The Feed Magazine Issue #1

RELIGION VS FREEDOM OF SPEECH issue # 1 - Winter 2013

Travel With a Purpose Fashion street to runway AUSTRALIA TAKES OVER HOLLYWOOD

www.thefeed.com.au

ISSN 2202-3275

Editor's

Letter A STORY wORTH TELLING...

I

t’s here! It’s finally here! After almost a year since the idea of The Feed was conceived, the final piece of the puzzle, The Feed Magazine, is in your hands. And what an adventure it has been.

Beginning as a reaction towards the shrinking media and lack of professional opportunities for writers, journalists, artists, photographers and other creatives, our team set out to create not just a new website or a new magazine, but a new platform to come together and to create fresh and exciting content for.

When I launched our website, TheFeed. com.au I never thought it would grow so quickly with over 40 contributors, some upand-coming and others veterans, jumping on board, with articles coming in from as far away as the US, the UK, Indonesia and Spain.

It didn’t take long for us to realise that we needed to expand. While a website has its advantages, it also has its limitations, and a print/digital magazine seemed like the way to go.

The overall idea behind The Feed Magazine was not to do something better than another magazine already available but instead to do something different.

Many magazines and websites aim to cover more news, topics and issues or to have a more unique and “distinct” writing style to appeal to a specific audience, but instead of overloading our audiences with content readily available from other sources which has been rewritten thousands of times by thousands of websites, or dumbing down our writing to appeal to the masses, we aimed to pave our own way by telling stories that are original, interesting and based upon real world experiences and observations presented in an intelligent, concise and artistic way.

Many of the stories that you’ll find in this magazine are topical, some aren’t, and while most mainstream newspapers,

1

magazines and websites would see that as a weakness or a flaw, I see this as our strength.

The Feed Magazine is made up of ideas, thoughts and stories expressed by a number of writers from around the world, just like your Facebook news feed or your Twitter feed. As one of my writers described it to me, The Feed Magazine is a sort of offline social media magazine.

But really what I wanted to give my writers was an opportunity to write about their passions and to tell the stories they wanted to tell when they first dreamed of writing.

I wanted to give young artists that big break, and established artists a new canvas. I wanted to give musicians a stage and photographers a studio. I wanted to see stylists style and writers write, and I wanted them to do it their way because their way is The Feed’s way. It was also a priority for us that everyone who helped create this magazine, who put in countless hours towards bringing it to life, were paid.

I’m proud to say we managed this.

For the first issue we really wanted to give you a taste of what is to come, to lay the foundation for The Feed Magazine.

In this issue, Entertainment Editor, Colin Holmes looks at why Hollywood has fallen in love with Australia, while UK writer, Sara Stanford, asks whether pop icon Lady Gaga is a feminist hero or just a sheep in wolf’s clothing.

I chat to designer, artist and visionary of this issue’s spectacular front cover image, Jesse Wakenshaw, and our Fashion Editor, Kate Burgess tells us how to take vintage styles and synthesize them with clothing straight off the runway.

You can see her results in our six-page fashion shoot shot by Sydney-based photographer Tawfik Elgazzar, featuring art by Stephanie Balchin and Julio “Hules” Castellano with models Emma Sabjan and Nat Taylor.

We then travel across the world as Shaun Colnan shines a light on the attempts being made by Brazilian artists and the government to restore Rio’s slums before the World Cup, and then Martin Borg tells us how we can all be ethical adventurers through his own experiences traveling in Cambodia.

Hannah Jose examines Islam’s attempts to censor both the media and the public and asks possibly one of the toughest questions our generation will ever have to face: “What’s more important? Freedom of speech, or freedom of religion?” Featuring art by Garenth Ernst.

16-year-old student, Grace Mitchells teams up with Shveta Candel to put a microscope on the ubiquitous Gonski Report ahead of an election where education policies could decide the outcome, and Sara Stanford asks whether being an eco-friendly vegetarian is possible, also featuring art by Garenth Ernst.

In an attempt to answer some questions rather than ask them, James Fletcher offers up some solutions to problems currently plaguing the creative and media industries internship programs, while Romy Kessler reflects on her own love life and tells us how we can avoid the trap of falling in love with our “Default Person”.

Thank you to everyone who has been a part of The Feed Magazine’s creation and to those who have believed in us. This is for you.

J ES S E M AT H ESO N FO U N D I N G ED I TO R

IN THIS ISSUE...

FACEBOOK.COM/THEFEEDMEDI A

twi t ter.com/thefeedmedi a

ARE AUSSIES THE NEW ALL-AMERICAN BADASSES? P.g 3

IN WITH THE NEW, IN WITH THE OLD + FASHION SPREAD P.g 11

LADY GAGA, FEMINIST HERO OR ZERO? P.g 5

RELIGION VS FREEDOM OF SPEECH P.g 21

DREAMS & NIGHTMARES WITH JESSE WAKENSHAW P.g 7

WTF IS GONSKI? P.g 23

t h e f e ed tea m FOU N DING EDI TOR J E S S E MATHES ON J ess e. M at h e so n@TheFeed. com. au S U B-E DI TOR GE ORGIA LEAK ER Geo rgi a .L ea k e r @TheFeed. com. au FAS H ION E DI TOR & ST YLIST K AT E BURG ES S Kate. B u rg e ss@thefeed. com. au E N T E R TA IN M ENT EDI TOR C O L I N HOLMES C o l in . H o l m e s@thefeed. com. au Il lust r at ions GA R E N T H ERNST J e sse wak ens haw st e p h a n i e balchi n Jul io "H u l e s " CASTELL ANO P h oto g r a p hy taw f i k elgaz z ar C ON T R IBUTORS MA RT I N B O RG , S HAUN COLNAN, H A N N A H J OS E , JAMES FLETCHER, SA R A STA N FOR D, ROMY K ES S ler, SH V ETA C A N D E L , G RACE MITCHELLS

INTERNSHIPS: WE NEED SOLUTIONS! P.g 25 VEGETARIANISM: DOES IT REALLY MAKE A DIFFERENCE? P.g 27

AND MORE... webs i te: www.thefeed.com.au Contributor Inquiries: Contribute@thefeed.com.au aDVERTISING Inquiries: admin@thefeed.com.au The Feed Magazine (ISSN: 2202- 3275) is published quarterly in Australia

by Helios printing. No part of the magazine may be produced in whole or in part without written permission from the publisher (The Feeding Media).

Opinions expressed in the magazine are not necessarily those of the publishers. Unsolicited editorial or photographic material is welcome but will not be returned unless appropriate postage is supplied. Submissions of text, photographs or any other material will be taken as consent to publish said material

THE FEED ISSUE ONE

ARE AUSSIES

THE NEW

ALL-AMERICAN

BADASSES? IT MAY BE A FIFTEEN HOUR FLIGHT FROM SYDNEY TO LOS ANGELES, BUT WITH MOVIES LIKE THE WOLVERINE AND THE GREAT GATSBY BEING FILMED DOWN-UNDER AND WITH AUSSIES TAKING THE LEAD ROLES, HOLLYWOOD AND AUSTRALIA HAVE NEVER FELT CLOSER. W R I T ES C O L I N H O L M ES

I

n the American mind, Australia exists as an exotic country where the women are sun-tanned, blonde and gorgeous and the men are rough, rugged and always ready to rumble.

Their perception of Australia has been filtered through repeated viewings of Crocodile Dundee, Foster’s beer commercials and Men at Work music videos. They think of the land down under and immediately imagine the outback, boomerangs and kangaroos - classic ‘Straya.

After all, Australia is a country where almost every animal is either poisonous or deadly, so it is understood that a man needs to be tough to survive here.

3

Combine all of these cultural stereotypes together and it’s easy to understand why Americans implicitly accept male Australian actors as total and utter badasses.

Eric Bana, Russell Crowe, Guy Pearce, Chris Hemsworth, Jason Clarke, Joel Edgerton, Hugh Jackman, Sam Worthington and Hugo Weaving are frequently seen in Hollywood films, and many Americans have no idea that these actors are Australian.

Thanks to these actors, and many others, Australia has had credits in many recent blockbusters, including Les Misérables, Thor, The Hobbit, Avatar and The Avengers. These actors all do amazing

work on a regular basis playing difficult roles and giving truly earnest performances, but this is no new phenomenon.

There have been plenty of action stars grown in Australia and raised to celebrity status in Hollywood, dating all the way back to the 1930s with Errol Flynn and his portrayals as the dashing Captain Blood and Robin Hood.

50 years later and Australia gave the world Mel Gibson with his breakthrough in Mad Max 2 (Americans will remember it as The Road Warrior), which led to Lethal Weapon and his long

P O P C U LT U R E

Wolverine & X-Men Origins:Wolverine is a property of MARVEL and Twentieth Century Fox

Hollywood career. Sure, he’s technically American, having been born there and later leading a solely American career, but he grew up and made his name in Australia.

Besides, the less said about his personal life the better.

Nowadays it often feels like every other actor is from Australia, but what makes this crop of actors so appealing?

Is it that there are more Australian actors looking to make it big? Perhaps, but the rise in Australian actors being cast as ass-kicking, tough, A-list leading men correlates closely with the decline of the overtly masculine American leads of yesteryear.

Who would be today’s Charlton Heston or William Holden amongst American leading men? Who is the modern equivalent of Kirk Douglas or Clint Eastwood?

We have to look to television for those kinds of actors these days in shows like Mad Men and Breaking Bad where Jon Hamm and Bryan Cranston are giving incredibly tough, nuanced performances every week. Meanwhile the leading men of American films today are mostly pretty boys and smart-asses.

Hollywood’s biggest movie stars at the moment are guys like Johnny Depp, Will Smith, Tom Cruise and Robert Downey, Jr. That’s not to say that those guys are bad actors, each has their own merits and are fun to watch and it’s also not to say that there haven’t been American actors with those qualities before, but it just means that Hollywood has to look elsewhere for the strength and nobility that used to be home-grown.

The tough leading men of the past represented America at its most dominant state. Post-World War II, America was the new world empire and as a result male leads needed to be strong, tough men, confident, capable and dashingly handsome.

In many ways, America’s empire is on the decline, and is no longer producing these kinds of actors because America is no longer perceived to be the proud, moral leader of the world it once was. The mood and cultural climate always defines the art of a particular era and film is no different. The American-born leads are mostly sarcastic and cynical jokesters because that persona is a better reflection

of America at this point in time.

The great leading men of the 40s, 50s and 60s represented how America wanted to be seen by the world - moral, but firm; strong, but with a good heart.

By the 1980s we would see America on film accentuated by Herculean actors like Arnold Schwarzenegger and Sylvester Stallone top-lining the American screens representing all that America was during that time - larger than life and ready to blow the rest of the world to bits while cracking a one-liner like “Hasta la vista, baby!”

Compare that to the 1980s Australian action classic Mad Max 2, where Gibson was wiry and quiet, but no less deadly than his American counterparts and possibly tougher with his ability to survive in the deserted wastelands.

Gibson’s performances definitely encapsulates the American perception of the Australian man, and would inform the way American culture viewed Australia.

It also led to Gibson being drafted to the Hollywood team earning himself his movie star status.

Aussie actors aren’t just stealing the spotlight from US actors though; they are actually replacing them in films about America’s own history.

Take a look at last year’s Zero Dark Thirty, a film that gave Jason Clarke his breakout role with his incredibly strong performance as a CIA agent. It was a very difficult

character that could have very easily been one-dimensional, but Clarke managed to humanise him.

In that same film, Australians played two of the main team members of Seal Team Six. Joel Edgerton played the team leader, while Australian TV actor Callan Mulvey played the soldier who shot and killed Osama Bin Laden. It is definitely interesting to note that in a film made by Americans about such an important American event that Australian actors were cast in many of the key roles.

However, the greatest Australian success story of the past decade goes to Hugh Jackman. While the X-Men films haven’t aged very well, it can’t be denied that the original film and its sequels proved that superhero movies could be a success in the modern film market which helped usher in the new superhero tent pole phenomenon, leading to films like The Dark Knight and The Avengers raking in billions of dollars each.

The X-Men film’s lasting success stems from Jackman’s portrayal as the X-Men’s unofficial mascot, Wolverine.

Had Jackman not worked as Wolverine and X-Men bombed, it’s possible we wouldn’t have the glut of superhero films filling up the multiplexes every year. It was a star making performance, and he imbued Wolverine with a rigid gruffness, while also giving him a warm likeable centre.

It was a performance that definitely harks back to a bygone era of film, and it’s hard to imagine anyone else pulling off the role as well as he did. It’s also rather impressive the way Jackman has managed to continue playing his über-masculine superhero role while indulging in his natural talents as a song and dance man in the world of musical theatre. Back in the day we had tough American actors like Marlon Brando and Lee Marvin working on musical films, but it’s hard to imagine any of the modern crop of American actors pulling that off.

This is all but a small sample of the Australian actors who are breaking heavily into the Hollywood scene. More and more Australia is making a big move to the American film industry.

Whether Aussie actors make that fifteen hour trip to L.A. or Hollywood shoots their films here on our sunburnt island, America is looking to Australia for answers. Australian actors may not be getting the top-billing role in every film, but if there’s a role that requires an old-fashioned kind of man to play it, there’s a good chance he’s going to be an Aussie.

THE FEED ISSUE ONE

LADY GAGA FEMINIST HERO OR ZERO? LET’S BE HONEST, LADY GAGA IS NOT AFRAID OF BEING TOO “OUT THERE” WHEN IT COMES TO MAKING A POINT. FAR FROM IT, BUT WHEN IT COMES TO FEMINISM IS GAGA’S SUPPORT ALL JUST ONE BIG PUBLICITY STUNT? W R I T ES SA R A STA N FO R D

A

feisty, bold and powerful young woman, Lady Gaga is, for many, the epitome of a modern day feminist icon.

She’s a talented, non-conformist female who isn’t afraid of her own sexuality and is strong in her conviction regardless of what society thinks. Feminists are often stereotyped, misunderstood and accused of being man haters. It has become quite a contentious issue and claiming to be a feminist is not always deemed the socially acceptable thing to do, and for the right or wrong reasons, Gaga has thrown feminism back into the public domain.

You don’t have to dig too deep on the old search engine to unearth Gaga’s thoughts on the subject. Turns out she’s talking about it left, right and centre. However, her opinion on the matter seems far from consistent and this has left people questioning whether her strong stance on feminist issues is merely her latest crowdpleasing fad. It’s natural of course to make a few contradictions here and there, but as a massively influential figure, Gaga’s mixed messages have the potential to cause more harm than good for the feminist movement.

“I am a feminist. I reject whole-heartedly the way we are taught to perceive women,” Lady Gaga said during an interview with ‘In Camera’ in 2010.

Her highly emotional piece to camera has your typical “stripped-back-celebtalking-serious” vibe that so many of our A-listers adopt for optimal impact. Taking a non-compromising stance on women’s rights and the continuing injustices against

5

women, Gaga discusses the common cultural “misinterpretation of feminism” as man hating, which it isn’t. It’s got nothing to do with that. Expressing her views with utter conviction, her long meaningful pauses and teary eyes urge viewers to believe her authenticity. We want to feel inspired, but the truth is, her words are perhaps not as profound as she was hoping for and, not wanting to sound too cynical, the whole thing appears rather rehearsed.

Whether you believe the authenticity of her speech or not, Lady Gaga’s not-soimpromptu performance demonstrates a modern, forward-thinking understanding of feminism and what it stands for today.

She didn’t encourage any man-hating, braburning parties at least (although she did have that one bra that shot out fireworks).

But Gaga hasn’t always been an advocate of feminism. Dig a little deeper and you may stumble across an earlier interview whereby Gaga painted a very different idea of feminism: “I am no feminist. I hail men, I love men. I celebrate American male culture, beer, bars and muscle cars,” Gaga said during a 2009 video interview.

Erm, what was that about misinterpretation, Gaga? She may be as indecisive as the next person, but can such loaded remarks really be made so flippantly by someone who constantly throws themselves into the limelight?

Not afraid of a bit of controversy, Gaga has almost entirely based her music career on the idea that she is a non-conformist

female who does anything for the sake of her art, regardless of whether society views her as conventional or not.

Gaga’s album entitled The Fame includes songs such as Boys, Boys, Boys, I Like It Rough and LoveGame. All of these songs imply a head strong and independent woman who is very much in control of the situation and of her sexuality. She mimics stereotypical male behaviour in an attempt to challenge traditional representations of the more passive woman.

Gaga’s second album, The Fame Monster, was much more brooding and dark with songs like Bad Romance, Alejandro and Telephone continuing her “strong woman” theme with a literal killerstreak. Her third album, Born This Way, included the song Scheiße that screamed feminism with the call to arms: “If you’re a strong female, you don’t need permission.”

During a recent interview with Stylist Magazine, Lady Gaga discussed a song to appear on her yet-to-be released album, ARTPOP, called G.U.Y (Girl Under You) saying that “any kind of feminist has valid views for herself about what it means to be a feminist, but, as a new-age feminist, I would say I quite like the transference of strength I feel by submitting to a man being under him.”

However, such lyrical efforts are somewhat undermined by her overtly raunchy music videos. Attention is focused on Gaga’s barely-clothed and magnificently toned dancing body, leaving me questioning exactly which part of our

P O P C U LT U R E

societal norms Gaga is challenging. In fact, Gaga appears to recreate precisely the idealised, objectified female that she claims to challenge.

Moreover, the very fact that Gaga is a celebrity pop-icon is problematic. Typically associated with vanity, the promotion of materialistic values and pop culture, three major themes in all her works, especially in her first album, is often regarded as a distraction from the issues and problems in the real world and thus sits uncomfortably with a more traditional view of feminism.

So what do her fans and, just as importantly, her non-fans think? Naturally, we turned to the trusty social networking to find the answers and asked: “Is Lady Gaga a feminist icon?”

The reponses were mixed: “Wow!” One anonymous Facebooker said. “She’s a role model for the mindless degradation of the body and soul.” A more favourable viewpoint however, recognised the positive aspects of Gaga’s global career: “She shows that women can wear what they want, do what they want and achieve their ambitions. This can’t be a bad thing.”

Tessa Barratt, Co-founder of The Sydney Feminists takes a more forgiving stance, recognising the moral transition Gaga appears to have made.

“Lady Gaga has not always called herself a feminist, so it’s encouraging to see a change in her attitude towards the word and what it represents. Until fairly recently, Gaga seemed to be using her attention grabbing, commercially sexualised antics to operate in this heavily misogynistic industry,” Barratt said.

“Now, with her Body Revolution Project and her recent statements about body image, eating disorders and feminism, she seems to be evolving as a person; let’s watch this space and see where she goes next.”

So is Lady Gaga a feminist icon or not?

It seems crude to judge Gaga’s actions as merely a fame hungry publicity stunt.

Beneath the glamorous facade is a young woman who is seemingly as indecisive as the rest of us - unfortunately for Gaga, her slip-ups end up on YouTube for public scrutiny. Perhaps it’s the public response to Gaga’s contradictory comments that is most relevant in terms of her contribution to feminism. But It seems that her initial ignorance has reignited the passion and drive for equality.

Gaga continutes to play an important role in keeping the conversation going. She, among other things, is a huge part of why young people are discussing, debating and rethinking ideas of what is fair and just and what it means to be a feminist and equal. It’s reassuring to learn just how many young women, and even young men, are willing to openly assert their feminist viewpoints, showing sure sign that, whilst of course they do still exist, negative social stereotypes of what it means to be a feminist are beginning to fade.

DREAMS

& NIGHT MARES 7

A R T & FA S H I ONN

WHEN THE FEED TEAM WENT SEARCHING FOR AN ARTIST TO CREATE THE PERFECT COVER WE KNEW EXACTLY WHAT WE WANTED: SHARP, MODERN AND BOLD. ONE GLANCE AT JESSE WAKENSHAW’S PORTFOLIO AND WE KNEW WE’D FOUND OUR MAN. W R I T ES J ES S E M AT H ESO N

J

esse Wakenshaw is an artist with a vision, and the ability to make it come to life. Using outlandish make-up, neon wigs and custom-made accessories, Wakenshaw’s images would make the Haüs Of Gaga blush.

His homegrown talent of mixing digital photography with digital arts work together to create a wholly unreal image. One could easily describe his art as Warhol-esque.

He may have only been creating these images for two years, but he says he’s truly been an artist his whole life.

“Creating visual art and fashion pieces has always been a major part of my life... With a background in dance and performance I loved the WOW factor, the theatrics, the visual concepts and the hidden stories behind it all,” he said.

“It’s embedded in my DNA and I truly think this is my destiny. I was born to create and share my passion with an audience.”

Although he has no formal fine arts training, Wakenshaw believes his ability is not defined by a piece of paper. “There are millions of artists out there who have had no formal education or training and are extremely successful in their fields.

“I personally think it takes dedication, hard work, passion and the willingness to push yourself further and further. That’s something that I really stand for as an artist...

I want to have no limitations.”

clockwise: marilyn sEEING fAME jesse jessica on acid toxic marilyn

Whether it be the European-royalty inspired ‘Jewelled Beauty’ (next page), the high-contrast ‘Marilyn’ (previous top left) or the image of a gun-crown wearing vampire simply titled ‘Guns’ (p.g 8), Wakenshaw’s inspirations seemingly stretch from bubblegum pop culture to the grungy underground, but he says his concepts originate elsewhere.

“They often come to me in dreams and nightmares and then I develop them from there. I couldn’t tell you when or how the dreams are triggered but they just happen.

It’s quite amazing! The brain is such a powerful tool.”

Wakenshaw also lends much of his artistry to the late Lee Alexander McQueen, a man he says was “a true talented genius with an inspirational

story of how he forged his way through the cut throat world of fashion to create clothes that had their own life”, a story similar to the one Wakenshaw hopes to write for himself with his art.

When Wakenshaw approached our team with his ideas for The Feed Magazine’s front cover which included his signature neon wigs, the use of two models and the custom creation of glasses, nails, bow ties and pocket squares, needless to say we were pretty fucking excited.

Here is what Jesse Wakenshaw had to say on the concept behind the cover: “The vision was for the cover to be raw, straight to the point and simply eye catching both through the use of colourful hair and make-up and monochrome styling.

“The magazine is directed at a wide audience and touches a lot of different topics, so I wanted the image to be appealing to all genders and all individuals hence the split image. It’s slightly fascinating when you look closer at it to reveal two completely different people.”

For more art by Jesse Wakenshaw, visit www.JesseWakenshaw.com.

sPREAD: jewelled beauty (LEFT) guns (RIGHT)

9

THE FEED ISSUE ONE

IN WITH THE NEW W

W R I T ES K AT E B U RG ES S

hether it be London, Paris or New York, every fashion week I spend more time looking at photos of the people attending the shows rather than what actually went down the runway.

I’m much more inspired by how these celebrities, magazine editors and bloggers are mixing together different designers from various collections, hailing from the different tiers of fashion, to create a look that’s totally unique.

With skyrocketing interest in fashion showgoers, design houses have been known to gift these sidewalk-celebrities with pieces resulting in outfits worth thousands.

One of the blessed is blogger Bryan Yambao, better known to his 401,328 Twitter followers by his pseudonym “BryanBoy”, which is also the name of his blog.

With this blog, BryanBoy attracts around 1.4 million views per month earning him over $100,000 per year and a seat next to Anna Wintour in the front row.

His blogging has allowed him to dress in some of the most lavish fashion styles straight off the runway, mixing it up with street trends, and then showing us how it’s done.

For The Feed Magazine’s first fashion spread we took inspiration from street style looks appearing more and more on the runways of fashion weeks across the world.

So, how can you create looks that get the attention of bloggers and photographers without maxing out your credit cards and getting the unwanted attention of debt collectors?

I have two words for you: consignment and vintage.

I would love to say that designer consignment store, Blue Spinach, is a hidden gem in the back streets of Darlinghurst, but seeing as the building is bright blue, you cannot possibly miss it. It’s still a gem though, a fabulous fashion-orgasm inducing sapphire.

This is where Sydney’s shopaholics come to send their excess designer hoard to a loving new home. And what a hoard it is. Christopher Kane, Balenciaga, Marc Jacobs - As Patsy Stone from Absolutely Fabulous would say, “Labels, darling, labels!”

11

IN WITH THE OLD A R T & FA S H I ON

SHE WEARS:

“AVA Leather Balconette Bra”

by Something Wicked from Baby Likes To Pony “Pop Leather” Skirt

by Provocator Christian Louboutin Heels from Blue Spinach FRONT OF RACK: “Crusader Pants”

by Premonition

Special thanks to: Asha Ray, Jana Krcmarova & Susan Bui

There are rare brands and pieces hard to find anywhere else, let alone in Sydney. And the prices are far cheaper than buying brand new; The Christopher Kane galaxy print dress featured in our shoot (p.g. 17) would retail for well over $2000, but in Blue Spinach you can snatch it up for a price that, like the dress, is truly out of this world for just $660.

Don’t worry boys, you’re not left out of the consignment fun either. The best wardrobe investments any guy can make is a great jacket and cool shoes like the Vintage M Jacket and Diesel boots in our shoot (p.g. 15).

Vintage tends to follow the same idea, but while consignment stores may be a shopping addicts playground, vintage stores are their offices - vintage means business.

Like consignment there is usually only one of each piece, so it’s really luck-of-the-draw and you have to have a certain amount of commitment to persevere through what might seem like endless racks of 80’s flashbacks we would all rather forget.

However, nestled amongst the warehouse of Marrickville lies a store one should never forget - Balatro To Remember.

Once you’re inside, the first thing you notice are the clothes. Racks and racks shoved up against the wall including pieces like a Chanel suit for only $49 9 and the 3.1 Phillip Lim pants featured in our shoot for only $149. My signing hand is trembling just thinking about it.

Of course this fusion street trend isn’t all about simply renewing the old. The best way to create an entirely original and envyinducing look is to mix it up with something new, working with both the high and low end of fashion.

However, traditional retail stores and fashion boutiques will always have their place in your shopping journey. Just check out the “Crusader Pants” by Premonition and the select pieces by the futuristic and artistic label Provocator, such as the “Bourgeois” cardigan or “Lilo Pans” pants (p.g. 16).

These stores not only give you and your look a modern flair (and the most size options!) but are places that allow us to look forward into fashion, to give us inspiration as we look back through vintage and consignment stores.

Creating your own personal style is a journey of self and store discovery: you’re never going to find the answers in one place, and maybe not even in the same decade.

SHE WEARS: Vintage Dolce & Gabbana Dress from Blue Spinach Marc Jacobs Jackets from Blue Spinach Vintage Hat from Balatro To Remember Necklace, Bag, Shoes Stylist’s Own HE WEARS: “Copper Cut” Jeans

by Premonition Ann Demeulemeester Knit from Blue Spinach Scarf & Shoes Stylist’s Own

13

SHE WEARS:

HE WEARS:

Vintage Gianni Versace Shirt from Balatro To Remember

Beam Jacket from Blue Spinach

Vintage 3.1 Phillip Lim Pants from Balatro To Remember

“Fighters” Jeans

by Premonition

Christian Louboutin Heels from Blue Spinach

Diesel Boots from Blue Spinach

Hat, Bag, Scarf, Belt Stylist’s Own

Shirt, Scarf, Sunglasses Stylist’s Own

SHE WEARS:

Art by: hules

Vintage Diane von Furstenberg Dress from Balatro To Remember Vintage Alaska Jacket from Balatro To Remember Sergio Rossi Boots from Blue Spinach Headband & Clutch Stylist’s Own

HE WEARS: Vintage M Jacket from Belatro To Remember “Lilo Pans” Pants

by Provocator Diesel Boots from Blue Spinach

15

Sunglasses, & Shirt Stylist’s Own

HE WEARS: “Bourgeois” Cardigan

by Provocator “Lilo Pans” Pants

by Provocator Shirt & Shoes Stylist’s Own

SHE WEARS: Custom Dress by RummageStyle.com Vintage Hat from Belatro To Remember Marie Tumor Bag from Blue Spinach Scarf & Shoes Stylist’s Own

HE WEARS: Vanishing Elephant Blazer from Blue Spinach Sunglasses, Pants, Shoes Stylist’s Own

SHE WEARS: Dress by Christopher Kain from Blue Spinach Flat & Square Sunglasses

by Cheap Monday Boots & Bag Stylist’s Own

17

HE WEARS: Vanishing Elephant Blazer from Blue Spinach “Broke Is The New Black” T-Shirt by Premonition Scarf, Sunglasses, Jeans & Shoes Stylist’s Own

SHE WEARS: “Sex” Silk Dress by Lick My Legs from Baby Likes To Pony Balenciaga Jacket from Blue Spinach Sunglasses, Shoes & Bag Stylist’s Own

THE FEED ISSUE ONE

RHYTHM

of the night

“RESTORATION” IS A WORD COMMONLY ASSOCIATED WITH THE CITIES OF BRAZIL AS GOVERNMENTS AND ARTISTS ALIKE ATTEMPT TO WHITEWASH ITS REALITIES. W R I T ES S H AU N C O L N A N

E

scadaria Selarón is one of Brazil’s most famous landmarks caught in the rapidly changing cultural economy of Brazil’s seaside metropolis. The famous steps are the magnum opus of Chilean artist and ceramist, Jorge Selarón, who began restoring them from dilapidation in 1990.

So well known is this landmark that tourists often gift Jorge with tiles to add to its rich history. It is so highly valued that in 2009, when the city made its bid for the 2016 Olympics, the 250 steps were featured in the uplifting promotional video, ‘The Passion Unites Us.’ But just past these steps there is a favela, Portuguese for shanty town or slum.

Modern Brazil is littered with the clusters of fledgling residences made from corrugated iron, wood, cardboard, brick, and pretty much anything else locals can get their hands on.

Many of the favelas we see today came into being in the 1970’s, during a period of rural exodus that stretched the bounds of Rio de Janerio and Sāo Paolo, resulting in the two cities being brought closer together. Now, there is only a small, unpopulated area of jungle and a few mines separating the outskirts of the two metropolises.

Brazil’s favela population is so extensive it constitutes approximately 11.5 million people, which is about six per cent of the country’s population.

In the favela closest to the steps, the inhabitants sleep in the day, hiding out from the tropical sun and recuperating for the night ahead, because when the sun sets, the steps light up and the shadows come out to play.

Full of noise, a jungle of people rise from the favela, to sounds of whistles, clicks and calls. addicts are lured to the steps, looking for a fix. They kick up dust and chew on their fingernails, they have raw gums and bloodshot eyes, they long to be numbed

19

by their next hit. A young man whistles, he is a lion of the favela, the dealer. The addict-animals tread lightly, walking in circles towards the dealer. He sits proudly, puffing out his chest. Not a word is spoken.

He looks away. The addicts howl softly to themselves, their eyes flitter.

The dealer’s right hand girl makes a subtle gesture up the steps taking the money from the junkies in a rapid motion, checking that it is authentic and that it’s enough, without lowering her head or breaking her gait.

The nod is passed to the first landing of the steps where a kid appears from the shadows, whistling like a lorikeet. He looks up for confirmation before an even smaller kid grabs the “stuff” and skips down the steps keeping an innocuous pace. The package is small but it’ll do until tomorrow. The kid hands it out to the crowd of junkies with the precision of a seasoned veteran. He is only five or six. He climbs the steps as the junkies slink away, back to their own favelas, or perhaps a dark alley, somewhere they can score. Wide-eyed, the addicts sway in the moonlight, shouting vulgarities and dismembering sundry bits of wood and metal, clanging them on the sidewalks, keeping the tourists awake in their comfortable hotels.

Meanwhile, the tourists still flock to the spot, oblivious to the cycle they are a part of, offering up themselves, their cameras, their wallets, to the endless rythm of the night.

Renovation efforts made by Eduardo Paes, Rio’s mayor from 2009 to 2012, have been felt throughout the city.

The Associated Press reports: “Rio’s slum ‘pacification’ program is part of a strategy to make the city safe ahead of the 2014 soccer World Cup and 2016 Olympics.

Murder rates are down, and SecoviRio, an organization representing Rio’s real estate professionals, estimates that in the 72 hours after police took the first three favelas, property prices there jumped by 50

percent — and are still climbing.”

However, it’s a tale of two cities. Over 19,000 families have been evicted from more than 190 favelas across the city. Many of those former residences have been left to deteriorate, attracting rats and drug addicts. Life for the remaining residents is difficult and dangerous.

Yet nights at the foot of the Escadaria Selarón go on as usual, despite the city entering a new phase. The deals are usually halted once a night by the intervention of a police car as it moves slowly down the Rua Joaquim Silva, pointing a large automatic weapon out the window. It’s an image symptomatic of a broken system where drugs propel people out of poverty while trapping others in it, and the police are able to do little more than shoot threatening glances, unable to create real change in a country where one in five incarcerations are drug related.

The cops stare at the lion and he returns their gaze, a moment frozen by menace.

They drive by and turn the corner. The drive-by has become another note in the symphony.

As the city gears up for two major international sporting events, tourists will flock to the heights of Corcovado Mountain, looking out on the natural splendour. Scores of sports fans will flood the newly replenished Stadium, the Estádio do Maracanã, and the steps of Escadaria Selarón is likely to be an enduring gem of 21st century Brazil, an example of two worlds colliding, a haven for tourists in the day and for drug dealers and their clients in the night.

The visionary of the steps, Jorge Selarón, was found dead along the 125 metre stretch of steps outside his home on January 10 this year, aged 65. Police have not disclosed the cause of death but are not ruling out homicide, having discovered burn marks on his body.

The cycle continues.

TRAVEL

ethical ADVENTURING

REAPING THE SPOILS OF ANOTHER COUNTRY MAY BE THE CRUX OF THE TOURISM INDUSTRY, BUT TAKING THE TIME TO FIND A WAY TO HELP THE COUNTRY YOU’RE VISITING, AND THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE THERE, CAN BE FAR MORE REWARDING. W R I T ES M A RT I N B O RG

A

s I stop to take a photograph of Angkor Wat, a small Cambodian boy, who should probably be in school, asks me politely, “Hello sir, you buy 10 postcard, one dollar?” Saying no with great difficulty, having already bought 20, I wonder what options this kid has. Whether he has any chance of escaping this life.

At many tourist sites in Cambodia, visitors are confronted by the sight of children selling postcards, books and trinkets. It’s common to hear in perfect English: “Please buy, [so I can] go to school.” Many of these kids can switch to Russian, French or German in an instant.

They are clearly very intelligent and know how to tug at the heartstrings of tourists.

I wish I could help them, but the sad truth is that my spare change isn’t enough to change their lives.

Having been to a number of developing countries, including many parts of China and India, I was still struck by the poverty in Cambodia. Although this country has maintained economic growth rates averaging six percent for the last 10 years, the wealth has not been evenly shared and many Cambodians still survive on subsistence agriculture, earning as little as 40 cents per day.

Cambodia is a country that has been through a lot. Caught in the crossfire of the Vietnam War, it endured extensive carpet bombing by the Americans, which gave rise to the Khmer Rouge in 1975. In the name of creating a perfect communist society, this regime was responsible for the murder of between one and three million Cambodians out of a population of eight million. Wearing glasses or speaking a foreign language was enough to be sent to a facility such as the infamous S21 prison and eventually, the Killing Fields. After the country was invaded by Vietnam in 1979, the Khmer Rouge were forced into the

jungle, but continued to represent their victims at the United Nations for nearly 20 years while the world tried to pretend the genocide never happened.

Today, Cambodia is one of the most corrupt countries in the world according to Transparency International. As a tourist, you are often quoted prices that are inflated several times the fair price and it’s anybody’s guess where that money goes.

The first thing I was asked upon arriving in Phnom Penh was whether I wanted to shoot a bazooka at a cow for only $400. It was explained that this price was due to the need to give multiple people their cut and to pay off the military. My lack of interest was

" IT IS YOU R R ES PON SIBILIT Y AS A TOU R IST TO MAKE YOU R IM PACT A POSITI VE ON E " mistaken for a bargaining tactic (apparently Westerners love doing this sort of thing) and the price was dropped to $200, but I later found out they will drop the price as low as $100.

Consider this against the backdrop of Cambodia’s tragic status as one of the most mined countries in the world, according to a UNICEF report on Landmining released in 2003.

Travelling around the country I saw many victims of land mines who are often reduced to begging, and at some tourist sites there will be a beautiful, traditional orchestra with a sign that reads: “We are land mine victims but we do not wish to resort to begging, please help us support

our families.”

However, not everyone is suffering and there are many scams that seek to take advantage of the good intentions of visitors. A number of times I was asked by tuk tuk drivers if I would like to visit the Chong Kneas Floating Village in Siem Reap. Out of 146 reviews on Trip Advisor, 114 have rated it “poor” or “terrible” and travellers describe how they are taken to a ‘very dubious orphanage’ where they are then pressured to buy a bag of rice for $US65 for “children who have lost their fathers.”

While I am not sorry to have missed out on that particular experience, as a responsible tourist, there are many constructive ways in which I try to help and you can too.

As hard as it might be, you should think twice before buying things from children and should not give them money as it encourages begging and may keep them out of school.

Instead, support organisations that are working to improve the lives of local children and help their families. For example, take part in a village project certified by the Responsible Tourism Initiative, where visitors are hosted by a local family whom they help to weave baskets or harvest rice for the day. Money from the tour price goes straight to the family or village, and some of the cost is donated to NGOs active in the area.

Cambodia is a country with huge potential and while you visit the amazing sites that are part of the cultural legacy of this country, it is your responsibility as a tourist to make your impact a positive one.

The next time you travel overseas, take a day or two out of your holiday to give something back to the country you are visiting. You will make a difference to the lives of less fortunate people and and you might even enjoy the experience.

THE FEED ISSUE ONE

RELIGION VS FREEDOM OF SPEECH IN TODAY’S WORLD, AN INDIVIDUAL HAS A RIGHT TO VOICE THEIR OPINION BUT THERE IS ONE INSTITUTION WHERE THIS FREEDOM OF SPEECH SEEMINGLY DOESN’T APPLY. SO WE ASK “WHATS MORE IMPORTANT: FREEDOM OF SPEECH OR FREEDOM OF RELIGION?”

W R I T ES H A N N A H J O S E

21

POLITICS & OPINION

“

I’m here to warn Australia about the true nature of Islam. It’s not just a religion, as so many people mistakenly think. It’s primarily a dangerous and totalitarian ideology.”

These are the words of Geert Wilders from his speech in Melbourne last February, reigniting the debate in Australia about the balance between freedom of religion and freedom of speech. His talks in Sydney and Melbourne drew groups of protestors accusing Mr. Wilders of being a racist. Setting aside for a moment the fact that Islam is not a race, it is clear that many in Australian society (including certain Senators) find his views inflammatory and offensive, to the point where there were calls for denying him a visa to enter Australia. But why?

Religion is a sensitive topic, to be sure. Even discussing it right now poses a potential risk to the creators of this magazine, but should it? Free, rational and critical inquiry is an important facet of any liberal democracy, regardless of offence that may be taken in the process. We as a

in the first place. Cultivating the maturity to withstand criticism of one’s beliefs is part of the “give and take” inherent in a free society.

However, even in a country as liberal and democratic as Holland, critics of religion have needed to equip themselves with round the clock security due to the very real danger of being targeted by extremists. In 2004, Theo Van Gogh was murdered for making the film, Submission. His murderer then singled out Dutch MPs Ayaan Hirsi Ali (co-creator of the film) and Geert Wilders as future targets.In the United Kingdom and the United States too, academics and public critics of religion like Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris are protected round the clock for the same reasons.

In Sydney, protests turned into riots in September last year, when groups protesting the film Innocence of Muslims clashed with police. The aim of these attacks is to intimidate individuals and organisations into complying with the demands of those who would curtail free speech. In large measures, it works.

which is inoffensive to others and will not ‘provoke’ people to violence is no freedom at all. If we were all to stop saying things that offended somebody, we’d have to stop talking altogether!

Proselytising religions in particular have little grounds to object to disparagement.

They, by their own choice, have positioned themselves in the public sphere by seeking to actively recruit adherents. Whatever is brought into the public sphere, is fair game for discussion, debate, and yes, even mockery. It’s also important to point out the differential sensitivity shown towards Muslims (whether because of fear, or hesitance to offend) can exacerbate the existing problem. The more institutions and organisations give in to terror, the less ordinary Muslims become accustomed to tolerating slights towards their religion, and thereby grow more intolerant when they do occur. This self-perpetuating cycle needs to be nipped in the bud, and it’s not too late.

While much of this article may seem critical of Islam and its extremists’ opposition to freedom of speech, the point

" R E LIGION IS A S E N SITI VE TOPIC, TO B E SU R E, BUT IT S HOU LDN'T B E . FR E E, R ATIONAL AN D CR ITICAL INQUIRY IS AN IM PORTANT FACET OF ANY LIB E R AL DE MOCR ACY, R EGAR DLESS OF OFFE NCE THAT MAY B E TAKE N IN TH E PROCESS." society already honour this commitment to free speech and expression by engaging in lively and vigorous debates about politics and policies, no matter how offended anyone gets.

Our politicians are routinely grilled, criticised, and forced to defend themselves and their policies, as democracy insists they should. As a result, they are held accountable, their ideas are scrutinised, and therefore we are able to make better, more informed decisions for ourselves and our societies. But where is the line between freedom of speech and hate speech?

It is argued that denigrating religion amounts to hate speech, due to the sensitive nature of the topic, and the fact that religious beliefs are held to be sacred and inviolable by many. We must remember, however, that the freedom to criticise, even the freedom to mock, is an inherent part of the freedom of speech.

Were it not, then we would have no need to enshrine such rights in our legal systems

Consider, for instance, the aftermath of the Danish cartoon controversy, when dozens of magazines, art galleries and newspapers declined to print cartoons of Muhammad for fear of a violent backlash. Even Yale University Press opted not to print the cartoon in a book entitled ‘Cartoons That Shook the World’ fearing violent reactions from the Islamic community.

The campaign of harassment against those who speak against religion doesn’t end there.

In the legal arena, the encroachment upon free speech is being ramped up.

At the UN, the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation, comprising of 57 Islamic countries, has called for a ban on insulting the Prophet Muhammad. The Secretary General of the Organisation has been quoted saying in an interview that freedom of speech must not be used to offend others, or to provoke people to violence.

But limiting freedom of speech to that

must be made that they are certainly not the only offenders. Sure, their outbursts are much more public in a post-9/11 world, but Christian lobbies are also quick to cry foul over the criticism they recieve when discussing controversial topics such as same-sex marriage and abortion. Some even go as far as to call themselves the victims, as if they weren’t the ones telling you how you’re meant to live your life.

So here appears to be a worrying double standard, wherein religions are allowed to preach what they like under the protections of religious freedom, but civil society is implicitly not allowed to criticise their preaching without attracting crowds of protestors.

All discourses, particularly politics and religion, which shape society in fundamental ways, need to be open to criticism and disapproval and we are lucky that in this country we do have the right to engage in political debate and that it is exercised freely and forcefully, as it should be.

"I LOVE YOU" BY GARETH ERNST. painted with strawberry and spearmint food colouring on edible korean rice paper. facebook.com/gareth.ernst1

THE FEED ISSUE ONE

WTF IS

GONSKI?

PERSONALITY POLITICS ASIDE, WHILE THE GONSKI REFORMS HAVE PASSED THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, THE PORTFOLIO OF EDUCATION REMAINS A KEY ELECTION ISSUE. BUT WHAT DO THE GONSKI REFORMS REALLY MEAN FOR OUR STUDENTS AND WHAT DO THEY THINK? W R I T ES S H V E ATA C H A N D EL & G R AC E M I TC H EL L

I

n 2010, public ambassador for the Australian Indigenous Education Foundation and leading philanthropist, David Gonski AC initiated a panel of education experts to produce a report. A report which showed that the Australian State and Federal Governments have let the standard of secondary education slip dramatically from 2000 to 2009.

According to the report, in 2000 there was only one country which outperformed Australia in reading and scientific literacy and two in mathematical literacy, but by 2009 a staggering six countries were outperforming Australian students in reading and scientific literacy and 12 countries were better at maths.

The report highlighted the growing gap between the highest and the lowest performing students due to often unnecessary and complex funding and that there is an imbalance of education funding responsibilities at both State and Federal levels of government.

There is also a clear inadequacy in school infrastructure between both public and private/independent schools, with schools in disadvantaged communities usually falling behind those in higher socioeconomic areas.

Due to these findings, the report outlines a clear 10 year goal for both State and Federal governments which is to “promote

23

equity and excellence” in schooling as well as assisting young Australians to become “successful learners, confident and creative individuals, and to become active and informed citizens.”

To do this, the report proposes arrangements to help deliver a funding system that is transparent, equitable and financially sustainable with a combined sum of $14.5 billion dollars to be injected into the national education system over the next six years. A major chunk of this contribution, nearly $9.4 billion (65 per cent), would be contributed by the Commonwealth.

However, the report recognises that just throwing money at the problem is not the answer and that any funding must be accompanied by continued efforts to strengthen and reform Australia’s education system.

The report calls for all schools to be staffed by quality principals and teachers, that classrooms take innovative approaches to learning, and that schools encourage a culture of high expectations and continuous learning through support from teachers and principals. They also highlight the importance of connections forged between schools,

POLITICS & OPINION

parents and the community.

That’s a lot to digest, but what does the Gonski Report mean to the people who it will affect most? To find out we handed the pen over to 16-year-old Grace Mitchell to find out. Here’s what she had to say: As a student at a Catholic Independent school I live a relatively privileged life compared to many students in Australia.

I understand you might think of me as being a posh catholic girl but in reality I am actually quite humble (and not even Catholic).

The reforms that the Gonski Report proposes would take my education and that of my peers, both in my school and in other schools in both higher and lower socio-economic communities, to the next level.

And really that is what the Gonski Report

The lack of funding is not the only problem. The government needs to be smart about this reform. They need to think through their actions and assess how their decisions impact on students.

One such education reform which clearly was not thought through and which greatly impacted on my education and learning is that of forcing students who do not wish to be in school, to stay.

In July 2009, the Australian government introduced a new school leaving age stopping students from leaving High School until they had completed year 10 and turned 17.

This decision was made after research showed that students who left school early instead of completing Year 12 and their HSC had less-desirable outcomes.

This all sounds well and good, but for

"TH E L ACK OF FU N DING IS NOT TH E ON LY PROB LE M . TH E GOVE R N M E NT N E E DS TO B E SMART ABOUT THIS R E FOR M . TH E Y N E E D TO THIN K TH ROUGH TH EIR ACTION S AN D ASS ESS HOW TH EIR DECISION S IM PACT ON STU DE NTS." is all about, investing in our classrooms, our infrastructure, our teachers, our schools and our students so that we can take them to the next level.

I spoke to a year 10 student from a semi-selective public school, Rose Bay Secondary College, who said that the teachers there were simply “alright”, and for a student about to enter some of the most important years of their education and their life, describing those who will teach him as being only “alright” is quite troubling.

My education has been top notch and my teachers wonderful, for that I am lucky, but it is also why I feel that the government should not be pumping money into Catholic Independent schools, like my own, as they very clearly do not need it.

How would it effect my life if all the Gonski proposals were put in place? Maybe it wouldn’t. Maybe it would mean a new gym, new facilities, better pay for teachers and more resources for students - for my school it would mean an upgrade rather than an overhaul.

For students living out in rural areas or attending public schools however, it would be revolutionary.

the students who want to stay in school and who want to learn, having a student who constantly disrupts the class, who doesn’t want to be in class and does not care about their outcome or the outcomes of others, can be seriously detrimental.

Hopefully, when the government implements this new education reform outlined by the Gonski Report, they won’t simply be thinking about it in terms of dollars or leave it to the adults to decide on the changes that need to be made, but will take the time to consult students as well.

Ask them what they think needs to be changed in their school, as no two schools are alike, and attempt to really fix the problems in our education system instead of simply placing a very expensive band-aid over it like governments have in the past.

I give a Gonski, hopefully you will too.

Want more information on the Gonski Report? Visit www.igiveagonski.com. au. Also check out betterschools. com.au for more information on the government’s plans for the future of our student’s education.

THE FEED ISSUE ONE

INTERNSHIPS:

WE NEED SOLUTIONS!

INTERNSHIPS ARE GREAT: THEY GIVE STUDENTS AND RECENT GRADUATES AN OPPORTUNITY TO TEST THEIR SKILLS, BUILD CONTACTS AND, HOPEFULLY, PROVIDE A FIRST STEP INTO A FULFILLING CAREER WHILE EMPLOYERS GET EXTRA HELP IN THE OFFICE AND A COST EFFECTIVE WAY TO TRIAL POTENTIAL NEW STAFF - BUT IS IT REALLY THAT SIMPLE? W R I T ES JA M ES FL E TC H ER

T

he quality of an internship program can vary enormously. They are often greatly rewarding for both parties, but increasingly we’re hearing more horror stories of businesses exploiting interns for free labour whilst circumventing the tangible benefits the intern would hope to gain. So what really is involved in an average internship?

The University of Adelaide recently published a study commissioned by Fair Work Australia into the nature and conditions of internships currently flooding the workforce in Australia. There have been various articles broadly outlining the realities of current internship programs and the bleak employment prospects facing interns and entry level employees attempting to break into their industry, but they don’t really dig deep enough or offer real solutions. The issues of internships, free labour and exploitation are complicated and ambiguous at the best of times, but what is right, wrong and realistic in an internship program is clear-cut.

Allow me to elaborate on two key issues of the problem and offer some real solutions too.

Firstly, the arrangement needs to be mutually beneficial. Interns want to gain skills and experience on the job and businesses want an extra set of hands around the office. An article from Pedestrian.tv states: “it is stipulated that the employer that provides the training derives no immediate advantage from the activities of the intern; and on occasion its operations may actually be impeded.”

Really? Clearly this notion is out of date.

What competent employer would hire an

25

intern to impede their business? How we define internships needs to be updated to reflect reality, or at least the ideal: a mutually beneficial working relationship where both parties agree on the conditions and attain betterment from it.

Secondly, internships mustn’t replace real entry-level jobs. An intern is there to develop their abilities and gain experience first and foremost. Contributing to the productivity or success of the business is, whilst still important, a distant second. If indeed a business has recruited two interns to do the work of one entry-level employee then their attitude towards internships is seriously skew-whiff.

Ultimately, two inexperienced students will produce significantly poorer quality work than a qualified employee, and is that really what the business wants? In the long term, businesses and industries are shooting themselves in the foot by failing to invest in the next generation of staff and the ramifications of this could be greater than we now realise. A common criticism of internship programs is the exploitation of interns by businesses to complete the most undesirable tasks. There is no doubt this is rife among internship experiences. Interns are there to learn new skills and apply the knowledge they’ve gained from years of study and training, not to organise the office mailroom and pick up the executive’s double-shot decaf lattes. If you want an admin assistant you should advertise for one and be prepared to pay the modest salary. However, this is still considered to be the best way to get ahead and break into the industry. After all, isn’t that the whole point of an internship? Maybe putting your

head down and working hard will earn you high praise and better job opportunities for the future. Doesn’t that make it all worth it? In the end, that is up to you. We can’t blame businesses alone; we also need to consider the intern’s own contribution to the problem. They are, after all, selling themselves for free. The labour market is a free market, just like any other in Australia.

Employers want the best possible product (staff) for the best available price, but if you can get an acceptable if lower quality alternative for free then why not?

If the product is free then you do need to question its quality, but hey, who doesn’t enjoy a free lunch?

At this point I need to put my hand up, I am guilty. I have frequently (unfortunately) offered my services as a writer to various publications for free in the hope of fostering strong ties that will lead to paid work in the future. This is symptomatic of all creative industries, not just writers. It is an epidemic.

Why do we undermine our own abilities and undercut our peers by offering free labour in the form of an internship?

No wonder all the entry-level jobs are disappearing. Perhaps we only have ourselves to blame? The solutions to these problems and ambiguities in our internship culture can be resolved, but they need real solutions, and someone to take the matter seriously enough to enforce it. My suggestions aren’t groundbreaking or particularly unique, just common sense really; ideas like greater regulation, better incentives for employers to treat interns fairly, and better organisation among interns and entry-level job seekers.

REGISTERED EMPLOYERS

TIME LIMITS Internships should have a set time limit which will vary between workplaces, and once the program is completed, if the intern excels in the position, the intern should be offered a full-time position or an opportunity to be considered favourably alongside external applicants. Furthermore, the number of interns hired over a specific period, say two to three years, should be restricted.

The employer cannot simply dismiss the intern and hire a new one on a never-ending merry-go-round just to avoid hiring someone.

Only approved businesses can take on interns, and those intern programs are registered with Fair Work Australia when assigned. Programs are monitored to ensure compliance with guidelines.

Conceivably even random workplace inspections, as done in food & beverage industries, could be used to keep businesses in check. Any infraction should result in a substantial fine.

GREATER REGULATION

PAID INTERNSHIPS Why aren’t there more paid internships out there? What really is the difference between a paid internship and an entry-level position, apart from the hours, amount of work and expectation? More paid internships, even with a modest wage, would make life much easier for interns and tolerating the challenging demands of the role much more palatable.

INTERN UNION

How many interns actually ever sign any documentation?

Are the conditions of their role specified and agreed upon in a contract and binding legal document? How often are interns briefed on emergency procedures in work environments? With this lack of documentation, are interns even covered by the business’s insurance?

These questions need answering to ensure the best possible outcome for both parties.

INCENTIVES FOR BUSINESS The government could offer employers incentives to take on an intern, with the view to future employment, thus providing the employer immediate financial benefits.

Apprenticeships are already relatively successful in doing this with our traditional trade industries so why not apply the same model to creative industries or anywhere internships are used?

We should be motivating employers, especially small and independent

businesses, to grow and offer financial incentives to help take on affordable entry level staff.

FORMALISATION OF INTERNSHIPS

.

It sounds crazy, but, it could work.

Funded in part by registered businesses (paying a nominal fee is still cheaper than hiring staff) and the government, a union would unite and organise interns and young job seekers. Benefits could include greater representation for interns, support and advice services, and more. Just imagine, an organised body of interns capable of

real industrial action such as a strike.

That might remind businesses of the value of their interns.

There is strength in numbers

Internship programs and the employers who offer them should conform to parameters stipulated by Fair Work Australia.

The principles of Equal Employment

Opportunity, acceptable working conditions and award standards, should be adhered to or, at very least used as a guide for internship best practice.

Ultimately, an internship program is no different to any functional relationship; it depends on mutual respect and effort from both parties to triumph. If a business is exploiting an intern then that aspiring young professional is hardly likely to give their best. Conversely, a successful program would see the intern assigned stimulating and challenging work, appropriate to their skills, that contributes to the objectives of the business, and the intern would in turn reciprocate with quality work and application.

My last suggestion is to stress less; if you are a struggling intern then technically you’re unemployed, so remember to put the fun back into funemployed and just enjoy it. Your internship isn’t a job, it’s voluntary. So if you feel you’re being exploited or just not gaining those valuable skills or contacts from the role then leave. Walk out, don’t look back, and take some of their stationary with you when you go.

You’ll miss that when it’s gone...

THE FEED ISSUE ONE

VEGETARIANISM

THERE ARE A GREAT NUMBER OF REASONS THAT ONE MIGHT OPT TO “GO VEGGIE”. BUT WHETHER IT IS HEALTH, RELIGION OR GOOD HONEST COMPASSION FOR ANIMALS, IT SEEMS EVERYONE HAS AN OPINION ON THE MATTER. W R I T ES SA R A STA N FO R D

I

don’t want to bombard you with anti- or pro- meat propaganda – from experience, preaching is rarely persuasive.

And as someone who has toyed with the idea of vegetarianism throughout my life (and once managed a solid five year stint!), I want an opinion that stretches further than just “I like animals” which, despite being valid, is a debate you can only take so far.

Rather the questions we should be asking is why modern meat farming is so harmful to the environment and does cutting out meat really help?

Tied up with a notion of social

27

responsibility, the vegetarian debate is lodged within a complex web of moral judgement. What may seem like a simple choice to eat meat or not somehow raises much wider questions about your values, ethics and ultimately the sort of person that you are. Throw global warming into the mix and you’re playing with fire.

According to a report by the United Nations Food and Agricultural Organization, global animal agriculture produces 18 per cent of total greenhouse gas emissions, which is more than all forms of transport.

Shocking figures like these, along with highly emotive imagery, are relentlessly drilled into us by the media, ensuring that we know how detrimental our modern lifestyles are to the environment.

Scenes of cute polar bears are seldom shown without mention of melting icecaps and frightening statistics. We are deemed to be irresponsible. But is vegetarianism the answer?

The vegetarian diet is now increasingly considered a “responsible lifestyle choice” for what could be described as a “moral panic”. Although farming in the traditional

POLITICS & OPINION

sense may be considered our most natural process intrinsic to survival, it’s the nature of our evolved intensive farming processes that makes our meat-based diets so environmentally damaging.

The sheer scale of intensive farming means that thousands of trees are cut down every year in order to make room for grazing, which in turn is having a knock-on effect on the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. The farming of beef can be particularly detrimental to the thinning of the ozone layer due to the methane produced as a result of the cows’ digestive systems. And this is before you consider the burning of fossil fuels to fertilise land as well as transport the animals.

Reducing the amount of meat you consume, or cutting it out entirely, sounds like a step in the right direction and, with a growing population and a reliance on a meat farming process which is arguably unsustainable, the United Nations have actively encouraged less animal-based diets.

This is all a pretty convincing argument for the anti-meat parade, but unfortunately, as editor for The Guardian, Leo Hickman once wrote, “vegetarians and vegans have long realised, a meat-free diet can often mean relying heavily on foods imported from abroad.”

The theory goes that a diet replacing animal products with alternative cropbased proteins would considerably reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Commonplace meat substitutes such as tofu, soy and Quorn (containing mycoprotein) however, are often either factory-produced or imported, making the environmental benefits of “going veggie” less transparent.

Many argue that a typical vegetarian living in the developed world could be consuming as much imported food as the average omnivore and are, therefore, as

"lAMBS" BY GARETH ERNST. facebook.com/gareth.ernst1

much to blame for environmental damage.

A study by Cornell University found that diets which don’t eradicate animal produce entirely are in fact more environmentally efficient than a strictly vegan diet – a sentiment which of course prioritises the planet before the rights of individual animals. So where does this leave our environmentally-minded animal rights ambassadors?

There are no greater advocates of the vegetarian or vegan diet than animal rights organisations, and they can be very persuasive. The veggie or vegan diet is presented to us as a minor sacrifice and an answer not just for ending animal cruelty, but also for protecting the environment.

So what do these organisations say to arguments that vegetarianism isn’t necessarily environmentally friendly?

PETA Australia (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals Foundation) claims that, “there is no such thing as a meat eating environmentalist... Eating meat requires us to grow 10 times as much corn, grain and soy as we would need if we ate the plants directly... [I]n fact, animal agriculture is responsible for more than 30 per cent of Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions.”

But according to Laurence Hall, Director of monkey and ape conservation group The Great Primate Handshake, tackling society’s mass production of food more generally should be the main priority when it comes to reducing environmental damage.

“It’s crude to say eating a certain diet is more or less harmful to wildlife, but greater education is needed so that people are aware of where and how a product (food or otherwise) has come to be,” he said.

In order to most effectively improve the efficiency of our diet, we need to think beyond simply cutting out the farming of livestock, and consider more widely the impact of globally importing, fertilising and packaging the food we consume be it meat or otherwise.

Arguing that animal welfare and environmentalism are in fact compatible, influential philosopher and author, Peter Singer, believes that all animals are equal - human or otherwise. Advocating both the ethical and practical benefits of a plant-based diet, Singer blames our energy intensive factory farming methods for “the loss of forests.”

Everywhere, forest-dwellers, both human and non-human, can be pushed out. Since 1960, 25 percent of the forests of Central

America have been cleared for cattle.

Interestingly, those critical of vegetarianism often fail to mention the fact that vast amounts of grain, oats, corn and soybeans are grown and imported just to feed the livestock we farm for meat. According to PETA it takes anything up to 13 pounds of grain to produce just one pound of meat, making it near on impossible to deny the obvious inefficiency of such a process.

So despite soy-based proteins being less eco-friendly than first imagined, the vegetarian diet is still widely recognised as an effective way to curb carbon emissions.

And let’s face it, if you do actively decide on a meat-free diet on the basis that you wish to reduce your environmental impact, it’s unlikely that you would rely upon processed and imported food. An effective, low carbon emission diet is all about being smart and doing your research.

So if you want to reduce your environmental impact but can’t bear the thought of going off meat altogether, it’s time to think small. Ideas such as Meat Free Monday or simply buying reliable and sustainably sourced meat from your local butcher does make a difference.

In making these minor lifestyle changes you are supporting local farmers and butchers rather than supermarket chains, not to mention the benefits to your health.

Intensive farming is harmful and is having a negative impact upon both the environment and animals. With the world’s growing population, the undoable impact of our unsustainable and highly inefficient method of intensive meat farming will only get worse.

We need greater consumer awareness and transparency in terms of how our food is produced, processed, packaged and delivered. We need better regulation on the industry to ensure farming practices are changed, and support for the government to help farmers update their practices. In the mean time, reducing the amount of meat in your diet, and replacing it with more sustainable and locally grown sources of protein, is one way to do your bit.

LIFE

the default

PERSON

ARE WE IN LOVE WITH BEING IN LOVE? EVER PONDERED WHETHER THE OBJECT OF OUR AFFECTION MIGHT DEPEND MORE ON HOW BORED WE ARE THAN WHO THEY ARE. W R I T ES R O M Y K ES S L ER

I

have a theory that at any given time, everybody has a ‘Default Person’.

By ‘Default Person’, I Mean the person in which you are the most romantically interested in at any given time.

That little crush you think about when listening to a love song, or sitting home alone, or picking out an outfit. The person who you think and care the most about, that’s your default person.

It could be an ex, a celebrity, a personal trainer, or even just a Facebook profile, but I truly believe that we all have a need to love someone, and it’s natural to have a ‘Default Person’ to focus that love on.

I can’t even remember a time in my life when I legitimately did not have a crush on somebody.

It’s actually a bit of a difficult habit to keep up when you don’t meet that many new people. It has the same affect as beer

“DEFAULT PEOPLE DON’T MATTER. NOT THAT YOU COULD EVER CONVINCE US THAT AT THE TIME, BUT THEY’RE REALLY JUST PEOPLE WE PUT IN OUR HEADS TO TAKE UP SPACE.” goggles; the longer you go without meeting new people, the more the ones you already know start to look better and better.

During university, I was best friends with a boy who lived in my dorm during my second year. We stayed friends throughout university and as we go closer to graduation, he got busier and busier with uni work.

29

He stopped going out as much, spent more time studying, and rarely ever saw anyone outside his few male friends and me. Soon I was the only girl he saw on a daily basis.

I saw it coming. I knew it would happen, it was inevitable. He sat me down and told me he liked me more than as a friend.

It was the completely wrong response, but I couldn’t stop myself! I just rolled my eyes and said, “No you don’t. You just think that because I’m a girl, I could be anybody, I’m just your Default Person.”

He, of course, was deeply offended that I refused to take his emotions seriously. But the fact remained that I was the only girl in his life, if he was going to have a crush on someone (as most people do), it would most likely be me by default.

Unfortunately, he didn’t feel this way because he thought I was particularly great or we would make a super fantastic couple.

It was just because I’m around, I’m female, we were buddies, and sometimes he needs a distraction from homework.

‘Default People’ don’t matter. Not that you could ever convince us of that at the time, but they’re really just people we put in our heads to take up space. A bookmark until we find someone special who we actually have a legitimate meaningful relationship with.

We like to think we’re good at picking out who would be best suited for us, letting our attraction guide us and filling our heads with unlimited expectations of how great it would be if you were ever to actually get to know the person we had become so attracted to.

And while getting lost in the reverie, it’s easy to forget that we don’t actually know them - At least not in the intimate way we’re convinced we’d like to, unfortunately.

If you were to take every crush you ever had and then envision a relationship with that person three years down the line, past the honeymoon stages, and into the small-

chit-chat-about-your-day, did-you-do-thelaundry realm… Would you still be so keen?

But that’s logical thinking. That’s no fun.

That’s thinking about what a relationship is with someone, and a crush focuses on little past the first kiss.

Crushes are about wanting someone that’s just out of reach. It’s what you want and how to get it, not what you’d do once you got it, that’s the fun part.

“Remember that sometimes not getting what you want is a wonderful stroke of luck.” – Dalai Lama

THANK YOU We’ve dedicated this page to the individuals and corporate sponsors who helped fund the first issue of THE FEED MAGAZINE. You believed in us and we couldn’t have done this without you....

BEAZLEY SINGLETON LAWYERS, NOVA EMPLOYMENT, MARTIN WREN, ADAM HANNAH, THE MATHESON FAMILY, MITCHELL PRICE, RAMI MANDOW, TREVOR SLATTERY, DAVID LARIKIN, ALAN SLADE,

RATHANA CHEA, CAMERON POWER, TOM SANDER, JESSE WAKENSHAW, TODD BACKHOUSE, DANIEL BARRACLOUGH, IAN HEATH, CRAIG BOREHAM, GEORGIA LEWIS, ANDREW M POTTS LEVY HG, THE BORG FAMILY, JONI LEWIS, LIAM HEYEN, THOMAS MUNRO, SHANE WOON, LORNA GLOSSOP, NASTASSIA BARONI, MILES HEFFERNAN, FRANK FARRUGIA, JAMES FLETCHER, ALED GAYNOR, IAN CHAPMAN, DAMIEN EAMES, JAMES BRECHNEY, SHAHAR MEROM, LUKE FAIRBROTHER, TIMOTHY ROBERTS, ROSA GOLLAN, KYLE SHELDRICK, LUKE EDGELL, DOUGLAS ROBINSON, JESSICA URQUHART, CLAIRE HIELSCHER, KATI-ROSE SAVI, WILL EVATT.