal pain: Does enhancing compliance decrease pain?

Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, 6(3): 177-190.

Johannesson, E., Simren, M., Strid, H., Bajor, A., Sadik, R. Physical activity improves symptoms in irritable bowel syndrome: a randomized controlled trial (2011). American Journal of Gastroenterology, 106(5): 915-922.

Renee Lyons

Stein, P. N.,&Motta, R.W. (1992). Effects of aerobic and nonaerobic exercise on depression and self-concept. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 74, 79-89.

voices. At times they may hurt, encourage, contradict or challenge people to think. It is a voice of a person that wishes to share their insight on a particular topic. But what happens when the topic itself is opinion? You go out and find someone else’s voice. The article this week will offer a unique perspective in the sense that the viewpoint and opinion expressed is one that does not attend University, but rather one that is from the outside looking in.

As a Māori girl coming from a small town, I know what people’s expectations are like. For Pākehā their opinion is usually the same and there always seems to be a one sided-story. If two are present however, one will always lose out.

Sometimes what is needed is a third-party perspective. So after moving to the big city I noticed how many people just need that one chance to make their big break.

These days it is like you need a degree to pump your gas. Looking at other Māori who have their degrees, bachelors, certificates or diplomas, I am very proud to say that I am Māori. Those who don’t but are trying their best to make life easier for their families just deserve that one chance to show people what they are made of. I don’t attend University, but looking in at those who do, makes me very proud.

After walking down one of the busiest streets in Wellington, I notice how many Māori there

were walking in business suits or uniforms. I think about the times we have been put down or peoples’ opinions have made us look like failures. But then when I look at small towns (for example where I come from), I see on the news girls fighting and their fathers cheering them on, gang fights, or burglers. I don’t think its all Māori just those that need a hand or advice in today’s society. A lot of people say: don’t move to this town the people there are mean, and the teenagers are useless. Well I have to say, it’s not the town, it’s the people in it, and the people in it need help.

Every time I go home someone asks me: how is Uni? I usually say, I don’t go to University. Instantly their reply is: well at least you’re out there making your place in the world. It feels good to know that I have the support as a Māori girl without a degree living in the Capital. I’m glad that everyone knows I don’t go to University, because even though I don’t attend, it pursuits others to get out there and make a mark on the world.

You don’t have to have a piece of paper to tell you that you are good at something (it helps to have one if you are looking into a specific career however), but you just have to show yourself that you are indeed special, regardless of the circumstances.

So get up and make your place in the world. It doesn’t matter where you come from or what your background is. It’s all about life and living it to the fullest.

*

salient.org.nz

6

the news Salient Vol. 74

Edited by Stella Blake-kelly

Young Voters Apath... Meh. Ben Hague

The number of young people enrolled to vote has dropped over 10 per cent since 2008, currently sitting at only 72 per cent.

This has caused concern for some politicians and has been highlighted by Green Party MP Gareth Hughes as a “worrying” trend.

“It is after all, your future that people like me are deciding here in Parliament, it makes sense that youth should vote for the people and parties that they feel will have the best impact on their future” he says.

A study released by the Electoral Commission on young non-voters identified five segments of non-voters based on their motivation, knowledge and attitudes.

These range from the “confident and convinced” segment, youth that have high motivation and knowledge about politics, through to the “politically absent” segment, young people who are on the opposite end of the spectrum with low motivation and knowledge.

Hughes calls for a dedicated amount of money from the Electoral Commission budgeted towards youth-focused enrolment programs.

“This isn’t just about putting stalls up on university campuses, it’s about getting to the working youth and the young people who are out of work as well.”

He urges people to encourage their friends to enrol by directing them to the Electoral Commission’s website, their Facebook page or printing out a form and getting them to fill it out.

For more information on how to participate in New Zealand’s democracy, go to elections.org.nz

NZ Seventh Best at Overcharging Students

I just have this weird picture in my head of the universities as fat little naked men in baths full of money yelling “Don’t look at me!” into a bright white light while they hold a $50 bill over their frail, shrivelled genitals.

Rhiannon Buttenshaw Students are no longer the only ones noticing the high tuition fees demanded by New Zealand universities.

A new OECD report has placed New Zealand tuition fees seventh highest amongst the 42 countries examined.

In top position is the United States with average fees over $7000. Japan, Korea and the United Kingdom closely following.

With fees averaging $3600, New Zealand came in just under Australia and Canada.

Law student Caleb McConnell has written a report on the subject. He comments; “it highlights what we already know, New Zealand tuition fees are high.”

Tertiary Education Union president, Dr Sandra Grey says “this is the trade-off between how much we feel students should contribute to their education and how much we’re prepared as taxpayers and as a Government to put into those institutions.”

Each year Victoria, along with universities across New Zealand has put fees up 4 per cent on average—the maximum allowed under the current Government regulated Fee Maxima policy.

Mr McConnell writes in his report that “it hardly gives New Zealand’s white collar workforce the perceived head start that a degree is supposed to bring.”

However Dr Grey commented to the Herald “we’ve had a big push in New Zealand for what is loosely called a mass tertiary market model which is the right of open entry so people do, if they want, have the opportunity to study.”

The OECD report also places New Zealand fourth on the balance between tuition fees, Government subsidies and scholarships, with the United States, Japan and Australia making up the top three.

7

Issue 22 opinion

Natalie Powlesland Token mentions of the impending “VSM environment” dominated the VUWSA Candidates Forum on Wednesday, most of which were overwhelmingly negative.

The Forum attracted a large crowd, many of whom appeared to be genuinely interested in the candidates’ ideas. Unfortunately time constraints meant a number of questions went unasked and the final few candidates were rushed through their speeches.

This was particularly problematic as the final speakers were those standing for the most important roles within VUWSA— Treasurer, the Vice Presidencies (Welfare and Academic), and the Presidency—and were the candidates most students wanted to quiz.

Lone presidential candidate Bridie Hood told the crowd she wants VUWSA to remain true to the goals it established 112 years ago. She focused on financial sustainability; student

representation; student engagement; and an active student community.

Both candidates for Vice President (Academic), Josh Wright and Craig Carey spoke knowledgeably of both VUWSA and the university.

Standing unopposed for Vice President (Welfare), Ta’ase Vaonga plugged her catchphrase a “visible, vibrant and viable VUWSA” and highlighted plans to encourage work with the International and Clubs Officers.

The forum saw three lively candidates for the position of Treasurer. William Guzzo spoke with great enthusiasm about reviving VUWSA while Bruno Simpson touted his business and accounting experience.

Zanian Steele made sweeping promises, stating he would cut VUWSA salaries and will resign if he cannot achieve this.

Also standing for Publications Committee Representative, Steele received rapturous applause as he waved a copy of Salient and stated: “If you don’t want controversy, get the bloody Economist!”

Also standing for this position, Salient co-editor Elle Hunt stated her experience working with the magazine will give her the knowledge necessary to be successful in the position.

“And if they decide to sell it I will make sure they get a good price,” she said.

Most other candidates spoke informatively and enthusiastically with most emphasising the challenges VUWSA will face in light of VSM. The exception was Kiran Mathews, who said he had no idea what the Activities Officer did and had “no opinions or passion.”

Students can vote online or in person in the VUWSA General Election from the 26th to 29th of October.

Check out the Salient Facebook page for a link to the candidates’ video manifestos and the centre pull-out in this week’s issue for more information

martin doyle

VUWSA Candidates Forum Goes Well.

Which is nice.

salient.org.nz

8

Salient Vol. 74

Fees Rise

Stella Blake-Kelly & Molly McCarthy

Students can look forward to another burden on their back pocket next year following the fees raise voted for at University Council last Monday.

The council passed recommendations to increase fees for domestic students by four per cent for 2012, which is the maximum fee increase allowed by the government.

Head to head: University Council Representative —sits on the University Council along side the VUWSA President 1. What does the University Council do, and what is the University Council Representative’s position within it?

The only opposition to the recommendations was from the two student representatives on the council—VUWSA President Seamus Brady and University Council Representative Conrad Reyners. Both spoke at length of the burden that the continual increases in student fees place on students, in that they create a disincentive to study and a future burden of debt.

“I feel it is imperative when we set fees that we are reminded of the impact that our decision will have on the lives of both students now and on our society in the future,” Reyners said.

Since 1997, gradual fee increases approved by the university each year have led to an overall increase of 100 per cent.

Max Hardy

Reyners and Brady both expressed concern that these ongoing increases would soon prove detrimental to students’ access to study, especially equity groups such as women, Maori and Pacific Island students, who would be disproportionately affected.

“The question is: Does Get Amongst the Best equate to get amongst the richest?” Brady quipped.

In giving its reasons for recommending an increase, the University cited the financial constraints that reduced government tertiary funding for 2012 has created.

“We make this recommendation with reluctance, but within the context of government funding we have no other choice,” Vice-Chancellor Pat Walsh said.

Although recognising the problem these cuts pose to the University, Reyners and Brady both said that it was the role of the University to speak out against government cuts to tertiary education.

“The current funding situation is unsustainable and any solution must come from Government. It’s about time this University and others around the country took a firmer line and vocally reminded the Government about the importance of funding students and the sector appropriately.”

Despite approving the fee increase, most council members agreed that the current funding model was unsustainable, and radical changes inevitably need to be made.

Due to proposed government restrictions as to what may be classified as a student service by universities, the Student Services Levy was not able to be passed at this meeting.

Following the recent We Are the University protest, during which a large group of students protested in the Hunter Building, the fee-setting meeting featured a strong presence of campus security outside the building. Despite this increased security however, only a couple of students were present, and Chancellor Ian McKinnon said that it was the smallest public gallery he had seen.

Full copies of Brady and Reyners’ speeches can be accessed at vuwsa.org.nz.

Lisa Taylor

Max Hardy: Council is the governing body of VUW. Amongst other things, it is responsible for our strategic direction, appointing and monitoring the Vice-Chancellor and determining and monitoring our budget. The purpose of the position is to ensure that the decisions of Council and the Vice-Chancellor are in the best interests of students and the University that the students make up. An organised representative can be effective in tangibly improving decisions for students, if they are proactive and understand VUW’s decision-making.

Lisa Taylor: The University Council, I believe is the top tier of representation for the entire University. It encompasses the feedback from the lower tiered representatives who sit on Faculty Boards and Academic Boards. Unlike the Faculty Boards which deal with faculty and school matters, the University Council operates to run the University as a whole entity. The University Council representative’s position is there to ensure the student’s voice is heard.

2. What experience do you have for being on council?

Max Hardy: My governance experience includes University Council and its Governance and Finance Committees (2010), SJS, University Sport New Zealand, VUWSA and NZUSA. I am proud of my experience representing students as VUWSA President and NZUSA Co-President.

In this time I have represented the interests of students faithfully throughout VUW including on the Academic Board, Academic Committee, Committee on University Academic Programmes and the Academic Audit Unit. I will go to Council with fresh ideas and new energy. Importantly however, my experience has taught me how to get things done.

Lisa Taylor: My experience is through being a class representative and faculty delegate for the FHSS academic board (during 2011).

I’ve been involved in making the student voice heard through being a class rep since early 2010. I believe that the students’ voice is important to be heard. The students’ voice filters up from the class representatives to the faculty boards up to the university council.

9

Issue 22 opinion

Trust is committed to providing VUWSA with a sustainable, yearly contribution. While this is nowhere near our current funding, it would be enough to ensure that we can continue providing representation and some service. The second way is through the University. We are currently in negotiations regarding funding and those discussions will be concluded within the next few weeks. The final way I see VUWSA getting funding is through user charges, which could be mean increasing the prices of things like lockers and carparks.

Always the Bridie-maid?

Stella Blake-kelly With just no confidence and a grassroots online campaign for Dinocop running against her, incumbent Vice-President (Education) Bridie Hood looks set to be VUWSA President for 2012—Salient news editor Stella Blake-Kelly sat down with her to draw back the Hood and peer through the Bridie-al veil at the woman underneath.

STELLA: Why do you want to be President of VUWSA? BRIDIE: Next year is going to be a tough year and we need to ensure that we have strong leadership. VUWSA must remain a strong and responsive students’ association.

I’m running for President because over my last two years as Education Vice President I have seen the important role that VUWSA plays within this University and it’s imperative that in the face of VSM and the challenges it poses we do not lose site of why we were established. We need experienced, committed and reliable leadership and I can provide that.

STELLA: What’s your vision for VUWSA in 2012?

BRIDIE: My vision for VUWSA is to create a students’ association that students view as important and want to be a part of. That means ensuring that students feel connected to the association by effectively engaging with them and regularly seeking feedback. It also means ensuring that VUWSA and the services we provide are responsive to student needs.

STELLA: How do you see VUWSA being funded in a voluntary environment?

BRIDIE: At the moment Seamus and the VUWSA Trust are in negotiations with the University regarding funding and many of those decisions will be made this year. However, how I see it working is that VUWSA can get funding in three ways. Firstly through the VUWSA Trust. The

STELLA: How do you see the membership structure of VUWSA operating?

BRIDIE: Once again a lot of this will be decided this year, though if elected I hope and I’m sure I will have input into these discussions. How I see VUWSA membership operating is that there will be some services that are provided to all students such as representation and advocacy, regardless of whether or not they are VUWSA Members. However students that sign up to VUWSA will have access to services that non-members will have to pay more for or will not be able to access such as diaries, wall planners and cheaper Orientation tickets. It must be as easy as possible for students to joining VUWSA, which is why I support a $0 membership fee. I think charging a fee upfront creates an unfair barrier for some students. Especially given that the vast majority of students will be signing up at the start of the year when money is pretty tight and they won’t be able to add it to their student loan.

STELLA: VUWSA is going to have to reprioritise as it adjusts to a new membership and funding environment—what roles of the association will you be prioritising?

BRIDIE: The decisions about what VUWSA does and doesn’t do ultimately lies with the student body. VUWSA is the students’ association, run by students for students and big decisions such as these should not be made without adequate student consultation. For me, the most important thing that VUWSA does is provide representation. That was the reason why this association was created. But, luckily enough, representation is also not that expensive.

If I had to choose a second area to prioritise it would be welfare. Without some of the welfare services that VUWSA provides such as the foodbank and the student advocate, students would drop out of the University. However, that’s not to say that clubs, rep groups and events are not important, they are. Any decision will be made with student consultation.

STELLA: Have you got any things you want to change within VUWSA next year?

BRIDIE: One of the main things that I want to do next year is carry out a governance review. We have had management and staffing reviews, which have had great results, so it’s about time we looked at governance. I also want to focus on ensuring that VUWSA remains sustainable in the future, so looking at new revenue streams and making VUWSA more financially sustainable. salient.org.nz

10

Salient Vol. 74

Design Students No Longer Blow Hards

c Bla Bla Bla

Michael Kumove The wind tunnel at the Faculty of Architecture and Design is set to be removed.

The proposal for its removal has led to an outcry among Architecture and Design students,who see the wind tunnel as a “valuable pedagogical tool”, and claim there has been a lack of consultation.

“Isn’t that the only thing that distinguishes us from that other architecture school up north?” asked one student.

Indeed, according to Harriet Eberlien, President of STUDiO, Victoria is “one of the only Unis in the world to have one.”

Other students are more concerned with the detrimental effect its removal will have on their ability to learn. One second-year Architecture student told Salientthat “it would be a loss to the university, as the knowledge gained from wind tunnel testing … is invaluable.”

Computer technology cannot yet accurately replicate the effect of wind on buildings, so the removal of the wind tunnel would mean losing an important element of architects’ training.

Salient understands that the space is proposed to be redeveloped intoadditional studio facilities.

NZ First has a Young MP That’s the Political Party NZ First not New Zealand as a whole. I’m sure other countries have had young MPs before us. Sorry if there has been any confusion.

Alex Braae Victoria University student Ben Craven has been selected as New Zealand First’s candidate for Wellington Central in the 2011 General Election.

Craven, 21, who is currently studying Philosophy and Political Science, will be one of the countries youngest candidates.

Standing on a platform of easing student loan repayments, he is advocating NZ First’s policy of matching student repayments dollar for dollar—on the condition that graduates remain in the country.

Craven has strong views about the current administration, and is against Voluntary Student Membership.

“This government has failed young people,” he said.

His candidacy has been endorsed by Winston Peters, leader of NZ First.

“He will more than hold his own against rival candidates in Wellington Central.”

Email snippets of life at Vic to editor@salient.org.nz with ‘Overheard’ in the subject line, or find Overheard @ Vic on Facebook

Irony: Student Media Having the Temerity to Call Anyone a Blow Hard Guy: “Are you a cock in a frock on a rock?”

Girl: “Wasn’t that you on the geology field trip?”

Wade Steven Gosper STAT293 lecturer, out of nowhere and practically mid-sentence: “Did anyone bring a cat today?” Students laugh and look at each other in confusion, lecturer continues: “Is there a cat?”

Richard Law GEOG212 Lecturer asks: “So what do you guys think caused the London Riots?”

Yankee student speaks up: “The police don’t have guns” Oliver Hefford ESCI132 lecture: “An Orca can eat 5-10 Happy Feet a day” Hamish Rundle “Can we go somewhere warm? Where I don’t have to wear clothes.”

Dana Ghent Girl: “Someone drew a penis in my book.”

Guy: “Was it really detailed, or a cab one?”

Girl: “It was ejaculating!”

Guy: “Oh, they’re the best ones!”

Lauren Carter Two friends conversing in the first floor library toilets:“Don’t you hate it when you’ve finished taking a piss, and blood comes out your penis hole?”

“Yeah totally dude!”

Troy Shaw John McDowall, PSYC235 whilst discussing antidepressants: “Why do they say achieving an orgasm? It’s more like having an orgasm. Climbing a mountain would be an achievement, not saying that there isn’t any work involved, but...”

Laura Conroy Chance meeting on the street with Construction Law lecturer, lecturer yells out: “Sup bitches!”

Anita Radcliffe PSYC121 Lecturer: ‘You don’t have good intrusive thoughts that keep you up at night. You don’t lie in bed thinking “I did so good on that test. Man, I am so awesome. My awesomeness is what’s keeping me awake.”’

Laura Searancke INTP113 Lecturer: “Oh let me have this! We’re[Canada is] a very quiet nation with a very obnoxious neighbor. Something I’m sure New Zealanders know nothing about.”

Seth Smith Girl 1: “He just smiles soooo much.”

Girl 2: “Yeah, I wouldn’t be surprised if he killed someone.”

Evelyn Bradley

Issue 22 opinion

11

No Bottles Dick Hayley Adams

I squealed in absolute delight when my flatmate pointed out an informative news article, headlined “No Bottles Dick”.

Why could I have not thought of that brilliant, comedic and hard hitting response first? I’ve been feeling this vibe for months, so I‘d thought I nick that title anyway.

Ever since the new recycling system started in May this year, I have elected myself its chief authority, mainly because no other dick seems to get it. As I leave my flat on Abel Smith Street each Tuesday morning, I am met by rubbish of every description, in almost anything you could cram it into, abandoned at the curbside. Why? Because it seems many of you Wellingtonians, even after all these months, remain ignorant and ill-informed when it comes to recycling in this here city of ours. So, this is me informing all you dicks out there.

Recycling is free! Everything you can sort into your green bag or bin is something that you are not going to have to pay for in order to have it taken off your hands! So as the council puts it on their informative and easy to understand website, recycling “helps you save money and protect the environment. It gives valuable resources another life while reducing the waste that goes into landfills.” Preach it.

Recycling in Wellington is easy! Despite what the littered streets post-pickup may

suggest. One week it’s glass, next week it is all other recyclables. The council have even provided you with a different vessel for each week, making it that little bit easier, as plainly put by WCC “wheelie bins or green plastic bags are used for metals, plastic and paper, and 45-litre green recycling crates are used for glass”...well I’ll be! If you live in a Wellington suburb, pop either your bag/bin or crate out with your normal household rubbish (in the regulation yellow bags) and that’s it. The green bags are delivered annually, 26 at a time and your next bunch will be on your doorstep in November. You can purchase a further 26 for only $6 if you run out, check the WCC website for details.

It seems the most difficulty people have, aside from people just kind of hurling all the rubbish they have into a heap on the street—Like one particular residence across the street from me, is remembering It gives valuable resources another whether it’s glass or metal/ life while reducing week plastic/paper the waste that week. This I can goes into landfills understand, weeks all blend into one and sometimes it is just impossible to recall whether it was the bin or the bag you dragged to the letterbox last week. But, never fear! Chances are someone on your street has remembered, stand on the footpath, turn your head right then left and see what the trend on your street is, simple.

Wellington City Council has said that the new system of recycling is going well and most are starting to get the idea. By separating your glass recyclables from everything else, almost all glass is now of use, while previously about half of glass collected was not because it was contaminated by other products. The council make about $100,000 a month from the sale of recyclables, well covering the $50,000 per month cost of the initiative.

So please, stop leaving your household waste strewn across the suburbs of Wellington and take a moment to read up and wrap your head around the system. It’s user friendly and saves you money. And remember this week, (at least on my street) it’s bottles dicks.

*

salient.org.nz

12

Salient Vol. 74

Museums get Fashionable: Why New Zealand Needs to Celebrate its History of Fashion Sally Anderson

Over the summer in New York, cues of people snaked around the block, all waiting for the hottest new thing to hit the city.

It was not the newest Apple product that had people waiting up to five hours in the rain but the exhibition Alexander McQueen: Savage Beauty. This was held in celebration of the late British fashion designer, who since the early 1990s continuously took the fashion world by storm with his controversial and trend-setting designs. With 661,509 visitors, it was the eighth most popular exhibit to be held at the Met in its 141 years.

The museum has recently announced that the recent four major exhibitions held at the Met, including Savage Beauty, generated $908 million from visitors to the city.

Clearly such exhibitions are money-making opportunities for public institutions and hosting cities. The public want to see fashion design, and institutions that give it to them are increasing their visitor numbers exponentially. New Zealand should get on board this international trend and celebrate its history of fashion.

Firstly, some of our public museums and galleries are already taking part in this evolving area of research and exhibition display. Te Papa continuously exhibits its textile collections in the Eyelights space. Currently on show is New Zealand In Vogue, which celebrates the former New Zealand version of the publication synonymous with fashion. There are other significant textile collections all around the country, including the Auckland Museum and the Hawke’s Bay Museum.

Secondly, in 2009 the New Zealand Fashion Museum was established and has already produced two exhibitions. Their most recent is titled Black In Fashion, opened to coincide with the Rugby World Cup. The New Zealand Fashion Museum is an organisation ‘without bricks and mortar’ and with that brings flexibility that enables exhibitions to be curated to suit the space and the designs. Black in Fashion will be travelling to Wellington in February next year.

Finally, two recent publications to be produced in New Zealand on the history of fashion are The Dress Circle: New Zealand Fashion Design Since 1940 by Douglas Lloyd Jenkins, Claire Regnault & Lucy Hammonds and New Zealand Fashion Design written by Angela Lassig.

Not only do these publications contain mouthwatering imagery of some of our most celebrated fashion designs, but they open the door for further research and publication.

I believe these are all steps in the right direction.

Douglas Lloyd Jenkins argues in his introduction to The Dress Circle that New Zealand has previously treated its fashion history as a recent phenomenon, starting year one at the moment ‘The New Zealand Four’ (Zambesi, Nom D, World and Karen Walker) took on London Fashion Week in 1999 and the New Zealand fashion industry got significant public recognition for the first time. However there is a far richer history of our fashion industry to be discovered, a lot of which has not been recorded. There needs to be major steps taken in order to preserve that history, including research, collection and conservation. Exhibitions that celebrate fashion are clearly popular and public support is there. Unveiled: 200 years of wedding dress is visiting Te Papa from the Victoria and Albert Museum in December and is already looking to be a popular exhibit with a large amount of pre-press and public interest. Next time, Te Papa could call upon its massive textile collection to present an exhibition the size of Unveiled, but instead celebrating New Zealand fashion history and our designers. Perhaps Karen Walker or Zambesi will get a queue around the corner too…

*

Issue 22 opinion

13

Auntie Sharon’s I’m sorry to be the one to burst your bubble, but there is no ‘one’. There is no ‘one’ person who will make you feel complete, and no soul mate waiting for your serendipitous arrival. You are not one half of a jigsaw, just waiting to be clipped together with your other half.

Opinion on Love Auntie Sharon

In my opinion, this concept is a very unhelpful figment of Hollywood’s imagination, perpetuated primarily by Disney and other films that end up in the Young Adult section of the video store.

I’m not saying this because I’m a bitter old person who wants to ruin your ideas of romance. I’m saying this in hope that you might come to your senses, and have a better chance of meeting someone you can have a long, genuine and mostly happy relationship with. I’m trying to save you some time.

Right now, you are probably looking for signs from the universe that he/she is the one. That you’ve caught the same bus to university for the past year but somehow never met. That you both love that same Bob Dylan album and own it on vinyl. That you both have dog-eared copies of On The Road. You know Right now, you are what all of that stuff is? Just shit you probably looking have in common, and shit you could in common with any of the for signs from the have straggly looking fuckers around you. universe that he/ You’re probably also waiting for that feeling. In movies they say she is the one ‘you’ll know’ when they’re ‘the one’, and it implies some sort of mystical tingling. I’ve had the tingling (on several occasions) and (every time) it just turned out to be hot sex-attraction. And sometimes gas.

Many of you are also no doubt rapidly adding to your list of must-haves in a lover: a sense of humour, nice eyes, same taste in music, nice arse, kind and thoughtful, will hang out with your friends, a good mix of intelligent and silly, same religion, same politics, dog-person not cat-person etc, etc, etc...

Uncle Daz is short, balding, and insists on wearing camo shorts year-round The problem is, if you keep looking for the instant magic and someone who meets your list of requirements, you’ll either be eternally dissatisfied or single. There is magic, there is spark, but it’s not because you’re fated to be together—it comes from mutual love, respect and friendship.

The fact is, in this world there are probably several hundred people that you could stand to be around for a good chunk of the day, every day, for the rest of your foreseeable life.

Uncle Daz is short, balding, and insists on wearing camo shorts year-round. Nothing I was looking for in an ideal man. But the man loves me unconditionally, is a wonderful friend and heaps of fun to hang out with. I don’t even mind his farts anymore.

I chose him because it was the right time. We were on the same page, wanted the same things from life and were both willing to put the work in. I chose him because I could trust him, have a conversation with him, and he didn’t mind my family as much as I did. It was nothing to do with destiny.

In keeping with my advisory role to you all: quit thinking that your fate is hurtling toward you, quit your dreaming. Instead, have a good hard think about what’s really important to you. Is it someone who listens to the same music, or someone who won’t cheat on you?

(Hopefully both, actually). Just start being realistic, and stop waiting for the one.

*

salient.org.nz

14

Salient Vol. 74

Rules

by which I live my urban life (as inspired by Andy Warhol) Michael Boyes

1.

Wear sunglasses, meteorology regardless.

2.

Read books on art by artists—they have something in common.

3.

Kiss strangers often.

4.

Never refuse a cigarette from an addict.

5.

Sing quietly in public, loudly in private, and soon you’ll find the two get confused.

6.

Jazz piano is impressive; but only if you can play something else.

7.

Ask too many people out for coffee and lose the ideal date scenario.

8.

Teach children to read by reading books yourself; your embryos shall be eternally grateful.

9.

Resist house plants—they’re like pets but without the pet factor.

10. Red meat.

11.

Name your children something easy to forget and save them years of bullying at school.

12. If I had wanted fruit tea I would have defrosted some raspberries and put them in water.

13. Go to the theatre, at least the company is beautiful.

14. Suffer from the Modern Condition and recover by routine online shopping.

15. Rain is nature’s form of weeping; I suppose it’s having a shit day too.

16. Repetition is always an admirable quality—the action itself may prove otherwise.

17.

Delight in punctuation. The semicolon is a privilege, not a right.

18. When I mention Homer I hope the right one comes to mind.

19. The unisex tee shirt is the ultimate symbol of the latter twentieth century.

20. There will always be an appropriate thing to say. Say it. But in txt.

21. Use personal pronouns in essays; it makes us think you care.

22. Always stand by an opening at parties as you never know when escape may be necessary.

23. Drink milk and then smile. If the calcium doesn’t improve your teeth, actually using them will.

24. Never mind I’ll find someone like you.

25. Things to keep on you at all times: an iPad. It has everything else you need, anyway.

15

Issue 22 opinion

An Uncomfortably Personal Account of My Own Folly

Outdoorsy yet intellectual:

and the Tossers I have Known Louise Burston

A bit greedy and a touch unrealistic, right? The sort of man who reads Ulysses from cover to cover for a lark couldn’t possibly also be an accomplished walker. Yet after reading the perpetually delicious Bill Bryson’s A Walk in the Woods I was determined to meet such an individual. No one was more surprised than me when I actually found him though.

My visions of us scampering about the countryside were tragically, however, not to be. Oh, he took me into the great outdoors alright, but I fear I was somewhat unequal to the task of keeping up my end of the intellectual banter while simultaneously trudging up a goat track and wilting under the glare of a sadistically radiant sun.

A musician: Imagine for a moment that you and I are artfully draped over a table in a corner of Havana Bar, both of us flatteringly nuzzled by the glow of tropically suggestive lamps, and that we have been drinking steadily for three hours.

There’s a natural lull in the conversation and, feeling

that we’ve really made a connection over the past few G&Ts, I lean over and ask you, my recently acquired bestest pal in the whole wide world, what your list looks like.

Come on now, everyone has a list. It’s that superficial inventory of requirements that pops into your head whenever the subject of an ideal romantic partner arises.

Some qualities might be vague and others a touch more specific; ‘nice’ belonging to the former category and ‘a retired Olympic gymnast whose vying passions for LARPing and Nordic cuisine somehow create a neverending sense of turmoil within her’ the latter. My inquiry is fueled by equal parts curiosity and the overwhelming urge to warn you against the very notion of having a list because, may I assure you, mine led to nothing but trouble. Allow me to illustrate what I mean, you coyly quiet thing, by revealing the qualities which used to occupy the Top Three positions on my list.

I’m certainly not the only girl who swoons at the idea of some guitar-wielding gentleman serenading her with a song but, not content with simply waiting for Antonio Banderas to make his way into my life, I was foolish enough to actively seek out a mysterious musician. I got exactly what I wanted too—a man whose mystery morphed into a paralyzing inability to confirm if/when/where we were ever going to meet up. I had more chance of George Harrison texting me back. Musicians, and every heterosexual male in Young Labour apparently, are not only notoriously flaky but also as difficult to pin down as that pesky 70s indie-fringe you whimsically got a few weeks ago at the salon.

Charismatic:

Wow. This guy. Let me tell you about this guy. He who shall be somewhat less than affectionately referred to as Penis Face was, physically speaking, the polar opposite of what I usually find attractive in a male and yet so energetic and confident that I somehow forgot he was about a head shorter than me. Aesthetic appeal was the least of my worries. I’m not prone to getting all flustered and pouty when a fellow has a wee flirt with other girls but Penis Face sure distinguished himself by, on one memorable occasion, pushing me out of the way so that he could do just that. The experience of being spatially readjusted in this manner encouraged me to look upon his behaviour thereafter with a rather less indulgent eye and thus, when a set of unidentified teeth marks one day graced his shoulder, I pursued the matter with a withering sense of resignation. Upon being questioned on the origin of said teeth marks, Penis Face favoured me with a charming, if sheepish smile, and suggested that perhaps he had “slept on it funny”. There are few things less attractive than an inept liar.

I’m sure that these boys were, on the whole, perfectly lovely. I suspect that I’m not still with any of them because of my rabid insistence on their possession of the very qualities which inevitably led me to resent them for quite some time. There was another boy, of course, amongst all of this. He was perfect and I simply couldn’t begin to tell you why. I sometimes try to account for why I liked him so much and why things didn’t work out there either but words, I’m somewhat bemused to report, fail me.

*

salient.org.nz

16

Salient Vol. 74

Why everybody should

play music Barney Chunn

Banksy said “I always used to encourage everyone I met to make art; I used to think everyone should do it... I don’t really do that so much any more.”

In the context of ‘Mr. Brainwash,’ you can understand where he is coming from. Still, I think his original sentiment was right, and it applies just as much to music.

Everybody appreciates music. We all know that.

I’ve never met anybody who doesn’t like some music to some degree. I’ve met people who don’t like chocolate or rice bubbles, and though I choose not to like them because of that, I don’t judge them to be the same soulless type that I might judge those, as yet unmet, who don’t like music. However, if the appreciation, the listening to and enjoying of music is the watching of porn, then the playing of music is the having of sex.

While it’s not necessarily the most elegant analogy to use, it does get the point across. And that point is this: not all of us are trying to be Ron Jeremy or Jenna Jameson, Jimi Hendrix or Janis Joplin; we might be, but it’s a small minority of people who participate in sex and sport who aspire to such heights of greatness.

At my high-school 85-ish per cent of people played rugby (a statistic of great pride for us all). Not everyone was doing it with the hope of being an All Black. Some may have, while for others it was a Saturday morning exertion of energy, for others an opportunity to try and start fights, and for the vast majority, a chance to dabble in a little Catholic school homoeroticism. But everyone did it—participation had very little to do with ability.

Alas! Not so with music. Attitudes towards the creatively engaging are treated with the weighty suspicion of Kiwi stoicism. From an early age people seem to latch on to phrases like “I can’t sing to save myself ” and self-diagnose tone deafness with severe musical hypochondriasis.

Whatever weird kink in our maturation that blocks our desire to participate in something so universally

There’s nothing as rewarding and down right enjoyable as playing music

appreciated is as irrational as procrastination. There’s nothing as rewarding and down right enjoyable as playing music.

Simply, it is my humble opinion that playing music is good for the soul, and everyone should give it a go. Just like calculus and coming to grips with Donnie Darko, it may take a bit of time and effort, but you will get there.

Everybody has some sort of intrinsic musicality (see ‘Bobby Ferrin demonstrates the power of the pentatonic scale’) that isn’t restricted to Happy Birthday’s and Fringe Bar karaoke.

You might say that this could be applied to anything creative or artistic, and if you did you might just be on to something. I would happily concede to include anything creative, but I think music has the somewhat unique characteristic among the arts of being more inclined to sociability that gives its edge over the other arts for me. You might also say that having the opinion that everybody should do something artistic to broaden his or her minds is hardly an earth-shattering revelation.

Again, spot on Bevan, but it seems that like eating habits, binge drinking and procrastination, we all know what we should do, we just don’t do it. So all I’m saying is, if you want to keep eating badly and drinking too much, while doing very little of productive worth, try your hand at music, and just maybe you can turn those bad habits into a lifestyle choice.

*

17

Issue 22 opinion

A ‘Soft’ Republic?

Paul Comrie-Thomson

In 1994, then-Prime Minister Jim Bolger said he believed New Zealand could cut ties with the British monarchy, and become a republic by the year 2000.

Although he succeeded in ending the awarding of British Honours in New Zealand in 1996, and firmly advocated replacing the Privy Council as the country’s highest appellate Court—successfully executed by the subsequent Clark Government—17 years later Mrs Windsor remains the symbolic head of state.

Writing in the 1940s, the foundation Professor of Political Science at Victoria, Leslie Lipson observed of New Zealand’s political culture: “abstractions, theories, ideals—these are of little account or interest unless they can be immediately applied. Utility is the national yardstick.” The cultural pragmatism Lipson recognised endures, and goes a long way towards explaining why Bolger’s push for full and final independence remains unfulfilled. The question persists: Why, when New Zealand is already a de-facto republic, do we need to officially cut ties with the monarchy?

With the Government having initiated a review of our constitution, it is with deference to the aforementioned cultural reality that I advocate the prospect of a ‘soft’ republic.

The soft republic approach would see New Zealand’s system of government move to a parliamentary republic, with the current hereditary head-of-state replaced with a New Zealander chosen

by New Zealanders, whether by direct election, or the more likely option of parliamentary appointment. Under the parliamentary republic model, this new head-of-state would retain the same powers, functions and responsibilities of the current GovernorGeneral, but would symbolically reflect New Zealand, rather than Mother England.

As Victoria University law lecturer, Dean Knight argues, under this system we would have a head-of-state who retains the valued ceremonial and community functions of the current GovernorGeneral, but would better represent and reflect the values of multi-cultural Aotearoa, and that’s the crux of the argument.

“The Royal Family do not represent us. They represent something different, and whether they be pop-stars, or champions of goodness, they lack the essential Kiwiness. While the office of the Governor-General has evolved to manifest many of these Kiwi values, there is a limit to which it can continue to evolve when it is a subordinate role anchored abroad in London.”

Often submitted as an obstacle to achieving full independence by way of its essence as an agreement between iwi and hapu on one side and Queen Victoria on the other, the Treaty of Waitangi need not be an insurmountable hurdle. As it stands, the New Zealand Executive has long assumed responsibility for meeting Treaty obligations (to

The Royal Family do not represent us. They represent something different, and whether they be pop-stars, or champions of goodness, they lack the essential Kiwiness

varying degrees, of course). Essentially, a soft republic would retain the status quo, with the transition to a republic, initiated largely independent of wider constitutional reform.

Of course, an optimistic—or less-soft—view of the potential surrounding republicanism, is that it would allow, and facilitate a wider debate resolving the future role and place of the Treaty.

This, as part of, and along side, the codification of New Zealand’s Constitution, would be a more ambitious approach to be sure, but an approach that would benefit the nation as a whole.

Assuredly, advocates of republicanism are unlikely to be beneficiaries of the current constitutional review. Bill English, while accepting that the panel will review the republican debate, has explicitly stated that the Government “is not advancing the prospect of a republic.” This is hardly surprising when the current Prime Minister seems to hold an unusual affinity for the monarchy, working to strengthen the old symbolic ties to the extent that he reintroduced knighthoods to the New Zealand Honours system.

However, the republican question is shrouded in inevitability—something even Mr Key will admit, even if he’s happy to leave it for the Sixth Labour Government to address. As Victoria’s Dr. Jon Johansson argues, “It’s a natural rite of passage that our history has inexorably been leading us towards.

“Britain, the old ‘Mother Country’ (for fewer and fewer of us), abandoned us several decades ago, to better put its own house in order (or at least to pursue its own perceived self-interest, which didn’t include providing continued guaranteed access for our proteinbased products), so it is time we simply acknowledged this reality and did the same.”

*

salient.org.nz

18

Salient Vol. 74

Constance Cravings

Let’s talk about the the clusterfuck that is

The Sexual Education Curriculum

Sex education needs to start early in order to be effective. How early? Early childhood education. I am talking about encouraging our children to be self-aware, respectful of themselves of others, and to learn that sex is about feeling nice with someone you like, but that it’s for older people. The key is that they learn that sex is meant to be good and fun. Not shameful and bad. It’s also important that children know their bodies are their own.

The primary school sex education curriculum needs to be about the fact that humans are often sexually interested beings from pretty early on. They need to know that the sex they are having with themselves is normal and fun, but that it’s personal to them. They should know what consent is, how to make decisions around sexual activity when they feel ready, what ‘ready’ and ‘age appropriate’ means, and how to communicate around this.

There was clitorally curious 12-year-old in the news recently.

He had heard about clitorises and he understood that it made ladies feel nice. He wanted to make his girlfriend feel nice. And he wanted to check that that’s okay. That’s the most beautiful thing I’ve heard in a long time and I want to throttle the Herald for admonishing this poor kid for his natural curiosity.

Should two 12-year-olds be touching each other’s genitals? Well, a surprising amount of them are having intercourse. If we can encourage these kids to potentially plateau at mutual fun-touching, then that’s a really good thing. Rather than accepting—but also ignoring—the quintessential hand shoved down someone else’s jeans at a third-form dance, then deciding that maybe the other gender is gross, before getting drunk on scrumpy at someone’s party a month later and deciding to do it, can we just stop for a second and celebrate this beautiful 12-year-old?

Being given a condom and encouraged to try it on a banana or a wooden penis—and please, let’s all just cringe at the casual racism with the villainous, gross “big black [wooden] penis” described by a horrified mother in the media recently—is not going to suddenly make your 13-year-old decide to have sex. They probably want to have sex.

Last year, I spent three days with over 300 sexual health clinicians, educators and big players in reproductive health, and it wasn’t until halfway through the last day that I heard someone say “We need to be teaching our young people to have good sex. Are we telling them sex should be fun?”

And if they want to have sex, they’re going to have sex. So you better hope that Mrs Palmer in Health Sci gave them a lecture about using condoms. Saying that sex education increases young people having sex is like blaming umbrellas for rain.

If you have any doubt about that, look at the proudly abstinenceonly education state of Texas and their unfathomably huge unplanned teen pregnancy rate. Then take a look at the Netherlands, which has some of the best sex education in the world, starting very young and making contraception and reproductive health choices taboo-free and easily accessible to all. They have one of the lowest unplanned pregnancy rates in the world.

To complement the potential for great, age-appropriate self-awareness based sex education in primary school, the secondary school curriculum should go further than that just safe sex. In year 9 young people should start talking about sexual and gender identities and getting to know themselves and what floats their boats. They should be talking about negotiating relationships, communicating what they enjoy and what they don’t enjoy, and what the difference between love and control is. They should feel confident in knowing what to do if they find themselves in an unhealthy relationship. They should discuss how to avoid ‘grey areas’ of consent. They should learn about the mixed messages in the media around sexuality, and they should be able to recognise the harmful beliefs those messages come from.

These conversations shouldn’t stop at year 10. Don’t pretend that parents are going to jump at the idea of having these conversations at home, or that groups of 14-year-olds themselves, who are exposed to the bullshit ‘1782 tips to please your man’ and “Gz up hoes down” culture are going to take it upon themselves to discuss what confuses them about sexual expectations.

We need to change out education legislation to require schools, all schools (because little Timmy at Saint Sacred Heart of the Angels in the Divine Family is still going to fuck Dylan from up the road) to teach not just the mechanics, not just safe sex, but the intricacies, preferences, conversations and joys of sexuality and gender. We need to start young, in an age-appropriate and open way. We need to accept that children of many ages and stages are having sex, and we need to encourage them to do it in a healthy, respectful way. Rather than shaming them and the people who try to help them.

If we don’t change this, then those horror stories you’ve got from your high school – about the girl who lost her virginity in the bush by the skatepark, or the dude who caught an STI from someone in the bathrooms at the ball—they’re going to be your kids. So you better start telling the horrified suburban Suzuki Swift brigade to stick their scaremongering bullshit where it can’t hurt any more young people.

*

uther dean

20

Salient Vol. 74

Quitters Never Win - A love story Asher Emanuel

I met cigarettes about 18 months ago. Sparks flew. We fucked on the first date.

A friend had introduced us. We were strangers to one another and our first encounters were fumbling and uncertain. My prejudices loosened by generous helpings of gin, I had let my guard down. At first I was embarrassed to be with cigarettes. We would meet infrequently; mostly in the dark, mostly drunk.

I knew the relationship was risky. I had been warned, and I promised I wouldn’t get involved. Cigarettes were no good for me. There was guilt and regret, but I always came back. My parents were unimpressed with my new acquaintance, suggesting that I find friends who had more respect for me, such as peppermint chewing gum or celery sticks.

But I hate celery, and gum is too expensive.

Eventually I surrendered, the concerns of others’ no longer bothering me. Cigarettes weren’t all leather and tattoos. They had a softer side, always waiting in my pocket, willing to talk at any time.

Cigarettes fast became a part of my daily existence. We started to do it in public. Mornings were spent together, drinking coffee and planning the day. We would occupy one another on the walk to work, or the moments between lectures. And when the night came, we would sit together, shivering on the porch, and reflect on the day. They always knew what I was thinking, as though an extension of myself. Their mood was my own; moody blue smoke in the morning sun, a fiery glow and crackle in the evening air.

We were in love.

Time, however, seems to corrode that which is good. The idealism of our first months was soon marred by the realities of being so close. Some days they made me feel beautiful, and others degenerate. Some times bold, others timid. Both strong and weak. But we didn’t give up, determined to find the initial glory that had brought us together. Rapidly, cigarettes became demanding, forcing me to make sacrifices in the name of our bond. My wallet wept.

Quick, too, was the reluctant wedding. One day an impermanent dalliance, the next a committed bond. There was no bachelor party. Our honeymoon was a respite, full of justifications and rationalisations that it was love holding us together, rather than base chemical addiction. But not long after, we would share flights of passion, only to find the end in a guilty smear of ash and paper in a curb-side puddle.

Each moment together was unceremoniously farewelled with a twist of the shoe.

I try not to see cigarettes as much anymore. This resolution has been less than successful. Cigarettes know how to make me take them back, writing me smoky love letters invoking the night we first met. Now they sit before me on the desk, laden with promise and despair in equal measure. I leer back at them, and inform them that this relationship has an expiry date. A moment later I apologise, and roll another.

Eventually I will file for divorce. The split will be acrimonious, the alimony patches and withdrawal. Red wine will never taste quite the same without my infallible companion, and no longer will I have an activity to punctuate awkward conversation. But maybe I’ll quit those too.

Until that tragic day, I’ll stick by cigarettes. For right now, I’m still in love. Despite the quarrels, doubt and guilt, cigarettes bring me moments of unmatched serenity. A time will come when this is no longer true, and I hope at that moment I possess the gumption to walk away. When that will be, I cannot tell you. But I do know that in the meantime I’ll learn to smoke in the shower.

*

We started to do it in public.

Mornings were spent together, drinking coffee and planning the day

Issue 22 opinion

21

g n i p Dum d Go Genevieve Fowler

(ex-Evangelical)

A few years ago, I went through a pretty nasty breakup. It started out civil. A clean split.

No hard feelings. We had grown apart. I just didn’t see the world the way he did anymore.

Slowly, life resumed normality and I went about it alone. It was okay, at first. Liberating, even.

Then the calls started, and the emails. “Hey, are you okay? Where’ve you been?” I guess his friends just wanted to let me know he still loved me. It was sort of nice of them. After all, it wasn’t just him I’d dumped. It was them too, the people I had shared the last years with who, I suppose, had loved me as well.

Occasionally, I’d bump into them. They’d hug me too hard and tell me wide-eyed how much he missed me and that he’d made so many sacrifices just to be with me. Of course, I had made him mad and stuff, but he was totally cool with it now. He’d take me back any day. It’d be just like old times.

“Here’s my number, we’ll have coffee.”

I was tempted. Those months were lonely.

Cripplingly. My memories of them blur into avoiding people in hallways and eating lunch alone. I hadn’t just lost the people; I’d lost a worldview, a routine. A warm and wonderful security blanket had been yanked from beneath my feet and I wanted it back.

Had I made a terrible decision?

We did have some great times, with this wise, enigmatic guy. He was dedicated, kind, cryptic and mysterious. A real romantic. Everybody loved him. He was always there with a comforting word and reassurance. He gave me

free stuff. We went to concerts and parties, full of bright and sober teens so eager to know all about me. For the first time, I really felt a part of something.

Only years later in the clarity of retrospect did I realise how stupid I had been. At first, it was nice not to feel wholly responsible for myself, to be answered for. But soon it was more. Soon, my body wasn’t mine and even the life around me and the thoughts in my head were somehow his. There was something wrong with me. I needed him. I owed him everything. I worshipped him.

That arrogant fuck.

And, god, did he lie. He told me wonderful, fantastical things, so obviously untrue. I watched him ignore unimaginable suffering and effortlessly control his adoring fans at whim. He was conservative, dogmatic, violent and dangerously persuasive. He ignored my questions and let me feel guilty, self-loathing and perpetually afraid of upsetting him. I let him take my money and use my worst fears against me. I let all the trademarks of an abusive relationship fly right under my radar. I let it all happen.

I was furious, but more than that, I wanted to help. I wanted to warn his next victims— the young and naive converts he will tempt down the same road. Maybe he’ll fool them for longer. Maybe he’ll hurt them more. I wanted them to know just how much of a dick he is. I wanted them to know that they were worth more.

I wanted them to know that dumping God will be the best decision they ever make.

* salient.org.nz

22

Salient Vol. 74

. y r e l e C e t I Ha (And Some Other Things I Feel Strongly About) Ally Garrett

I don’t know if you’ve noticed but I have a lot of opinions. A lot. A looooot.

I think that bread is a savoury food and should never, ever be eaten with jam. Or honey. Or marmalade. I think that Six Feet Under is the best television show of all time. I think that celery is the worst thing in the world, especially when it’s in potato salad. Sometimes when I find celery in a foodstuff I just purchased—a foodstuff I assumed was celery-free—it gives me heart palpitations.

As much as I hate the stringy green devil, I don’t know if it’s the worthiest thing to spend these six hundred words on. So, I’m going to write about the thing that makes me the most angry.

I believe in something so bland and so boring. I can’t even fathom it’s considered an ‘opinion’. I can’t believe this could be a fourth form debating moot or an essay topic or a contentious legal issue. I don’t understand why this is something that even has to be written about anymore.

The thing I believe in most of all is that the gender of the people you fuck and the gender of the people you love should not matter.

At all.

Not to anyone.

Not to the church and not to the state and not to any other human being on this green earth.

I could rehash all of the tired-but-truthful arguments about same-sex marriage, like the Edge’s wedding competition and Britney’s 55-hour marriage. I could argue with you until I was turquoise in the face about gay adoption, and tell you about that Williams Institute study which showed child abuse rates are at zero per cent for children raised in lesbian households.

I could. But I’m not going to.

Because when I’m gay-writing about gay rights all I can think about is my girlfriend. We have one of the most boringly normal relationships ever. We spend our weekends trying to decide whether we, as two hollandaise-loving lesbians, think Floriditas really has taken out Aro Cafe for the coveted title of best Wellington brunch spot. Recently we’ve started getting our groceries delivered and it’s working really well for us. We love This American Life and we sing along to television theme songs so that by the time we’ve finished the box set we’ve perfected the harmonies. When I write about gay rights I think about how much I love her. And then I think about how we live in a I think about how country that considers we live in a country our relationship to be that considers our lesser, just because there are two vaginas relationship to be involved.

lesser, just because there are two vaginas involved

And then I want to cry.

It could be worse. It could be a lot worse.

We could live in one of the 82 countries where homosexuality is illegal. My problems are small fry, compared to the queer people in other parts of the world who are thrown into jail or stoned to death. As small as my fry may be, it still sucks. It sucks that my girlfriend and I are supposed to be satisfied with a civil union. It sucks that Stuff.co.nz, ‘New Zealand’s Best News Site’, runs a ‘Weddings’ section but they have never featured a gay couple. It sucks that our smiley Prime Minister voted ‘no’ on the Civil Union bill. It sucks when people use the word ‘gay’ as a pejorative term but maybe I can’t blame them when the New Zealand legal system considers gay relationships to be of an inferior status.

I want New Zealand to change. I want New Zealand to legalise gay marriage and same sex adoption. That’s my opinion, if you will. If you consider a belief in equality to be an opinion.

*

Issue 22 opinion

YOUR STUDENTS’

23

ASSOCIATION

salient.org.nz

24

Salient Vol. 74

Issue 22 opinion

25

michelle ny salient.org.nz

26

Salient Vol. 74

Blame the Jews The Hawk of Liberty At Victoria University today, one of the consequences of pandering to the bigotry of left-wing cognitive dissonance is the rise of anti-Semitism. The whole world knows there could have been a peaceful settlement many times in the Middle East but for the incompetent and corrupt Palestinian leadership which now, in Gaza, is the terrorist faction Hamas. If you support Hamas, then you support people who want to exterminate Jews, not for being Israelis, but for being Jews. You also support a culture of education where martyrdom in the form of killing Jews is the greatest goal to which a citizen can aspire. I hope you’re proud of yourselves.

The problem with this “nationalist” Palestinian movement is the complete lack of people interested in actually running a nation, let alone capable of doing so. It seems that only Israel draws intellectual criticism about its very existence. This is a fair call if you look at its positioning and the mental state of its neighbours.

It comes as no surprise that the same pompous hypocrites who delegitimise Israel are silent on far bloodier state establishments that involved larger displacements of people like, say, Pakistan. [You know, that politically fragile, Islamic state that has nuclear There is never weapons..? Whoopee.]

There is never any any mention mention of the 10,000 Palestinians killed by of the 10,000 Jordan who seized most of the land, have stripped Palestinians refugees of their citizenkilled by Jordan ship and continue to ban ownership of property who seized sixty years on. The mass killings and human rights most of the land abuses in Syria, Sudan and Egypt are considered irrelevant, probably because Jews cannot be found to be at fault—although they could always find a way.

The social justice brigade (in the sickly form of Students for Justice in Palestine etc) is quick to join in on the self-righteousness, without even thinking that their twisted definition of the word ‘justice’ equates to the destruction of Israel. Usually when somebody hears the words peace or compromise they think happy things like harmony and understanding, but in this

context it means an imposed solution. This “solution” means one side wins and the other loses because one side is “right” and the other is “wrong”. There is absolutely no thought given to the fact that both sides may have valid claims.

This bullshit concept of justice leads these middle class left wing pricks to believe, somehow, that Palestinian Arabs have the only historic claim to the area and that the Jews are solely responsible for all Palestinian suffering. This is despite the 750,000 tons of humanitarian aid to Gaza alone in 2009 from Israel. These same people protect the right to Palestinian terrorism or “armed resistance” (y’know, that military aid Palestine’s sending Israel, in the form of 6500 rockets).

If the Students of Palestine really believed in justice, they would demand billions of dollars from Arab states for the displacement of the hundreds of thousands of Jews and support them living in their rightful home. They would demand that the US stop funding the Palestinian Authority, who celebrate terrorists and pay salaries to murderers in prison.

If Hamas and the PA really wanted to take care of their people, they would save money on explosives and buy their hungry children some food. A great idea, I believe, given 70 per cent of their economy is foreign aid.

It is no coincidence that the Palestinian authority has just appointed the celebrity mother of seven terrorists to launch their UN campaign for statehood. You have to be totally immune to irony to be a Lefty these days.

(And no, I am not Jewish)

*

27

Issue 22 opinion

The answer is alternately yes and no. No because I do love and will never grow tired of Miller’s Crossing—in contrast with Ebert, who is apparently “finished with” Kane.

But yes, because if we follow Ebert’s lead, it is not the film I want to watch most right now. The same can be said of many of my other favourite films. I adore Bong Joon-ho’s monster movie The Host; Jean-Pierre Jeunet’s sweet confection Amelie; Rian Johnson’s sharp, resourceful high school noir Brick; Kim Ki-duk’s poetic, beautiful 3-Iron; Jean-Pierre Melville’s effortlessly cool Le Samourai. I love them dearly, but I do not want to watch them right now.

Right now, I want to watch Final Destination 3.

My favourite film is Final Destination *But not really

3*

Adam Goodall

“What’s your favourite movie?” is not an easy

question to answer, regardless of whether you’re a pretentious cinephile who judges people for confusing Kurosawas or a risk-averse economist who thinks Cowboys & Aliens is the height of originality. Most people, if posed the question, would no doubt hesitate and consider the question for a few seconds. Indeed, in a 2008 blog on being asked that question, Roger Ebert wrote 1600 words about the difficulty of answering before giving two answers, each as temporary (and passionate) as the other. But before giving those answers, Ebert posed an important question—how do we decide?

The answer, obviously, varies from person to person.

Some may apply some convoluted algorithm to assess a movie’s ‘worthiness’ while others may just cite a film they saw recently that they really liked. If asked, I’d be one of those sad fucks weighing up My ultimate answer each film’s ‘worthiness’; my ultimate answer would be would be Miller’s Miller’s Crossing, the Coen Crossing, the Coen brothers’ gangster masterwork. brothers’ gangster It’s both technically flawless and incredibly entertainmasterwork ing—the dialogue is classic Coens; snappy, inventive and a delight to listen to; the actors (Byrne, Turturro, Finney, Gay Harden et al) all give spectacular performances; Barry Sonnenfeld’s cinematography gives a dry comic life to the autumnal production design; etc. etc. etc. I will never not love this film. But is that the truthful answer at any moment in time? Or, as Roger Ebert suggests of his stock answer—Citizen Kane—is it merely convenient?

Final Destination 3 is everything I want out of cinema and more. I cannot profess to have the depth of feeling for FD3 that Ebert has for La Dolce Vita, the film he waxes lyrical about in his blog entry, but I can honestly say that I have a deep appreciation for every second of it. James Wong directs like Vincent Price used to act in the old Corman films, broad and deliciously hammy—Wong Their futile humanity takes a film about teens running around, freaking out about their in the face of a grand, imminent deaths and uses his complex terror playful editing and cinematography to turn it into a wholly unique endears us to them tragicomedy. Their futile humanity in the face of a grand, complex terror endears us to them; their deaths at the hands of methodically-constructed, ridiculous Rube Goldberg set-ups reveal the comedy of their situation. It’s lively, it’s exciting, and it’s a knowing and clever piece of filmmaking. If Sight & Sound called me up and asked me to submit a top ten for their poll each decade, would I put FD3 on it? Probably not. But, right now, it is the film I want to see the most and it deserves the title of ‘favourite film’ at this point in time. A favourite isn’t for life—it can be, and should be, just for Christmas, because our opinions are never static.

It’d be a little bit boring if they were.

*

salient.org.nz

28

Salient Vol. 74

Are you ruining the Internet?

Haimona Gray

Politics and social media are like air and fire—both are neccessary, but combining the two only make both worse.

This extends beyond the political parties themselves; they are selling a product and it makes sense for them to utilise any and all ad space available. They are not the true threat to social media, their supporters are.

“When you go to the zoo and you see a monkey throwing poop, you go, “that’s what monkeys do, what are you gonna do?” But what I wish the media would do more frequently is say “bad monkey.”

This quote is from Jon Stewart who was arguing that the media was being unresponsive to the failures of politicians and that a form of comfortable Nihilism had set in around the reporting of these political failures. He may have a point, but countering this is a universe of twitterers and trollers whose reactionary streak is inflamed by seemingly anything, and who refuse to debate on, or about, anything substantive.

This is because the internet is seen by many as so divorced from the real world that what happens on it will not have any ramifications in the real world. They are wrong

How do you know if you are ruining the internet?

Substance can be subjective, but there are certain common traits of the type of lazy debating seen on the Internet. Here are a few: Taking an argument anywhere just to win it—Whether by Godwin’s Law or pure stupidity, when someone fears the

It does stem from desperation and an unhealthy attachment to what others think of them

momentum in a debate is turning against them they will change the subject to something they feel better prepared to argue, even if the correlation between that and the original point is almost nonexistent.

Unrelated previous failures/controversies— Like the ‘taking an argument anywhere just to win it’ technique, this strategy involves making up for one’s lack of anything worthwhile to say by pointing to previous, but not at all connected, failures that this person had as proof that they are incapable of being right. This has the added effect of allowing the hack in this situation to dismiss any point you make, no matter how valid.

Ad hominem—Going on the offensive because you have nothing intelligent to say is a staple of the lazy-but-opinionated crowd.

Calling your political opposite an offensive word for the female anatomy or calling them racist/sexist/homophobic/etc without any proof of the validity of your accusation is all too common in these partisan online arguments. It’s dirty, callous, and entirely out of line, but it has the added effect of rallying any like minded reactionaries who are looking for an excuse to behave poorly.

Why would someone ruin the internet?

One word: Signalling.

In contract theory, signalling is the idea that an employer will state a skill or level of proficiency they require from a potential employee, thereby attracting people with

those skills to apply. In partisan Internet trolling, people use similar statements to show their loyalty to a party, ideology, or social group. This can come in the form of Facebook likes, events, or just using the above strategies to attack people who don’t agree with them. Far from being irrational— though it does stem from desperation and an unhealthy attachment to what others think of them—this type of behavour is often calculated and part of a greater goal—to convince others that you hold these beliefs and that this makes you better than them/in the same boat as them.

Next time you see one of your friends has joined ‘John Key is a <insert swearword here>’ or any other non-positive partisan group, just remember that this is all a show.

When you go to the zoo and you see a monkey throwing poop, you go, ‘that’s what monkeys do, what are you gonna do?’ But what I wish people would do more frequently is ask themselves ‘why did I come to the zoo?’

*

29

Issue 22 opinion

The importance of being

Rational Elle Hunt

First, a caveat: I don’t claim to be a decent human being. I am a Media Studies major. I text in all caps. Just last week, in fact, I set my hair on fire.

But even in the face of these grave character flaws, I strive to be rational, a trait that is not prized enough by modern society. Fuck being earnest—earnestness is just, as P. J. O’Rourke so rightly said, stupidity sent to college. The importance of being reasonable, however, is paramount: if we can’t reach conclusions from deliberate consideration, if we can’t connect our beliefs to our reasons for belief, and our actions with our reasons for action, we are chickens without heads.

Too often, issues that are shaded grey are discussed in black and white terms. The argument over Voluntary Student Membership is a key example: to articulate it as a binary of compulsory or voluntary undermines the influences on and implications of the debate. Even worse than such total statements is hand-wringing, hysterical rhetoric.

The New Zealand Union of Students’ Associations were quite rightly mocked for their “desperate” press release that declared that “members of the press release” would “tonight be appalled” that the “extreme...

Bill” had not been reconsidered. I understand the intended effect of emotive language, but this verges on being insulting.

The same issue arose at the tumultuous ‘We Are The University’ protest on Kelburn campus a fortnight ago. Call me heartless, but changes to the International Relations programme does not constitute “the death of tertiary education”, and saying so undermines your point, alienates potential supporters, and makes it easier for your detractors to ignore, dismiss or rebut you. Moreover, the letter addressed to Vice-Chancellor Pat Walsh was, quite frankly, cringeworthy—petulant, sarcastic, and reeking of entitlement. I don’t dispute that the lack of consultation with students on changes to the University is disturbing, but snarky repetitions of “Pat” do not convey this, and that the protest’s organisers felt that this was an appropriate way of articulating these concerns—especially on behalf of other students—was acutely embarrassing.

Sometimes people confuse “discussion” with “sermon”, “lecture”, or “verbal assault,” but it’s easy to engage in reasonable dialogue, and doing so fosters constructive,

Too often, issues that are shaded grey are discussed in black and white terms

rewarding, authoritative debate. Just be respectful of and open to new ideas; provide proof and justification; and concede to evidence that disproves your point. Your argument is never so powerful that it’s not necessary to talk about it.

By the same token, it is important to recognise the limitations of your opinion. Above all, you need to come to terms with the fact that all your opinions, without exception, are framed by your own experience and understanding of the world. Being a student of Victoria University, you are likely to be a white, middle-class New Zealander, aged between 17 and 25—and by that definition, you cannot be a leading authority on China’s economy or Michele Bachmann or the Rationality does not Israel-Palestine conflict. Not even if you hold a full online preclude creativity subscription to The New or innovation: in fact, Yorker. It is of course vital to it reinforces their pay attention to international affairs, but fronting foundations like an expert on issues that neither you nor I, by virtue of our position within the world, could ever hope to fully comprehend is misleading and presumptuous.

This is why we need to initiate a return to reason.

Rationality does not preclude creativity or innovation: in fact, it reinforces their foundations. As one creative type, filmmaker Lars von Trier, noted—”if one devalues rationality, the world tends to fall apart”, and I am deeply concerned about the world falling apart. It is so, so important that we articulate ourselves clearly and intelligently and reasonably; otherwise, we just look like dicks.

And if I’m going to look like a dick, it won’t be because I’ve made a blanket or overwrought statement that highlights the flaws in my logic. It will be because I’ve set my hair on fire.

*

salient.org.nz

30

Salient Vol. 74

‘Human’ by The Killers

is a terrible, terrible song Mikey Langdon

As someone who listened to radio once, I know that roughly 99 per cent of music is terrible.

Seriously, there’s so much shit music out there that whenever I happen to be in a situation where music is playing, I feel like a newly hatched coprophiliac maggot who is ashamed of what he has just done. In fact, as a certain Dim Post columnist once described my writing, finding good music is like “sifting through so much shit to get tiny flecks of gold”. And of all of the terrible music that I have heard, the song ‘Human’ by The Killers takes the fucking cake.

I first started to seriously dislike this song because of that line in the chorus - you know the one: “Are we human or are we dancers?” What the fuck does that mean? I thought. That makes no sense whatsoever.

Humans and dancers aren’t mutually exclusive. You can be a human and you can be a dancer—being one “Are we human or are we dancer?” ...I’m sorry, doesn’t exclude you from being the other. I know what? Are we dancer? people who are both human You mean, like, are we and dancers. You can be a all one dancer? Singular? human and not a dancer, Really? Fucking really?? and there are non-humans out there who can dance.

Bees dance, did you know that, The Killers? And did you ever see that YouTube video of the parrot dancing to fucking drum and bass music? Yes, dear readers, The Killers are misleading you through song.

It gets worse. Upon doing some actual research for this opinion, I looked up the lyrics, which actually read “Are we human or are we dancer?” ...I’m sorry, what?

Are we dancer? You mean, like, are we all one dancer?

Singular? Really? Fucking really?? Not only does that logically not make sense, it also grammatically doesn’t make sense. I just... no. Just take a few breaths, count to ten. Okay.

Listen, I can appreciate art, and I understand that artists must sometimes push the limits of their medium for artistic reasons. So if we are to label this particular arrangement of words and musical notes as art, we must first find the reason why lead singer Brandon Flowers seems to be illiterate. I looked up the inspiration for the line and found it came not from a YouTube comment, but from a quote by Hunter S. Thompson, which is grammatically correct because he was literate, so it’s not that.

Perhaps he needed to omit the ‘s’ so it would rhyme?

Well, throughout the whole song it only rhymes with the line “And I’m on my knees looking for the answer”.

Well, so am I, but if he had put an ‘s’ on dancer and answer then it would have made sense and made the song slightly less shit, and it’s not like adding an ‘s’ would screw up the rhyme scheme. So that rules that out. He’s just illiterate. Brandon Flowers sucks at grammar so hard that ‘Karma Police’ by Radiohead was originally called ‘Grammar Police’ and was about him (Grammar police / Arrest this man...).

Let’s move on to the actual musical content of the song. There’s a beat in there somewhere. The singing makes you want to rip your inner ear out with a corkscrew. As the lyrics suggest (?), it is supposed to be a song you can dance to. But there just seems to be something a little off about it, something not quite right. Sure, there’s a sort of techno-dance sound to it, but you wouldn’t actually dance to it, would you?

It somehow manages to be a very depressing song. A depressing dance song. How is that even possible?

Brandon Flowers is not only illiterate, he’s also musically illiterate. And the song is shit. But keep musicalising, The Killers. Maybe one day you’ll make your fleck of gold. Maybe.

*

31

Issue 22 opinion

Why we should

Give a Shit

Giving apathy about everything a kick in the pants

Molly McCarthy

When I was 11 I was pissed off. Riled up, red in the face, cheated and angry.

I had spent months upon months of going on anti-Genetic Engineering marches; pasting stickers and posters reading ‘GE Free NZ’ everywhere; persuading my parents to shop religiously with the GE Free shopping guide—not to mention risking social exclusion by earning myself the label of ‘dirty hippy’ after getting preachy about the topic at my intermediate speech competition. And after all that, ‘Corngate’ broke, and the government was accused of covering up the accidental release of GE-contaminated corn seeds in the country.

I expressed my extreme outrage in a long and strongly-worded (for an 11-year-old) letter to Helen Clark. I’m not sure if it was my over-zealous use of commas or choosing to write in Comic Sans MS that gave me away, but instead of receiving a thoughtful, personalised and adult letter to match mine, I was fobbed off with a ‘GE and You’ information pack for children. At the time I was annoyed, even hurt, that my government thought I could be so easily appeased, simply because I wasn’t of voting age. I had spent hours researching, writing and editing that letter, only to receive a glossy booklet that did nothing to address the issues I had

raised, but simply explained to me “What is Genetic Engineering?”. When I was older, I vowed, I would use my pull as a voter to try to change society into the place I wanted to live.

Nine years on from that incident however, and although I may have stopped using Comic Sans and excessive commas, I’m certainly not making the most of my advanced years to right society’s wrongs. Although there are still issues that get me hot under the collar, and certainly things I would like to see changed, the truth is that for the most part, I just don’t give a shit. And it’s not just about genetic engineering, or politics in general— I’ve no idea where the fiery passion of my childhood has gone, but these days I’m hard-pressed to give a rat’s arse about most things. In 2000, I would go hungry at times in order to avoid eating battery-farmed chicken. Now it’s 2011, and after attempting When I was older, vegetarianism for two weeks, I I vowed, I would decided that I didn’t really care anyway, and ate three mince use my pull as pies in the space of an hour. a voter to try to Although my childhood change society protestations had a notably political bent, no matter what into the place I our cause, there is no denying wanted to live that most of us were far more passionate as children and teenagers. Oh, how we stuck it to the man with our temper tantrums, slamming of doors and rolling of eyes.

But now that we are older and capable of constructing a reasoned argument, why aren’t we using this ability to protect the things we hold dear? It seems a shame that we’ve lost our mojo just as we reach an age where society will actually take us seriously.

It’s easy to convince ourselves that we just don’t care; that there’s no point in trying, because even if we did it probably wouldn’t make a difference anyway. It’s easy to think that we’re above being outraged, too cool to get worked up, and too old to throw a tantrum. Yes, it’s easy not to give a shit—but when we let our apathy rule, we risk losing the things we really do give a shit about.

Whatever your cause—whether it be big or small— stand up, speak out, and do something about it. Maybe it’s the cuts to tertiary education that have got a bee in your bonnet; maybe you just paid way too much for a wrap that was actually pretty substandard at Wishbone.

Pissed off, riled up, red in the face, cheated and angry?

Then do something about it. It’s that simple.

*

salient.org.nz

32

Salient Vol. 74

In Defence of Robbie Williams Ollie Neas

Joy Division? Shit. The Beatles? Shit.

Radiohead? Shit. They’re all shit.

There are times in life when you must stand up for what you believe in. Now is one such a time. I fight for the redemption of music. I fight for Robbie Williams. Yes, I’m out, and I’m proud.

Ever since Robbie Williams ripped off his own skin and cast his fresh flesh into a throng of ravenous half-naked ravens on roller-skates, I have harboured a secret crush. I am not ashamed to admit it, and I am not ashamed to have attended Robbie live in concert, Christchurch, 2001. It was a “sick” gig. Robbie remains the eternal spring of hope buried deep ‘neath my loins, the sparkle in thine lover’s eye, the heavenly breathe upon a supple summer’s wind.

Robbie is my life; my destiny. They say music taste is subjective. Perhaps this is true.

But not with Robbie. Robbie is truth.

In those days it was OK to be open about these things. They were brighter times; Robbie was universally adored. Torn from humble beginnings, he was cast into the spotlight, lusting after transcendent greatness. This he achieved in the spring of 1998 with the release of seminal compilationinfused-with-original-material classic, The Ego has Landed. It seemed Tony Bennett had fornicated with George Michael and produced the god-child of soft pop-rock. He was purity in a festering sin-pit of pop filth.

But then came the stigma. The album Rudebox was released and, just like that, Robbie was uncool. Rudebox: what was this enigma? I became insecure—ashamed even—isolated. Occasionally though, in the forgotten back-rows of class, the muffled phrase “I actually enjoyed the hidden track on Escapology” could be heard and I would

know I was not alone. There was rare companionship. But there would always, just as swiftly, be retraction: “I don’t really like Robbie Williams.” Alas, it hurt me then to see those poor fools suppressing natural instinct. But I kept faith. It takes courage to swim against the current. I mean, if you can’t swim, you drown. But today, those dark times are over.

In defence of music, I offer you three reasons why Robbie Williams is the greatest recording artist of all-time: Record sales are no indication of quality.

Not so for Robbie. He’s sold a fuck-load of records. Everyone fucking loved him. How’s that for fucking tautology.

Robbie has the fertile mind for lyrical intrigue revered by all great musicians. Few have covered as diverse a range of subject matter. Compare the discussion of 21st Century mystic hedonism in ‘Let Love Be

Your Energy’ with the analysis of medieval occult fatalism in the trip-hop infused archetypal Bond ballad, ‘Millenium’. “We’ve got stars directing our fate, and we’re praying it’s not too late, cos we know we’re falling from grace,” he sings in the chorus.

I don’t particularly like tattoos and it is no secret the Robbie has a penchant for the habit.

But his tattoos serve a purpose. They are a reflection of his descent from god to fallenangel. But he knows this. “Such a saint but such a whore”, he reflects in ‘Come Undone’.

He’s self-aware; it’s fucking postmodHis tattoos ern, trust me. It’s serve a art. And every purpose. erudite bro has got to love a bit of art.

They are a Now, nothing reflection of repulses me more his descent than people who from god to claim to possess fallen-angel superior music taste to others.

But then, it is important that we reject total relativism. It leads to critical inertia.

Sometimes it is imperative that we stand up for what we believe in. In doing so, we must not have any regrets: “they only hurt”.

Robbie’s coming back you see. I know it. He must... for me... The Rudebox years are but his time dormant, buried behind stone. Soon, his heavenly spirit will return, the stone will be cast aside, and he will rise again. This time, more powerful than we can possibly imagine.

In these days of apathy and doubt, there is only one such thing I can say with certainty: I believe in Robbie Williams. If you too know truth, speak out. You are not alone.

*

Sam Northcott

Issue 22 opinion

33

salient.org.nz

34

Salient Vol. 74

Ban the Burqa?

In my view, the merits for banning ties equal those for banning burqas

Selina Powell

At the beginning of this year the New Zealand media turned its attention towards an item of clothing that alternately flummoxed, intimidated and angered sections of the public.

While it became the ‘burqa debate’ the central focus was on one element of the burqa which covers the face – the niqab. Media attention was initially sparked by the refusal of bus drivers in two separate incidents to allow women wearing burqa to board the bus. The bus company claimed that the bus drivers’ actions were not due to a prejudice against a particular type of Islamic dress, but because of a fear of facial coverings known as ‘maskophobia’.

Leaving the bus drivers aside and assuming that the coincidence of two people being diagnosed with the same rare medical condition was genuine, the ensuing public discussion revealed widespread misconceptions of the Islamic faith within New Zealand society.

Some critics argue that the burqa should not be allowed in certain situations while others called for an outright ban in public places. Opponents claim that the burqa symbolises the oppression of women, that it allows wearers to commit crimes with impunity as they remain unidentifiable, and that the garments provide a method for hiding weapons or other devices which pose a risk to public safety. Paul Holmes, in an opinion piece for The Herald entitled ‘No Place Here for Burqa’, claims that “even the most reasonable New Zealander—even the most pro immigration as I am— will tell you they hate the muslim face mask”.

These views mirror the anti-burqa stance taken by several influential politicians overseas. In France, burqas were banned from schools in 2004 and face coverings were prohibited in public places from September last year.

Speaking of his objection to the burqa, French President, Nicholas Sarkozy observed, “We cannot accept to have in our country women who are prisoners behind netting, cut off from all social life, deprived of identity”.

Jack Straw, who served in the British Cabinet from 2007 to 2010, also became infamous for his views on the burqa when he refused to meet with constituents wearing face

coverings. Closer to home, Cory Bernardi, an Australian MP publicly declared burqas to be ‘un-Australian’ garments which represent the repression of women and contribute to a growing trend of ‘burqa bandits’.

You get the feeling reading such comments that these powerful men had not spent a lot of time talking with the women that they perceived to be victims of the burqa. If they had, perhaps we would have heard a more balanced view of the burqa and its place in Islamic society. For example, that rather than always being an oppressive requirement, Muslim scholars generally accept the view that it is a woman’s choice whether she wears a niqab.

There was no public questioning of the attire that Holmes, Sarkozy, Straw and Bernardi select each morning.

These men line up in their respective Google image searches wearing that beacon of Western culture—the tie. In my view, the merits for banning ties equal those for banning burqas.

You could claim that Jack Straw’s rivetingly awful striped tie turns him into nothing more than a faceless hanger for his polyester blend. The slightly trapped look in the eyes of businessmen darting down Lambton Quay confirms my suspicion that Paul Holmes cannot liberate himself, or others of his Yes Men generation, from their silk chains. Sure, Sarkozy has the most elegant tie of the bunch, but doesn’t this just illustrate Sarkozy’s repression by his sartorially inclined supermodel wife? While Bernardi looks innocent enough in his baby blue number, you’ve got to wonder whether that high collar is hiding something sinister.

Granted it may be ridiculous comparing ties, which are a quirk of dress, with forms of Islamic clothing which have far greater religious significance and in some cases prevent identification. But it is also ridiculous to contend that the superficial measure of banning the burqa will actually address or remedy the oppression of women. A common theme of imposing a blanket ban on either garment is undermining the freedom of the individual for very little public gain.

Recent events in Egypt and Yemen where muslim women have taken on leadership roles within public protest have caused those in the West to question the stereotypes that they associate with burqas and hijabs. Women, in a diverse range of clothing, are controlling their own liberation. Paul Holmes and other burqa ban advocates are only limiting choice in the name of freedom and should stick to making their own wardrobe choices.

*

35

Issue 22 opinion

Zoe Reid

If there is any one way you can definitively impact the world, it is through freeganism.

a

e rF e g ni s m

Everyone, every single one of us has something which we do not value at all, which another one of us would be eternally grateful for. We can all make a positive difference directly to everyone in our lives in a meaningful way. Be a freegan. It’s easy.

There are layers and layers, and all you need to do is float on top. Ignore anything you’ve previously heard, ignore the label if you are uncomfortable with it. You don’t have to rifle through trash, or re-appropriate others’ possessions. Simply give things you do not need or want to people who will use them. Offer leftover dinner to your flatmate. Offer those shoes that don’t fit to your friend of the same shoe size. Two cheese graters just takes up space, but a flat without a cheese grater is really put out on occasion, so pass it on.

You have this amazing potential to make so many lives seem better, easier, more comfortable, at an absolute minimum effort to you.

Listen out for comments like, “We don’t have a ----” and assess how quickly and costlessly you can help. If you own something which doesn’t fit you or your lifestyle, quickly assess those around you to see if someone else would cherish it. Anything you own which you don’t actually use is better used by someone else.

If you won’t just give, loan things to people who you know always return them, or only loan things you don’t mind not getting back. If you have it, help others use it, or spend the time to teach them. If you have a friend who you don’t trust with your stuff, come over with the stuff, help them use Just offer the it, and leave with it. In many cases, they’ll help in the probably be more grateful for the help—and format you’re everyone understands nervousness about expensive belongings. Just offer the help in comfortable, the format you’re comfortable, and it will be and it will be accepted or declined—no harm, no foul. accepted or Freeganism also makes you a happier declined—no person. Did you know the people who live above me bake for me because I let them use harm, no foul. my washing machine? I have never asked for anything in return, but they think of me often enough to turn up with hot delicious baking. At no cost to me, when I’m not using it, my washing machine is used by an entire flat of people. There is no conceivable way that I will stay at this house long enough for this $100 machine to require replacing, so what’s the harm? They’d probably just try to sneakily use it anyway, it’s stored in a communal area, and instead of spending many an hour fretting over washing machine possessiveness, I get cookies.

I think it is important to see each other as friends with a life, thoughts, feelings, and a future. It is important to care about everyone else’s future, because it’s our future too. Giving freely encourages love and empathy on both sides. It also gives us faith in people. Giving freely is a transaction where there is no fear in what is expected of us, and strength in ourselves to only give what we can.

It is so rare to receive something you need, simply because someone has observed you need it. It shouldn’t be. Freeganism pulls us further away from a tit-for-tat system where we carefully measure out our love, money, and possessions to ensure we get ‘enough’ back from life. Society does not owe us anything. We are a part of society, and we owe it to ourselves to make society what we want it to be.

*

salient.org.nz

Salient Vol. 74

conrad reyners

In Defence of Politics

36

Over the last three years I have become increasingly frustrated with the way politics operates.

My concern is not directed at what political parties say or what they do, instead it’s directed at the political space in which they talk. Something is missing from our generation’s politics. Something important, and it’s been lost.

Former Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, Tony Blair, said the that most important thing in politics was the power of ideas. What he meant by this was not that political parties were going to win hearts and minds by proposing new, populist policies. Instead, he meant that in order for politics to work properly, in order for it to matter, it needs to be based on a vision.

Visions, principles, values—these are amorphous things but they matter. Trying to pin them down and make them real is always a challenge, but its important. But in contemporary politics the power of ideas is conspicuously absent. And it has been since the late 1980s.

Thats not to say that ideas are not acknowledged. They are. But they have transmogrified into something more vulgar. Major political leaders now only pay lip service to values. Evocations of freedom, equality, personal responsibility, environmentalism or reason are bound up in the discourse of brand and image, not ideology or vision.

This represents something that is increasingly disturbing about the role and importance of politics in peoples lives. The Harry Potter generation no longer see politics as something that is empowering, or as something that can make our collective lives better. Our parents did, as did theirs before them. Earlier this year in the Dominion Post, Professor Jon Johansson said that if you truly want to meet a cynical person, talk to someone aged under 25. I think he has a point. The oft quoted reason for this is because our generation is blasé and apathetic. That probably plays a part—but as an explanation it is entirely insufficient. It is simply describing a sociological symptom, not a cause.

The reason for this disconnect is more fundamental. It goes to the heart of how our generation views the sociological role of politics. Since the mid 1980s, the power of political change and of political thought has become increasingly undermined by politicians, perhaps inadver-

tently. The rise of the individual has inherently shunned the importance of politics (of any ideological persuasion) as a force for good. Apparently, politics is now no longer needed to regulate society, it has been rendered defunct, superfluous to requirements. Instead, individuals acting according to their own interests will eventually lead to order and stability. Because we are rational, obviously.

The result of this was that politicians or political activists are no longer seen as visionaries—but instead as managers. Democratic elections have become an exercise in consensus over who we can trust to “run” the country.

They are a competition for who we can trust to ensure that the apparatus of the State, along with the services we need to oil the wheels of individualism, are looked after and protected. Government, and the politicians who manage it are engineers within a system. There to keep us safe from unseen threats—the most obvious being international terrorism.

Ironically, it was Tony Blair and his third way Labour Government that contributed in the most obvious way to the removal of the political from politics. In the early years of his administration the British State was transformed from a vehicle that promoted patrician values to a public choice machine that simply provided people with whatever they wanted.

New Zealand’s own experiences of State reform during the 1990s and 2000s was similar. Even within a leftist-social democratic framework major policies were directed at the individual or the family— In order to break this not at the nation, as part of a progressive vision. cycle there needs The current Nationalto be resurgence in led government personifies this insipid “govern the power of ideas. by the numbers” approach There needs to be political life. This is a re-appreciation of to reflected in the legacy of the the importance of last generation of student ideology politicians—of which I would consider myself a part. Inadvertently or not the approach has been to manage the competency, sustainability and viability of our student institutions. It has not been to promote a vision about what it could be or what it should be for. This is nobody’s fault—a fact that frustratingly reflects a political culture which subconsciously shuns the political.

In order to break this cycle there needs to be resurgence in the power of ideas. There needs to be a re-appreciation of the importance of ideology. Not of only one, but of all ideologies—from the Libertarian right to the Communist left. Scarily, it is only the fringes of political society, the tea-partiers or the anarchists, who still cling to Utopian dreams. But they are only heard loudly because they are the only ones talking. We must have a conversation that drowns them out.

The purpose of politics is not just to figure out who gets what, where, why and how. It is to try to imagine how to create someone different. Without re-injecting the political back into politics we, both as individuals and as a collection of individuals, will never figure out how to change the world for the better.

*

37

Issue 22 opinion

We should be

building awesome things Carlo Salizzo

Wellington’s waterfront is pretty

cool. There are places where you can’t help but think that whoever designed it had nothing else in mind but pure enjoyment. There’s a walkway that does little else but take you a bit closer to the water. There are snippets of poetry carved from stone, a wind wand, an eccentric statue in an iconic pose, and a diving board. In all objectivity, it’s a bit awesome.

I know that is possibly the most overused word of the last two years, but it sums up fairly succinctly the concept I’m trying to put across. A concept that we could do with a lot more of. Our world is full of innovations and constructions to make us feel more comfortable, relaxed—to make everyday life easier and, to be perfectly honest, a little bit bland. There’s not much around today that really has the potential to overwhelm us with awe. Nothing to make us grin and giggle uncontrollably just because it’s there. That is exactly what we’re missing.

Wouldn’t it be great if the world we live in wasn’t full of dreary quasi-mature office buildings and occasional abstract sculptures of steel and glass, but things our eleven-year-old selves could glimpse and be genuinely excited about the future. It’s childish, yes, but that’s the entire point. Sometimes, the kids are all, every last one of them, right—they’re using their imaginations, and isn’t that what we pay “creative-types” the big bucks for? If a child’s vision of the world could be implemented by adults with some technical expertise behind them, there would be some seriously awesome changes around here. Something better than a Wellywood sign.

The possibilities are endless with the technology in this day and age. Dubai’s skyline has shown us what can happen with a bit of positive attitude, and Japan made the most of a cultural knack for awesome with an indoor beach. Auckland’s even got an indoor ski slope.

But why can’t we take it further? How about a public waterslide that goes on a hundred metres? Or a statue of a sword, so high that it’s

cutting through clouds, just for the hell of it? Who knows what we could dream up, if money was no object.

And that, I suppose, is the one big hurdle to my dream. The bottom line. I don’t have to point out that money’s a little bit tight at the moment. There are problems that are going to take time and a lot of money to solve, and critics of awesomeness would quite rightly argue that they need our attention before we look to building a Futurama-style compressed-air-tube mass transit system.

But why can’t we have both? There’s material for endless debates on the related politics and economics, but there’s something I wish the great minds would take into account. Instead of worrying and committeeing and thinking of a million reasons not to do something cool, why can’t we focus on reasons why we should?

Look what happened to Auckland.

They had the chance to build a central-city waterfront stadium, which would have been a step in the awesome direction. Instead, they decided it would make the CBD too noisy on game days, and refurbished Eden Park instead—far from awesome.

Why not put aside a special fund for building awesome things. Some of the money could come from the lottery, or donations from people who’d love to see a fifty-squaremetre public ballpit in Central Wellington.

It’s not about anyone making money: it’s working for the public good. And since it’s creating construction jobs, the government can happily sign on with their support— they’ve contributed to far less worthy causes in the past.

Life should be an adventure—not an exercise in drabness and uniformity. Stop whining. Care a little less about money, and a little more about giant foam sword arenas.

There is a library in Kansas City shaped like a stack of books—how cool is that? We have the technology, the know-how, the imagination: let’s build awesome things!

*

salient.org.nz

38

Salient Vol. 74

You know what they say about

New Zealand politics?

Chris Salter

Absolutely nothing, if even that.

Over the last week, I’ve been quizzing people left, right and centre (bias is bad) about politics in this fine country of ours, and the overwhelming majority have responded with disinterest and ambivalence. New Zealand politics is so deathly dull, Parliament TV has been successfully trialled as a sleeping aid for chronic suffers of insomnia. It’s deeply soporific, to a degree rivalled only by statistics lectures and watching grey paint dry in a room completely devoid of any other stimulus. It’s the only channel with negative viewers.

I have an opinion, however, as to how the machinations of the New Zealand government could better appeal to a generation brought up on a steady diet of explosions and instant gratification. For this, we look across the Pacific to the United States of America: the first thing you’ll notice, as you check out the political scene, is that everyone is angry.

Foaming at the collective mouth. Politicians there are incredibly polarised, and compromise is a dirty word. Many take the phrase “Sticking to one’s guns” quite literally. Following the deplorable assassination attempt on Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords in January of this year (which I am, to be clear, not encouraging the imitation of—use your words),

politicians and political talking heads alike leapt to declaim the violent and aggressive nature of American political discourse (in much the same way that media outlets are only now discovering the racist swamp that is a Youtube comment section). Here, we face the inverse problem – civility and politeness. While the harmless-looking Phil Goff “respectfully disagrees” and the bland, smiling John Key manages to choke out an “I believe the Opposition is misinformed” between photo opportunities, the various would-be Republican presidential candidates are positively crawling all over each other in their haste to declaim President Obama as the “antichrist” and the “most stupid/ least capable president in the history of the United States”.

It’s fascinating to watch I recognise that there are some strong reasons underlying the New Zealand political timidity—we have a lengthy tradition of politeness and respectfulness. Several Members of Parliament have ‘Honourable’ right before their names.

We have few real left- or I’m convinced that a right-wing parties; the big are within spitting little more spectacle, two distance of one another. Our a little more unicameral system reduces sound, fury and the potential for factions to gain power and obstruct the outright rhetorical legislative process. Almost all viciousness would of the time this is great, even do wonders for the laudable, but some might dismal youth voting consider the system even a little bit too streamlined enrolment rates in certain cases cough file sharing cough. Besides that, New Zealand’s relatively progressive and liberal national values (not to mention our cabinet-acknowledged “socialist streak”) cut off a whole broad avenue of minority-bashing and infringement on peoples rights. There might simply be less to be indignant and “over my dead body” unyielding about.

But enough of these perfectly reasonable excuses. I want to see Opposition party leaders elected on the basis of hating the Prime Minister so much more than the other candidates. I want highly-publicised hissy fits from both sides of the political spectrum, generalised gnashing of teeth. I’m convinced that a little more spectacle, a little more sound, fury and outright rhetorical viciousness would do wonders for the dismal youth voting enrolment rates we’ve been hearing so much of lately. Fuck arms, give politicians the right to bear grudges. Maybe then politics would be an effective tool to get youth into ballot booths, instead of into dreamland.

*

39

Issue 22 opinion

Weirdness, appreciation & flava Flav Fairooz Samy

Weirdness is such an underappreciated quality. Now, now, calm down and don’t give me that look.

I can see you, narrowing your eyes and getting ready to turn the page because you think this is an ode-tofreaks sermon. You’ve probably already glimpsed your course’s resident weirdo this morning and wondered how anyone in a pink ski jacket could listen to that much Metallica. Maybe you’ve just had your day spoilt because the seemingly average guy you almost asked out followed you down Cuba Street talking about his exotic keychain collection.

You’ve had enough of weirdoes and their eyebrow-raising ways. But that’s alright. This is not a tirade against you or a beat-down of normality. It’s a celebration of peculiarity and the way it makes life just that little bit spicier. Weirdness comes in many forms. The scale ranges from “I carved your name in to my arm last night, want to see?” (extreme) to “I think blanket man is Jesus” (mild). It affects people in different ways. Some like to play soccer while wearing swimming flippers, or eat grass when no one’s looking. Others are afraid of the colour blue.

Weirdness has also lead to greatness— think of Alfred Hitchcock’s macabre possessiveness, Virginia Woolf ’s inability to write sitting down, or Walt Disney’s penchant for mice. The world isn’t exactly unsalted either.

Forget global warming, dictators, AIDS, and the oddities in Animal of the Week—the planet is home to far more inexplicable occurrences.

There’s a 24 carat gold toilet, eight-metre-long fingernails, Kim Kardashian’s fame, two-headed kittens, snake-charming, hot-dog eating contests, sword-swallowing, Hello Kitty, spoon-balancing, Silvio Berlusconi’s face, Flava Flav, 50 per cent water Just Juice bottles, Pez dispensers, and the fact that I got a whole page to write an opinion column when I am notoriously devoid of them. The point is that too many people these days fear the

It’s been one of the most damaging and insidious forms of close mindedness in history, yet each generation shakes their head and refuses to believe that it’s their problem unusual. From radical hair colours to radical philosophies, being too different is cause for concern. It’s been one of the most damaging and insidious forms of close mindedness in history, yet each generation shakes their head and refuses to believe that it’s their problem. We take decreases in racism and sexism as proof that we’re more tolerant and enlightened than we really are. And that’s what keeps it going.

Ethnic cleansing and racial segregation both start in the same place as the urge to belittle the fat guy with the Bon Jovi tee shirt or whisper ‘slut’ at the leggy Goth girl whose only infraction is being prettier than you. It seems like a stretch, I know.

This isn’t to deny that we’ve come a long way, because we have, and we should all be proud of that. It’s simply a reminder that everything gets better when we take a minute to chill the hell out, let go of the fear, and ask ourselves why we can’t try to appreciate those less conventional than ourselves. The freaks. The weirdoes. The nerds and the crazies. The people who talk to their reflections, act like they’re acid-tripping when they’re not, or are self-taught experts on Norwegian stamps. This isn’t a call for more anti-bullying facebook status updates.

It’s an appeal to be a little nicer, maybe a smidge more understanding.

If you don’t agree, that’s fine. It’s just an opinion.

*

salient.org.nz

40

Salient Vol. 74

In Defence of Flexitarianism Sophie Turner

Meat is Murder, so says Morrissey; and he’s right too, you know.

Besides considering the morality of breeding animals for human consumption alone, meat production is among the top contributors to climate change, which seriously jeopardises the lives of people in island states like Kiribati who have already experienced rising sea levels. Even on a personal level, eating a hamburger a day could increase your risk of risk of heart disease by one third. All scary thoughts when we consider that we’re eating twice as much meat as we did 50 years ago.

As an environmental studies student and a George Monbiot fangirl I know these facts. Yet, for as long as I have been endorsing the vegetarian lifestyle, I’ve also been known to let my taste buds rule on occasion, and order the chicken curry. Some would call this cheating. I call it flexitarianism.

Sounds sexy, right? Part-time vegetarianism has been the in-thing on the trendy streets of San Francisco for some time, but it reached New Zealand only a few years ago. In my opinion, there is little reason it shouldn’t have staying power. Whereas vegetarianism is an ethical (and therefore personal) choice, the attempt to eat less meat is just a good idea. It’s healthy, super cheap, eco-friendly, and best of all, effortless. Subsisting on the five other food groups is not difficult, and we flexitarians can do this without feeling like the only greenerthan-thou guest at Friday night’s potluck dinner.

This may be the kind of statement that would inspire a Smiths song on walking, talking, meat-reducing oxymorons. To that, I argue that doing your little bit for sustainability still far outweighs doing nothing at all. There are certain parallels between the choice to cut down on meat and the one to use bio-oil as your fuel of choice: both are not as sustainable as going teetotal or donning your bike shorts, but both still cut down emissions substantially. Most importantly, both can be easily adopted into the average lifestyle.

Evidently, some vegetarians are more vegetarian than others, and as the environmental impact of meat production starts to be seen, full-vego may soon be the only way to go. Until then, call flexitarianism your prep-work, but don’t feel too condemned if you very occasionally indulge in homekill. Meat is murder, true, but Morrissey’s a bit of a bastard.

It’s healthy, super cheap, eco-friendly, and best of all, effortless

*

41

Issue 22 opinion

Heavy Metal Facials The Pointy Point of Piercings Doc Watson

With trends going in and out like an indecisive leper at a no-shoes-no-service buffet, it’s hard to keep a track on which the sane ones are and which need an urgent chopstick lobotomy.

For the record, I can accept most of these. Not that I’d do them, mind. But I can look at them and raise a bro fist of respect, because they are proud enough, happy enough or just ballsy enough to do it. Although, one thing that I have never understood for the life of me is piercings—the process of inserting metal or other foreign material through and into your skin as a fashion statement.

Now, when writing it like that, it sounds fucking ludicrous. Try fielding this earth-shattering concept in the Dark Ages. The only times any piercings went down is if you were pinned to a grassy hill by a spear or if you were the doctor attempting to remove said spear with an even bigger spear. But, like all formulae, once you have the basics, you can only build upwards. Say, for earrings. You start with a stud, then a dangly one, then a tube. Suddenly, these freaky people are channeling Quetzalcoatl and hanging paving slabs out of their ear lobes.

It’s scarily fascinating and fascinatingly scary at the same time. And like all things, I can’t get it out of my head until I find some kind of reasoning behind it, however backward it may seem logically. I see some of the prettiest girls—and guys, because I’m accepting like that—go out and ruin themselves by mutilating their noses, their lips, their tongues with all this jewelry with non-lethal hara-kiri.

What the hell sparks this process? Is it rebellion? I mean, the act of mutilating the body that was bestowed upon you just to prove that it is yours seems rather definitive if a little hard to digest. But then it can be reasoned in the same way a guy crashes his car. It’s the scratches and dents that give it character and narrative, and what makes it unique. Perhaps it works the same way with piercings. Then again, in the

In all honesty, the practicality is nuts. Piercings seem to have no other purpose than status same manner a car has no selling potential after you’ve taken a tire iron to it, it’s the same when you apply a tire iron to your nipple.

In all honesty, the practicality is nuts. Piercings seem to have no other purpose than status. But even then, what status are you preserving by parading a bull ring through your nose? That you are a bull on heat ready to ride the nearest heifer? It doesn’t help that those particular piercings are female dominated, or maybe that’s just where I live.

There are so many other ways to prove your point that doesn’t involve mutilating your body. And, it’s not stopping with staple art. Now there are implants that go under the skin to simulate, say, the alien queen planting eggs into your skull. At what point do we leave the uncanny valley of weird and fetishistic and return to the land of ever-so-slightly quirky?

All in all, I’ve never got it, and I never will. Perhaps they’re dying to prove a point which isn’t the “I walked in and they were having a two-for-one sale on bottle caps through frontal lobes, and deals like that don’t just appear on TradeMe” spiel. Maybe it’s a personal thing, maybe they just never grew out of that phase where it was cool to eat chalk and shove crayons up their noses. But I decided to pass on piercings when burnt sienna got stuck between my nostrils.

And don’t get me started on the chalk.

*

salient.org.nz

42

Salient Vol. 74

free to choose Daniel Wilson

One of the greatest tragedies of the recent scandal at Hutt Valley High School was not that it took four years for the indecent assaults to be made public.

Rather, it was that if those boys wanted to flee from the disgusting abuse, their capacity to go to another school was severely restricted. New Zealand’s system of school zoning means that to go to the school of your choice you have to be lucky or rich enough to live near one that is good.

The current system is easy to understand. The government builds a school and then, on a map, draws an area around it: anyone living between the lines gets into the school. Anyone outside those lines typically goes to another one. If all schools were equally good, this would be fine, but they’re not. There are some, like Macleans College in Auckland, that are routinely recognised as being great, with high levels of academic achievement, teacher ability and parental involvement. But others continually fail their pupils. Even schools close to good schools can fail, as was the case with the dysfunctional Selwyn College, which, despite being relatively close to Macleans, had its entire board replaced by the Ministry of Education.

Every parent in New Zealand wants the best for their kids, and some really don’t want to send their children to one of the ten South Auckland schools that have a uniformed police officer on duty during the day. They can try to send their kids to a better school in a number of different ways. First, they can move to an area of the city that is in a good zone. Unfortunately for them, many other parents have had this idea, and the increase in demand for houses in that area raises the price beyond the reach of most. In Auckland, for example, one side of a road that is in the Grammar zone has an average house price that is $100,000 greater than the side that is out of zone. This is madness.

Alternatively, parents can send their kids to a private school, like Kings College, Scots College or Christ’s College. This is, of course, another choice unavailable to the vast majority of parents due to the costs involved. Finally, they can enter their children on the ballot of a good school, a system through which a very small number of children from outside the zone can attend that school.

Every year there are hundreds of applications to Wellington College for out-of-zone children. Figures obtained by Stephen Whittington, a candidate for the ACT Party, show that last year there were 208 applications to the ballot. Of these, five were accepted. The remaining 203 children are now in worse schools.

In the absence of school choice, there is a captive market, where schools are safe in the knowledge that 99 per cent of the students that live in their area will be attending no matter what.

This guaranteed income stifles improvement and innovation: even if the schools get better, the funding available to them doesn’t improve, and they can’t capitalise on students wanting to attend them. Worse still, the number of places in successful schools is often specifically limited by the Ministry of Education in order to sustain the rolls at others. That is, good schools are prevented from taking more students to ensure that bad schools are full of pupils.

It is an absolute outrage that poor parents in New Zealand have little choice but to enrol their children at schools that are worse than those rich parents can send their kids to. There are few areas in which those with low incomes are as discriminated against than schooling. The Government spends around $8,000 for every student in the country on education each year: this money should simply follow them to whichever school they want to attend. Schools would then have an incentive to improve: no board or principal wants to be responsible for the loss of $8,000 when parents, fed up with their taxes funding a terrible education, send their kid elsewhere.

Good schools will no doubt be oversubscribed to—Auckland Grammar at the moment probably can’t hold many more than its current 2500 students (although they have indicated that they would expand as much as possible if they were not subject to an enrolment scheme). However, with every new student bringing with them $8,000, and with no legal restriction on their capacity to expand (as is currently the case), they could build a new wing to accommodate more.

This wouldn’t enable everyone to attend Auckland Grammar; some children would still miss out. But now, unlike before with their captive markets, schools face competition pressures. In order to get as many of those valuable students, they will have to improve, innovate. Some schools will push academic achievement to attract enrolments; others, a focus on the arts or sports.

The point is this: if schools continue to fail their students, parents should have the choice to send their children elsewhere. Even if it isn’t their first, second or even fifth choice, anything is better than a school that maintains order only through police presence, or a school that hides for almost half a decade tragic cases of sexual abuse.

There are few areas in which those with low incomes are as discriminated against than schooling

*

s i k c u F e h t t a h W g with the Economy Wron

43

Issue 22 opinion

Ben Wylie-van Eerd

Oh, you wanna hear my opinion? Well okay, here it is: The economy is broken. Actually no it’s worse than broken, it’s completely fucked.

Not exactly a unique opinion, to be sure. But whenever I hear people talking about it they always have the wrong idea. It’s investor confidence this or debt that or taxation the other thing. Nobody seems to take a step back and say well hang on now. What is the economy? Why do we even have one? Well I’ll tell you what an economy is. An economy is a system for organising all of the labour and capital resources we have. The basic idea is that we want to organise these resources in order to satisfy as many wants and needs of people that we can. Pretty simple, right?

Now, I can show you in the world right now, hundreds of millions of people who are unemployed, and who are suffering because of it. And at the same time I can show you hundreds of millions more people who would rather like to own pool tables and hot tubs. You don’t have to be a genius to figure out that something is very wrong with this picture. Not just a little wrong. Not just extend-somemore-cheap-credit-and-the-problem-will-go-away wrong.

Fundamentally. Broken.

So why is it that the people without jobs can’t make pool tables for those without hot tubs? Oh, well, it’s because the rich(er) people can’t afford to pay them to do so. Yes their incomes are higher, but they’re spending it all on things already. Likewise the unemployed cannot afford to work without being paid. They need to survive as well. A little extra consistent income in the hands of the tubless classes would fix that right up. But where is that money? I’ll tell you where it is. It’s in the hands of the richest 1 per cent of people. Some people say they worked hard and deserve that money. I say that if they insist on using that money in such a way as to leave half the rest of us unemployed and the rest tubless then they don’t deserve squat.

Most of us live in democracies.

Why would I vote for an economy that leaves me tubless instead of one which provides me with pool tables?

Madness!

There’s a little history here which I should review. People have a strong belief that rich people use money better than poor people. They invest, they create businesses, they create jobs, they create prosperity. There’s a good reason that people believe this. The reason is because it’s true. However, exactly who this is true of is not all rich people. It’s all about how

the money is used. If you use your money to buy a plant and equipment and raw materials and labour, then good on you! You’re the good guys. You drive our economy ever upward and you satisfy ever more needs and wants. But if you use your money to speculate on property or currency or commodities like cereals or petrol then I despise you. You create no jobs, you satisfy no wants or needs, you create no wealth for anyone except yourself and what is worse!—Your despicable trading only drives up the prices of commodities!

Your actions simultaneously make you richer and stifle the growth of everybody else! Food, housing, transportation, all of my basic needs cost me almost double what I should be paying for them because of you. That means that employers have to pay twice the wages. It means that nobody has money left over to buy products, no money left over to satisfy their other wants. You’re not the heroes who drive the economy. You’re the scumbags that grind it beneath your feet, and the sooner we stop you, the better off we’ll all be.

And that’s why I support a punitive financial transaction tax. I want to target exactly that kind of speculative commodity trading and make it impossible to profit from.

Then we can get your colossal foot out of the smoking crater that was once a prosperous world economy and get on with our lives. In fact, if we stop you from masturbating all over us, then you’ll in all likelihood start actually helping us again by putting your money to productive use. Wouldn’t that be nice?

*

salient.org.nz

Salient Vol. 74

Salient provides a free notice service for all Victoria University of Wellington students, VUWSA-affiliated clubs and not-for-profit organisations.

Notices should be received by 5pm Tuesday the week before publication. Notices should be fewer than 100 words. For-profit organisations will be charged $10 per notice. Send notices to editor@salient.org.nz, with ‘Notice’ in the subject line.

Drinking getting you down?

AA Student Meeting Every Thursday Student Union Building Room SU219 Noon email: aameetingstudent@gmail.com

VUW Film Production Society

Everyone has something to contribute to a film with, and the goal of the Film Production Society is to link these people together. This is a student created and run organisation run primarily for the benefit of students, but also for the Film School and Victoria as a whole.

The Film School, and Dinocop, are supportive of this endeavour and hope it will be a useful tool in helping Students make, learn, and enjoy Film.

30/9 – JET Programme (Teach English in Japan), 1.00pm

AIESEC CULTURAL FEST

- what to expect at an interview

Monday 3rd October 11am-4pm, Student Union Building Atrium and Memorial Theatre Foyer Great Performances and Exciting Cultural Stalls from around the globe! Bring your friends along for some great fun!

Refugee Background Students Stressed out this week?!

Come to our homework centre in MY1010 between 4-6pm Mon-Fri 10th floor Murphy bldg, Kelburn, for extra help with your assignments or even better come for a free snack while relaxing with other students.

Supported by “Empowering study for Refugee Background Students” Facebook: Victoria University RBS Drop-in Centre

CAREERS AND JOBS 2011/12 Internships and 2012 Graduate Jobs: A Film Production Club has recently started at Victoria, and will be holding it’s initial meeting soon. Go to facebook.com/vuwfps to keep updated and find out more information, and email vuwfps@gmail.com to join the mailing list.

The goal of this organisation is to help increase the creative output, range of film-making opportunities, and cinematic education available to VUW students, by facilitating networking between those who want to make films.

The Victoria Film Production Society will have a regular newsletter of relevant news, advice, notices, and advertisements for those who want people to help them make a film. Demonstrations of equipment from filmmakers, screenings of student and postgrad films, and more are planned for meetings.

Applications Closing Soon (details on CareerHub careerhub.victoria.ac.nz): 26/9 – Solid Energy; Ernst & Young Singapore 28/9 – Tait Radio Communications 29/9 – Disney International Programs 30/9 – Parliamentary Counsel Office; TaxTeam; Datacom 1/10 – Telogis; Provoke Solutions 6/10 – NZ Sugar Company 14/10 – Orion Health; Communication Agencies Association of New Zealand (CAANZ): Media Assistant 21/10 – Communication Agencies Association of New Zealand (CAANZ): Advertising Account Executive 30/11 – Asia NZ Foundation; JET Programme

Careers in Focus Seminar - check details/ book on CareerHub: 27/9 – FHSS – Careers with a BA, 5.30pm Get expert advice from Vic Careers on: - what to do with your degree - how to put together a CV

- how to get a job Vic Careers: 463 5393, careers-service@vuw. ac.nz, 14 Kelburn Parade

Vic OE – Vic Student Exchange Programme Why not study overseas as part of your degree?!

Earn Vic credit, get Studylink & grants, explore the world!

Weekly seminars on Wednesdays, Level 2, Easterfield Building, 12.55pm - 1.05pm Deadlines for Tri 2, 2012 exchanges - January 16th, (University of California Nov 25 2011) Email: exchangestudents@vuw.ac.nz Website: victoria.ac.nz/exchange Visit us: Level 2, Easterfield Building Drop-in hours: Mon & Tues 9-12, Wed-Fri 10-12

World Film Showcase: Free Admission!

Held at the Language Learning Centre, on the big screen in VZ003. Be early as seats are limited. Foreign films screened with English subtitles.

Matariki Date: Wednesday, 28 September 2011 Time: 5 pm Venue: Language Learning Centre vz003 Address: von Zedlitz Building, Kelburn Parade Matariki New Zealand 2010 Run time: 92 min.

A random act of violence leaves eight people in crisis, searching for hope and new beginnings, as the Matariki constellation (Maori New Year) rises in the southern skies.

Kiwi independent drama from debut director Michael Bennett.

El abrazo partido (Lost Embrace) Date: Thursday, 29 September 2011 Time: 5 pm Venue: Language Learning Centre vz003 Address: von Zedlitz Building, Kelburn Parade El abrazo partido (Lost Embrace) Argentina 2004 Run time: 99 min.

This film is part of a series of quirky, charming comedies about contemporary life in Buenos Aires.

Director Daniel Burman excels at examining the rich variety of cultural life in Argentina, often drawing on his own Jewish heritage.

Favoured Argentine actor, Daniel Hendler brings warmth to the role of the protagonist Ariel Makaroff as he searches for answers about his family’s past.

Vincent Konrad

Notices

Employer Presentations - check details/ book on CareerHub: 28/9 – Walt Disney World, 5.40pm

charles panic

44

45

Issue 22 opinion

Letters Salient Letters Policy 2011 Salient welcomes, encourages and thrives on public debate—be it serious or otherwise—through the letters pages. Write about what inspires you, enrages you, makes you laugh, makes you cry. Send us feedback, send us abuse. Anything.

Letters must be received before 5pm Tuesday, for publication the following week.

Letters must be no more than 250 words. Pseudonyms are fine, but all letters must include your real name, address and telephone number. These will not be printed.

Please note that letters will not be corrected for spelling or grammar.

The Editors reserve the right to edit, abridge or decline any letters without explanation.

Letters can be sent to letters@ salient.org.nz, posted to Salient, c/- Victoria University, PO Box 600, Wellington or dropped into the Salient office on the third floor of the Student Union Building.

~

m to Send ‘e

.nz nt.org @salie t c/ n e li a S ersity ia Univ Victor 600 x o B PO

letters

ton

g Wellin

Bro... Fuckin’ VUWSA, man.

Dear Vic Student Union Later bol, you blew it. Over the years you had the repeated opportunity to provide services to students that we both want and need. But no, you didnt. Scourged by complacency resulting from an unconditional levy funneled into your account annually, you morphed into a committee of incompetent bureaucrats. The Victoria student union has managed the 8.87 million they receive every year in a similar fashion to struggling third world African nations. The money has been frittered away on elected students and completely inefficient events and services.

8.87 million annually! Apart from Salient magazine I cannot think of one service I have used in the past year. (Salient, you’re all good bro, I’d happily pay 20 bucks a year to keep you afloat.) People always bitch about the student culture in vic. Solution? Instead of running an 8.7 million dollar sausage sizzle, how about you spend half of one years levy on a small property in Wellington CBD? Turn it into a student only club, hire a bartender, subsidise the drinks, buy some coke with another mil, and let the party begin. Pipitia Campus needs it. There would also be a room for the nerd birds to quietly read their textbooks next to a blazing fire and blaze, a room for the lawyers to play soggy biscuit in a dark room, and a room for Seamus Brady to sit on his throne. Oh wait, there’s already a room for that.

Regards, Terry Serepisos

No Complaint Too Mediocre Dear Salient, It has abruptly come to my attention that the vending machines previously located on level 4 of the central library have been moved to the ground floor, in the stairwell. As I type, my dear friend Astrid is eating a Chunky Kit-Kat with a spoon due to the heating properties of the sun melting everything in the machine.

There is absolutely nothing you can do about this of course but I felt you ought to know as your letter section is for this kind of mediocre complaint, is it not?

Also, why is half of level 4 a blue zone? I do not understand the logic, sound does not stop at the green-blue transitional point. Is the entire fourth floor becoming a blue zone? We fear for the integrity of our nap area. We’re not cool enough to hang out on the fifth floor yet, we are mere first years and would be eaten alive.

Lots of love, Too-lazy-to-walk-down-the-stairwell-andthen-back-up-again.

The Case for No Confidence This week you’ll see a lot of slogans bandied about as student politicians once again vie for positions on the VUWSA Executive. As the elections approach, we should be asking ourselves some important questions.

What does VUWSA’s record for 2011 look like?

Current VUWSA President Seamus Brady has been utterly impotent on important issues affecting students. He has consistently ignored and neglected the issues of rising fees and savage cutbacks at VUW this year. Last week, you may have been among the 300 students protesting the termination of three valued papers in the Humanities and the closure of the Crime and Justice Centre. Several students elected to speak to the crowd, Seamus did not. He gave his brief and vapid address only when he was publicly shamed into doing so. He was the only member of the VUWSA Executive to speak. Neither he, nor his Association, took any part whatsoever in the planning of the event, which was organized by concerned students and the Tertiary Education Union. In fact, when the cuts were announced a month ago, Brady was silent.

Brady’s inaction last week is characteristic of his career in student politics. Last year, as Vice President, when it was announced that VUW was capping enrolments, denying entry to hundreds of expectant students, Brady was silent. In 2008, as a member of the General Executive, Brady took no active part in the protests that saved the film school, and was silent as Gender and Women’s Studies was closed. In fact, in 2009, when members of the Executive were involved in a somewhat uncouth protest action against a fee rise, Seamus Brady submitted witness statements to VUW Administration that led to the disenrollment and trespassing of three student activists, and the fining of another.

In regards to the fee rise this month, the only opposition Brady can offer is contained in his President’s Column last week: ‘Students need to speak against this’, he says. He failed to call a single SRC this year, which means his entire Executive has no mandate to represent students, if the VUWSA Constitution

is any guide. An SRC had to be called by the courageous students in Students for Justice in Palestine. Seamus was not present.

VUWSA, under Brady, maintains a cosy relationship with VUW administrators, even as their programme of cutbacks and fee hikes is intensified.

Now we have to ask ourselves the logical question: Will anything change if the sole candidate for next year’s Presidency is elected?

Bridie Hood has stood by Seamus in silence and inaction all year. She did not attend last week’s protest; she has done nothing whatsoever to challenge the administrators of VUW on their decisions to slash courses, sack lecturers and terminate valuable departments while they vote to give themselves pay rises and this University generates surpluses; and she said nothing last year as fees rose and enrolments were capped. She is a member of Young Labour, like Seamus, and she does have precisely the same self-interested, careerist politics as him.

If you want to join a movement of students that are acting to hold VUW administrators to account for their actions, join We Are The University (Wgtn) on Facebook and in the SUB each Wednesday. If you are tired of student politicians who do are concerned only about for their political careers, and who do nothing to fight for students, vote No Confidence in these elections.

– Sam Oldham

LOL. (Lois, Oh, Lois) Dear Salient, (The Griffins at a grocery store) Lois: Chris, would you run and get some milk?

And be sure to get it from the back.

(Chris is reaching for some milk and a hand pops out. It grabs his hand and brings him into the A-Ha music video “Take On Me”.

Chris falls out from the music video onto the grocery store floor.)

Lois: Chris, where have you been?

Chris: I don’t know!

Love, Seth Macfarlane

Con-cis-tency is Key Dear Salient, Your gender issue last week made me think.

I put myself in a pair of transgender shoes (I’m a cisgender male) and I thought: man it’d be shit if I couldn’t go in the bathroom that I wanted to (pun not intended). In my ignorance, I didn’t think that this caused distress for some people. I obviously can’t claim to speak for all men’s bathroom users, but if someone sans-penis wanted to use the men’s then I’d be aaall good with it. I won’t judge, I don’t make a habit of looking anyway.

Just Sayin.

A “Nice” Letter

screwed because the people teaching the papers I was plugging through my English major JUST to take retired. Like 2 years ago. And there’s still no replacement.

That’s not nice. What IS nice is I had a cry on my flatmate’s shoulder, and she made me a massive batch of cinnamon rolls with chocolate chips in them and told me to choke down one english paper in order to finish my degree, and fill the rest of the spots with whatever gives me shits and giggles.

I’m thinking of Latin and Greek, because old languages are delicious My flatmate is awesome, she even watched Labryinth with me. You’re pretty awesome too when you put your mind to it.

Love, Pixie

What?

I wonder if it would be possible to raise a child in a strictly controlled environment, surrounded by hundreds of actors, all demonstrating the opposite facial cues and emotions to those expressed by the rest of their body?

Cause then when they were released into society, that expression on Uther’s face would be interpreted as lustful rage. Or something. I should comandeer a kindergarten, they have plenty of kids. And an acting school. Tell them it’s one really long audition.

Regards,

The Domino Effect in Action I wish to express my outrage at the recent changes to the “zoning” within the library.

Recently my friends and I were horrified to discover that the social hub of the fourth floor has been partially turned into a “blue” zone, for quiet study, introspective contemplation and dep philosophical thought. Now a vibrant place has been transformed into a bland prison, where people shoot you filthy looks every time you move your piece of paper.

Do we want the fourth floor to become the soul-crushing and depressing place, that the overly noise sensitive people have reduced the third floor to?

God forbid we should migrate to the fifth floor which, judging from what is on overheard at vic, seems to be the home for our more mentally unstable and disturbed students. Alternatively the idea that we should study is horrifying, university is a place of socialisation and relaxation, not education. Soon the library will be reduced to just being a storage place for books, whilst those of us who enjoy conversation and interaction with people will be forced to congregate at the construction site.

We must fight the university/library administrators on this, lest we become as angry and joyless as they are.

Yours Sincerely, Gerald Lee P.S. Wonder if you guys are getting sick of these letters yet

Hi Salient, I noticed you get a lot of angry letters. People angry at you, each other, the weather. So I thought I’d write a letter about something nice. Yesterday I found out my degree got

salient.org.nz

46

ACROSS:

DOWN:

3. A wound (4)

1. Furrow (7)

7. Violent (6)

2. Consecrated (6)

8. Expedition (7)

4. A succession (5)

10. Inconsequential (7)

5. Overconfident (5)

12. Talk loudly and persistently (6)

6. Cause to be (6)

13. Solution (5)

9. Misery (5)

15. Resolved (4)

11. Colossal (7)

18. Trick (5)

14. Propose (5)

21. A nibble (5)

16. Hop (4)

22. Phase (5)

17. Fine particles (4)

23. Mesmerize (5)

19. Bgas (7)

24. Conceited (4)

20. Fuse (5)

27. To verify (5)

24. Pamper (5)

28. Squirm (6)

25. Normal (7)

31. Immediate (7)

26. Encumber (6)

32. Admiration (7)

27. Storeroom (6)

33. To maintain anger (6)

29. Dense (5)

34. Ingratiate onself to (4)

30. Crooked (5)

answers

Salient Vol. 74

ACROSS: 1. QUICKLY 6. IMPEL 9. INSTALL 10. FEAT 11. RAPT 13. ODIOUS 15. HAZARD 16. TANGENT 17. JUST 20. ORDEAL 21. MEAN 22. FALLACY 23. WARMTH 26. DANGER 28. LAND 29. IDOL 30. RAUNCHY 32. EJECT 33. REVERSE

DOWN: 1. QUIRKY 2. CONTRAST 3. YONDER 4. MATE 5. ILL 7. PRESS 8. LITIGATION 12. MONEY 14. DENIAL 17. JEOPARDIZE 18. VOYAGE 19. FELONY 21. MUTILATE 24. AUTHOR 25. UPDATE 26. DRONE 27. GNAW 31. ART

CRYPTIC DOWN:

3. Jeremy’s voice across Omar’s face (4)

1. New rink leads to crease (7)

7. It is fierce to make a beer that isn’t short (6)

2. Holy French bag with Merlot (6)

8. A flight of joy around the rune (7)

4. Ball and paper of events sings of fools (5)

10. Negligible lair with the television and I (7)

5. Arrogant phallus by the end of the day (5)

12. The harem may clamour on and on (6)

6. Make a muddled need between rest and relaxation (6)

13. Smooth chimney and instinctive impulses (5)

9. Ali Unit does tower in the dark (5)

15. A hard coniferous tree by a thousand (4)

11. Eminem’s gigantic! (7)

18. A bit of black ends stuff to deceive (5)

14. Bid fish eggs and Final Fantasy (5)

21. Eat a little something from a kilo of cans (5)

16. Such kiddish interest prances (4)

Solution for last week:

22. The Gatsby on a platform (5)

17. Star bunny pan (4)

23. In real time I have to enthral (5)

19. Ewe in the gaggle for a suitcase (7)

"The more contact I have with humans, the more I learn." -The Terminator

24. Self-satisfied wine candy housing your teeth back (4)

20. Bootleg reminders to join together (5)

27. Demonstrate the advantage with a bit of vermillion (5)

24. Ruin the urine in the earth (5)

28. Twitch half of the first Castro jet (6)

25. Standard wrath with shortened path (7)

31. Non-taxable stain of the moment (7)

26. Obstruct erratic beginnings after the backside (6)

32. Tiny start creeps to a Franklin (7)

27. Wooden flute scores a rugby goal in the cupboard (6)

33. Hold on to resentment against the roughly handsome (6)

29. Wide majority of a bush without aliens (5)

34. Feel any wild need for young deer? (4)

30. Headless tweaks are off centre (5)

jason govenlock

CRYPTIC ACROSS:

Walkabout Starting in the top left corner, all of the words can be found in one continuous winding trail. It can turn in any direction but the path will never cross itself.

W H

AMBULATORY BIRDWATCHER

C

O

I

L

L

Y

D

D

A

O

L

A

Y

O

R

O

U

W N

H

O

N

D

P

E

L

R

M U

T

T

H

B

Y

T

S

P

A

T

S

E

T

T

O

B

A

R

I

V

E

U

R

COMPASS CONSTITUTIONAL FOOTHOLD GRADIENT

I

L

L

A

N

O

I

M R

N

H

G

D

W D

O

E

S

N

T

O

T

T

O

O

A

H

I

E

T

C

L

A

P

C

Y

O

I

U

U

I

S

B

E

R

P

O

K

E

A

B

T

I

H

H

N

K

I

N

G

R

C

A

G

O

F

C

T

H

H

A

E

K

L

E

T

O

B

E

H

T

E

T

I

S

C

T

Y

T

R

C

O

T

U

A

T

W L

W W A

T

Y

T

S

T

A

R

K

A

R

E

R

A

Y

K

O

A

U

R

I

W S

R

U

S

P

O

E

T

L

O

F

C

W L

O

I

S

S

T

D

H

Y

O

A

U

U

T

O

I

H

K

E

L

A

R

E

I

G

E

A

S

M O

T

D

N

T

I

P

L

W P

H

E

D

I

R

G

C

C

I

N

A

S

H

N

A

S

M E

T

T

N

A

Y

O

TRUDGE

U

P

H

T

W I

G

C

C

O

A

N

D

T

E

R

I

N

UPHILL

G

A

G

I

O

S

R

E

P

R

D

N

E

V

R

E

A

E

WALKING STICK

R

R

O

P

A

T

T

E

Y

O

E

U

A

R

L

I

H

D

WANDER

E

E

L

S

S

E

D

S

O

C

R

A

W L

T

E

M S

HIKING BOOTS MARCH OUTDOOR TRACK PACE PEDESTRIAN PERIPATETIC STROLL SWITCHBACK TOPOGRAPHIC MAP TREADMILL

WATER BOTTLE

Sudoku

Romany Tasker-Poland

Sam Northcott

Robyn Kenealey

Issue 22 opinion

47

salient.org.nz

Victoria is now offering more than 100 courses in Trimester Three 2011. A full list of courses is available at www.victoria.ac.nz/tri3 Most courses start on November 14, talk to your faculty about how to enrol.