A Simple Comment to a Video…

or Why You Don’t Ask An Internet Communications Student For A Comment On A Video Off YouTube, Because You Might Just Get What You Asked For (but that was too long for a title on my blog, so you get the simplified version).

So, it appears I cannot retire my “political hat” any time soon. If you haven’t seen it yet, here is a link from the Vice Chancellor of Curtin University, Professor Terry. All in all, it’s a good delivery of an update on the goings on around campus and what she is doing to keep up-to-date with the various campuses. I, however, have the following email which I am about to send to the Vice Chancellor, as per her invitation for comments.

And now for my extensively long comment. Don’t say I didn’t warn you.

Dear Professor Terry,

Thank you so much firstly for posting your video on YouTube, and for inviting comments. It is rare to hear someone in an actual position of authority openly ask for, and encourage feedback in such an engaging medium as the Web.

I was happy to hear you speak of the restructuring of the academic teaching system within Curtin University. As a current student, completing my Honours thesis this year with a view to going forward to higher degrees by research in order to join academia and the teaching profession, it is a relief to hear that you will not be cutting numbers of teaching staff. I do, however, offer my story as a view from the other side of the fence that you may not have considered in the implementation of these changes.

I began my undergraduate degree as an Open University’s Australia student, not because I wasn’t as committed to my studies as on campus students but because, as a mature aged, single parent student without high school completion dependant on public transport who was working full time in order to make ends meet, it afforded me the best possible opportunity to fit me life and study together in the same 24 hours everyone else had.

When I made the realisation that this degree I had undertaken was giving me a more rounded sense of accomplishment and personal pride than almost anything else I had undertaken, I decided that I would be furthering my studies. The staff of the department with which I was studying afforded me every opportunity to obtain the necessary information, facilitated my education with a shared passion for the learning material and concepts of study that I thought were a myth amongst academics.

This department was that of Internet Studies, out of the school of Media, Culture and Creative Arts at Curtin University – a group of academics whom I owe a great debt of gratitude and thank no end for the development of a lifelong love of learning.

This inspiration is, I’m afraid, in spite of almost being erased from the history books due to a proposed cancellation of on campus enrolments last year. This move would have seen the end of this department – the first and only dedicated Internet Studies department in Australia. The students of this department lead and won the fight to retain the opportunity to attend on campus classes, despite opposition from the chancellory of the university, through online and offline means of protest.

But my story does not stop here.

As a current Honours student in the Arts, I have seen more uncertainty regarding the offerings to students already this year than I feel is acceptable. This is absolutely through no fault of the teaching and support staff who have done the very best with what they have had available.

I am attending classes on campus, having made arrangements with my family and employer, as an off campus option has not been made available to students this year. I have been lead to understand that this is due to a revision and restructuring of the unit material and teaching method. This, in spite of having been offered as an off campus study stream in previous years.

Class timetables were finally made available to students, in order to select the  days and times of their classes, only a few days before the beginning of the semester. We then received automated confirmation that our chosen times and days would be made available, only to be told the following week that they were not, and that the classes would be combined and only available on a single day of the week. Thankfully for me, I have a moderately flexible employer who understood that these changes to my schedule were not under my control.

We were then told, just a few weeks later, that the previously possible day and time for class to be held was still available and that the consensus of the class would be the deciding factor as to whether or not the day and time of our compulsory-attendance class would be changed in the middle of the first term. While it only took a matter of an hour or so for the decision to be made by the students that keeping the current day and time would be best, the moments of panic were felt by more than just myself, I can assure you.

I was probably not the only student who felt that continuing studying would be jeopardised if the class were to change circumstances again.

I was probably not the only student who felt that their employer might not be so understanding if study circumstances were to change again.

I was probably not the only student panicking that the Honours we had invested ourselves in might be taken away from us before we had the opportunity to really get started.

What I do know for certain is, I am the only student from my department currently studying Honours with Curtin University. Why? An unofficial poll of my fellow online students puts this down to the inability of enrolling off campus.

With so many Internet Studies students currently enrolled in off campus or online only study of the Internet Communications degree, it makes no sense to not have this further education offered online if, as you say, numbers of teaching staff have not been reduced.

It makes no sense to not offer Honours online or off campus, especially with the fine online access to Curtin Library resources we now have available.

It makes no sense to not offer Honours online or off campus with the degree of control and interaction possible through the Blackboard system, which served as my lecture, seminar and tutorial space for three years quite sufficiently.

It makes no sense to not offer Honours online or off campus, when the Internet Studies department of Curtin university have shown that this mode of study facilitation can create future scholars that will, one day, make Curtin University proud.

This, Professor Terry, is why I find it difficult to believe that the current restructuring at Curtin University has no negative impact on the numbers of teaching staff available to students of Curtin University. I have seen the ability of the teaching staff of Curtin University to traverse space and time to deliver a world-class degree second to none in the world. I have also seen the trials of trying to deal with university bureaucracy when staffing changes, restructuring, budget cuts, reforms and proposed denial of access take place.

Please, if you want to be sure that these staffing changes hold no negative impact for the students of Curtin University, both current and future, I suggest you ask the current students if they are seeing any ramifications from the initial changes today. You may be surprised to hear what they have to tell standing in direct opposition to what the numbers and figures suggest.

I may be just one student telling my story today, but this is not my story alone.

Many thanks for your time,

Melissa Nile.
– current Honours student of B.A. (Internet Communications)



I didn’t write all that so you could cheat and look for the Brodie’s Notes (and if you don’t know what they are, you’re too young!) version of my email. Go read it! And get off my lawn!

Why Australia opposes Fair Use.

Having just finished this article I fear, once again, for the future. Why? Because it contains a very important message that will, ultimately, get drowned out by all the other important messages we are currently facing both here and globally… but that’s a post for another time.

Fair Use for EFF.orgAustralian copyright laws always have been considered antiquated. In fact, we are not terribly forward thinking as a nation, legislatively speaking. Copyright is, however, one of those topics that very few people understand and even fewer care about, unless they stand to profit from the proceeds of it.

Every study period throughout my undergraduate degree I was approached or pointed to a discussion regarding the unsanctioned use of unattributed copyrighted material for assignment purposes.

“But if my tutor says it’s okay to use this picture in my project, then isn’t it okay?”

“What do you mean using the writing of another person is illegal unless I have a specific agreement from the copyright holder to say I can?”

These questions, and so many others like them, resulted in me banging my head against a non-existent desk or wall, as the people I was attempting to educate gleefully told me that they didn’t care, the law was stupid, and they’d go and use copyrighted material anyway because no one was going to chase them for the royalties for their use of said material.


This is why ideas like Fair Use won’t take hold here.

Fair Use is a legal idea allowing people to use copyrighted material so long as the copyright holder isn’t losing out on profits from said use. It’s that simple really. Of course, the real legal mumbo jumbo goes into exclusions and restrictions, but that’s pretty much what it amounts to.

Parliament’s a funny place. And by funny I mean disparaging to the human soul.

So, as long as the public don’t care that they’re breaking the law and could stand to lose a significant amount of money to an already filthy rich corporation (think of how many times you’ve share a meme based on someone else’s work, or a music video, or copied a line from some book onto a completely unrelated image), or face jail time and as long as politicians sit in the pockets of those corporations that believe they will miss out on all the profits if they allow people to do what they’re already “turning a blind eye” to, then legislation such as Fair Use will never take hold in Australia.


Still not sure what it’s all about? Check out the video below for more information.

Online Students: What Do We Want?

I’m finally going to write a little a bit about my studies. It seems that not only do a lot of people still feel that online learning and, by default, external learning, is a bit of a cop out, but they really don’t understand what it is that I am studying and how it can lead to anything in the future. Also, I would like to start documenting my intentions for this magical piece of paper I’ve been working towards, and noticing when or if those aspirations change.

First things first: What is it I am studying?

Head of Internet Studies Dept. Prof. Matthew Allen at the Curtin Uni Open Day. For license and info: http://www.flickr.com/photos/tamaleaver/6064211772/

I am currently undertaking a Bachelor of Arts in Internet Communication through Curtin University (and I’m not supplying these details for kudos or cash FYI). As it stands, Curtin University is the only Uni in Australia that has a dedicated Internet Studies department, which I find particularly strange considering the ubiquitous nature the Internet has these days. I started my line of study through Open University Australia, because it offered a delivery system that I could work around the rest of life. Also, I have to admit, the university system, to one who hasn’t wrangled it is daunting and more than a little intimidating. Given that OUA offered a HECS-style payment system, it also worked in with my available cash flow (ergo: nil), meaning I could study towards getting an awesome job (as yet to be decided upon) and then pay it all back, which I am cool with. Other students find that the more flexible study times, due to the delivery system, are the key to their choice. It allows them to work their study in and around parenting and work commitments.

I am learning about interactions online, why people have flocked to it (and continue to), the issues surrounding online practices and privacy concerns, how writing for an online audience is a little different to writing for an offline one, and how society can find balance between the two “worlds”. It may not sound like much, or its relevance may not be immediately apparent to you, but it is these kinds of studies that will allow people such as myself to develop better practices for the future world in which we all become cybermen, symbiotically attached to our tech… wait a minute! 🙂

I still have just over a year to go of my BA at which point, depending on my grades, I will think about Honours. And, just because I’m crazy and have obviously taken leave of my senses, a PhD application may be thrown in for good measure. Because I can… Or might be able to… Hopefully…

What do I hope to achieve with all of this?

I want to keep researching what is making people tick. Ever since I was a young’un, I’ve been interested in why people like what they like, why they do what they do and what can be done to make people happier. Some days, this comes from a kind of altruistic intention to make the world a better place… If only for myself. I want people to stop their whining (myself included) by aiding them in finding what it is they want or need out of life. Also, realistically a virtual world is only going to become more integrated with “reality” (whatever that is these days) and, as such, if I want to have a place in that multi-world, I need to carve a place out now. I’m not super smart, or a massive tech head. I’m not an engineer and I don’t have a really good head for creative coding (plain and simple stuff I could probably deal with, if I could be bothered updating my language skills, which I can’t), so it’s not likely that I will be heading a development team bringing you the latest installment of what Google Glass aims to be in the future.

What I will be able to give you (at least once I’ve finished all this study) is an in-depth analysis of why your ideas (or their ideas, or that platform for interaction, or … whatever!)failed and what you can do next time to get people to flock to them. I will be able to tell the world why they need to assess what it is they aim to gain from electronically-delivered engagement systems (because the phrase “online worlds’ be become obsolete – stay tuned for my book on that in a few years’ time), in order to spend their precious time, effort and cash in the right places. I will be able to authoritatively show people why employing current slow thinking (as in it takes more than a few months to get an idea out there and have it accepted – look at pressure start-up groups and their success if you don’t believe me) for a world that is changing so fast is a dumb idea (this may also involve revolutionising the way we peer-review stuff, but we have to aim high, right?).

So, online learning vs on-campus learning. Is there even a contest?

Firstly, let me dispel the myth of online learning being easy. It is NOT. Plain and simple. You have to be self-motivated. You have to search out your own community groups if you want to really engage with the material and ideas presented. You have to maintain that level of stamina, all without the scheduled-out-for-you, spoon-feeding that on-campus learning can give you and you have to do so all by yourself. If you don’t have that drive, you’ve got no hope. If you can’t find it in yourself to keep going when you have to do a unit with a university that hasn’t fully understood what it means to provide an online unit, then the chances of you completing your studies are very slim. More on this later. If you can’t handle being interrupted by people who don’t see your head in a book or you typing on a computer as “real study” (I’m talking parents, children, partners, friends who drop in, everyone!), and you can’t tell them to please respect your study time, then you’re going to fail. No sugar coating it. You will.

Using online tools are only useful if they actually offer students something that they need or want from their study. Online tools are only as good as the education they offer. If tutors are not engaging with their students or if the unit materials are not accessible, then what good is the delivery system?

Just waiting for the Quickening. For license and info: http://www.flickr.com/photos/laurelfan/46008993/

Too many times I have heard from students studying units with various universities. That the tutors don’t answer questions sent to them either by the internal mail system or through discussion boards which serve for many as online tutorials. That some units relying on web-based materials, meaning digital copies of papers or articles, have broken links or resources that just cannot be found at all! Simply copying a paper-bound university unit to a digital format does not making an online learning environment. An online student is, unfortunately, at a disadvantage when it comes to finding resources that are not published in a digital format. If your unit still relies on bound text books that an on-campus student would be able to check out of a library, you are doing your online students a dis-service. If you don’t have reliable checks and balances to make sure that your students are receiving the education they have paid for, then you are failing your students. I’m not talking about providing customer service for students. I think this opinion that universities are no longer the bastions of education and research they once were, is a little misguided and black-and-white. So what if students are expecting some kind of a ROI (Return on Investment) in regards to their education? This doesn’t mean that the primary role of a university can’t still be research and attainment of knowledge. It just means that those who help invest in that gathering expect a little something for their investment. The world isn’t as Highlander (“There can be only one!”) as some people would like to make out.

Soooooo… what do students employing online methods of study want?

Candy? Medals? A shiny pony? Not really. Although, having said that, I’d never look a gift horse in the mouth (sorry, I had to).

We expect a system that values us as students. As GENUINE students. We want tutors and lecturers who actually care that we can get and understand the material they are using to facilitate our knowledge. We aren’t expecting our degrees or diplomas to be handed to us on a silver platter. We expect to have to work for them, but no more than on-campus students. By undertaking externals studies we accept that we need to think and act differently to on-campus students, but we still want to be awarded the same level of engagement that on-campus students expect. Though, in saying that, I have heard a LOT of complaints from on-campus students saying there’s a decline in the amount of teachers giving a crap about classes… That may be a rant for another time.

We expect that when we are told that there is no text book required for the unit (as in my experience often happens) that we will be able to access all of the required readings for that unit online.  It’s no fun to play if we can’t get our hands on books or chapters because they don’t exist online. And, as a tutor, please don’t try to tell us it isn’t your responsibility to make sure your students have the resources. If a complaint is made that students cannot access the resources from anywhere online (the university’s library, Google, Amazon and the network of resource pirates out there), then it’s not that they don’t have the resources, your resource list needs revision. You need to make sure your students can actually find the resources so they can understand your lectures and complete assignments.

Which brings me to another point. When studying contemporary issues, such as politics or even Internet Studies, we expect that the topics being covered are from the past four or five years, and even then, it’s a stretch. Ultimately, we’d like within the past two to three. History is history and contemporary is now. Now, I understand the peer-review process is what universities and researchers live and die by, but it is long in the tooth and takes oh so long. I don’t have the answer. I wish I did, really, but the current peer-review process takes far too long to get actual contemporary resources into the hands of students. Think about it this way. It takes up anywhere in the realm of five years to research a PhD. Then it gets submitted for review… Now, I’m no mathematician, but that sure does add up to a lot of time in my mind. Not to mention that a lot may have changed in the world in that time. Now, if you’re doing a science (excluding computer sciences) or mathematics line of study, it’s fairly certain that you’ll be fine. Not much changes quickly there. 1+1 will always equal 2 … unless it doesn’t, in which case it’s already been proven and you can read up on it. If you’re in the Arts, some fields stay moderately constant while others change incredibly fast. My particular field of study looks to be changing and growing at a pace that the peer-review system can’t stay in step with. This causes problems for those of us looking to only use peer-reviewed articles and publications for our work. I am sure you can understand the frustration built up by trying to find something relevant written in the past two or three years when everything written in that time frame is still under review, or not widely accepted yet.

We ask that universities don’t try to charge us for services we cannot use. Yes, we are glad that should be able to we can use the physical library, or the student services centre or any of the wonderful services your on-campus students have access to. Personally, I am in something of a rare position amongst my external study peers, in that I am able to get to my university’s campus. Most of the other students I know who have been studying through external studies live too far away from their university to make use of the facilities. Some don’t even live in the same state! I think there needs to be more work done into as to what services a university might actually provide their external students that will benefit them, rather than assuming they require the same services as on-campus students.

A silly cap, a smile and a piece of paper. License and info: http://www.flickr.com/photos/willfolsom/5702452656/

We really really really (as in “cannot stress this enough”) need a checks and balances system outside of individual institutions, making sure that the level of education, educators and materials is sufficient to facilitate learning. We aren’t asking for our learning to be spoon-fed to us. We want to have to seek our own understanding, but we need to know that the help will be there if we simply don’t understand a concept or ideology. Universities and providers like OUA do their best with regular surveys asking how we felt the particular unit was delivered. Sadly, these do not seem to make a lick of difference when the same units receive the same complaints, or the same tutors receive the same complaints made against them, study period after study period. It’s not that we want studying to be easy, but we need to know there is some degree of accountability for our educators. I suspect this is a universal issue, rather than an online-specific one.

If you are in education, please understand that the world you may have learned in is changing. This means that older methods of thinking also need to change, in order to keep the pace. If you are a student or are considering undertaking online study, be patient with your institution. They may not understand the “game now. They may never understand it properly but unless you give them the chance and  provide them with appropriate feedback, they will never understand how to provide properly for the brave new world.


What’s that?

It’s the sound of automated feed filling by a site that only allows you to sign in with a pre-existing social media account. And you know what? I’ve had enough!

ImageThere was a ruling in Germany this week slapping Facebook over the back of the hand in regards to their facial recognition data. They have been told to delete it, because it’s deemed to be against EU regulations, even though it’s perfectly fine by Irish standards, where Facebook’s European offices are located.

So what does this all mean?

Well, at the heart of the matter is the fact that Facebook did not allow users to opt-in for this. Instead, it was forced upon them and they had to opt out. Now, if you remember from when you signed up to Facebook (because we all read the Terms of Service, didn’t we?), we gave them the right to use any and all information we publish on their site in any which way they want. That’s right. We don’t own our own information, they do. So when we are forced to use some kind of facial data recognition, and that data is stored, anything published that employs that until we opt-out of it (which, in some cases is darned hard to find), is therefore theirs and they can use it however they want.

Likewise, other SNSs (Social Networking Sites, for the uninitiated) that only allow you sign up using a pre-existing SNS account are responsible for adding to that information. I am looking at Spotify, Pintrest and other useful sites that are fast becoming part of the social media/community manager Must-Have ToolBag (or, at the very least, we need to know about them in order to explain why we wouldn’t touch them with a bargepole). These you can only sign up to with an existing social media account. I understand that Facebook now owns Spotify, but why can’t I use it without attaching my facebook account to it? I have to download it… and THEN you want me to sign up with my facebook account? WHY?! Why isn’t my email address good enough? And then having automatic posts “on my behalf” (read: “whether you like it or not”) until I go and turn it off.

Now, I know I’m banging on a lot about Facebook and the evils of it when I use it for so much. I know I am just as responsible for the perpetuation of these unethical allowances as any other user. However, I am aware that whatever I put out there is no longer mine, but if it’s so bad and I hate it so much, why don’t I just opt out of Facebook altogether? Well, there’s a simple answer to that. “If you can’t beat them, join them.” I was going to disable my account and shut it all down. Cancelling Facebook alone would have had far-reaching ramifications to my “displacement activities” when assignments were due. In fact, I probably would get more done. Thing is, I accept that it still, for a little time at least, is the number one SNS of the world, which means I need to keep up with what is going on in, on and around it. Also, until my friends understand what I have been saying now for over a year that Facebook will not keep its “top dog” position in the SNS world for too many more years (I’m guessing about seven to ten more years tops), I will miss out on much of the invites to parties, knowledge of life and whatnot. It’s a sad but true fact.


So, what do I suggest you do? Stop. Think. And if you really need to sign up to these things, please, for the love of all that is lovely and dear to the people of the world, opt out of those updates STRAIGHT AWAY! Don’t let Automatic Update Syndrome be the thing that turns your friends to opting out of your updates altogether.

The S-word… and what it means to me.


There. I’ve said it. It’s a nasty word, as are most “-ism”s, but it seems to be one of the current ones doing the rounds in the media spotlight for this month. Twitter, in between Assange and other asylum cases, is rife with stories of sexism against women and how women are made to feel inferior due to their appearance or other characteristics generally thought to be “female”…

A lot of these describe how making the choice to not dress in a provocative manner, or a socially accepted “womanly” way has led to gender based bias from colleages and superiors. I feel their pain. Really I do. By making the choice to not wear short skirts or wearing makeup and/or shiny hair, how is your work any less valuable than another’s? By choosing to look a certain way, do you automatically rate lower than someone who is towing the stereotypical line?

But this is not my gripe to give, per se. Mine is at the other end of the situation. What is you are one of the girls who actually likes to wear make up, have shiny hair and wear short skirts? Does that mean I am automatically buying in to the theory, undermining the last decades of feminist’s hard work?

Why can’t I wear my heels and short skirts and tight blouses, with makeup on and my hair looking lovely, without fear of being sexualised by my co-workers or hearing mutters behind me of other women in the workplace who think I’m sleeping with my superiors to get the good jobs?

I work hard. I do damned good work. Why do I choose to dress that way? Because it makes me feel good and when I feel good, I work better. When I work better, the company wins, When the company wins, I get paid! That should be as far as it goes. I am not performing sexual acts for the boss if I wear a tighter dress than you might feel comfortable in. I am, however, sleeping with the boss if I come out of the closed office with my lipstick awry and my hair a mess as I pull down my dress and remove a soiled condom from my stocking.

All I am saying is that women who suffer sexism on a daily basis should also give those of us who actually, genuinely feel better in our skirts and blouses a little lee-way. Don’t automatically assume we haven’t thought our decision through. Though, I will admit some of us clearly haven’t… and that’s why they don’t seem to get the promotions. Am I right? But that’s because they can’t do the work!

Gah! I am sick of the mentality that simply because I choose to look a way that is the opposite to how you see a feminist looking, that automatically means I must support misogynistic, sexist behaviour. I don’t. It’s uncalled for and yes, I have been the target of it. You know what? I have been the target of it when wearing my skirts AND when wearing my loose pants and a jumper, so arseholes are arseholes no matter what you’re wearing!

Money and value: the greatest concensual mass hallucination?

This article came across my tweet feed today, about the HSBC being under investigation for possible money laundering and other monetary woes. Needless to say, I was not shocked that this had been happening. What’s that you say? “Not shocked???!!!” Well, no. Not really.Okay, maybe a little bit. Outraged, most certainly, but not shocked. Disappointed, oh you bet, but not shocked.

Now, I am not about to go into the legal ins and outs, or the moral implications of taking money from known terrorist groups, suffice to say I think it stinks that one corporation will accept profit from sources that are murky at best (because yes, banks actually profit from the money that is being held in trust. They don’t just do it out of the goodness of their hearts – there’s something in it for them).

What I am about to go on about is the fact that this is a large bank, with ties all over the world. Most of us have either had ties with HSBC, or have ties with a company that does. What happens if this bank gets more than a little slap across the wrist? Well, apparently this sort of a thing is nothing new for the bank, who has ties to the cartels of Mexico, and has done for quite some time.

So, the ramifications of HSBC being prosecuted?

Not much really. Well, that is if you consider that this could go one of two ways. Either, those responsible get jailed and “shockwaves” go through the banking “community”, in which case, new people get employed in their positions and they either run the bank ethically and we all live in sunshine and happiness, or they go back and run the bank in exactly the same ways albeit a little more sneakily, in which case the same old cycle starts again. OR the whole bank gets fined a ludicrous amount of money. This, as an option, can one of two ways. Either the amount they are fined is equal to or less than the annual profit of the bank. If this is the case, then they pay the money, shareholders get angry, some jumping ship but ultimately they see the profit the company can make as what they’ll get on their ROI in the next financial year and so stay. On the other hand, the fines will amount to more than the annual projected profit. The shareholders will try to jump ship, but won’t be able to because the assets of the company will be frozen as it goes into administration, and one of the worlds banking giants falls.

And if all the cards come crashing down…?

Well, it wouldn’t be the first time. Or even the second. But it would be felt harder and further than any previous financial crisis. Why do I think this? American banks, from which the 2007-2012 crisis originated, had ties overseas. These were not so heavily intertwined with average Australians. HSBC is one of the largest lending banks across the world, with “…around 7,500 offices in over 80 countries and territories in Europe, the Asia-Pacific region, North and Latin America, the Middle East and Africa. With assets of US$2,556 billion as at 31 December 2011…” Now do we see where this is heading?

I am not proposing that we step away from prosecuting these banks, or making them accountable for their interactions. What I propose is something entirely more radical and, potentially more anarchical (at least in the early days). How about we enact a shift in perceived value? It’s an odd concept, and some watching this video may not understand how it can work in the financial world. I am going to let you in on a little secret that few people have actually ever spoken: Money has no real value. Think about it. It’s little pieces of printed paper or alloyed metal stamped with images. In itself, there is no value, until we perceive it has value. The perceived value of money is, perhaps, one of the greatest ‘consensual mass hallucinations‘ we have in this world today.

And, with that, I will let you think about how you perceive the value of the things in your life.

Privilege – Is it still a Thing?

General Broadcast Warning: This post contains some material unsuitable for people who are not aware of the following: A) I am bisexual; B) I am opinionated; and c) I have a child. Right. Carry on.


No auto-fill was harmed in the making of this screen-capture from today.

I was given this link about Google and what is being termed the ‘Bisexual Problem’ today. I must say, as I was reading it, I was struck by a couple of things.

Firstly, I find it very odd that in a world aiming for an end to discrimination of all groups of people, the black and white lines seem to have been made even more apparent.

It is a fairly constant peeve amongst those of the bisexual orientation that you’re not liked by anyone. So many people misconstrue what it means to be bisexual. The usual misconceptions that I have personally encountered are, as follows:

  1. “You’re not really bi. You just don’t know what you want.”
    Ummmm, no, I’m fairly certain I DO know what I want. I want a nice life, a happy family and someone to love and be loved by. I am just more flexible than most as to where I look for all of that.
  2. 2) “You’re just greedy.”
    Well, this may be true. You put a tub of ice cream in front of me, it’s going to disappear. However, when it comes to who is included in my life, I am very discerning. Even more so when it comes to who I let into my heart. So, no, I don’t think I am greedy.
  3. “You’re just a lesbian in denial.”
    No. Just. No. I am in denial about many things. I deny that I have uni assignments due over the horizon all the time. In the case of my sexuality, I am very certain that I have it right.
  4. “It’s okay. You’re just experimenting.”
    Again, no. I am past my wild, impetuous teens and early twenties. I have experimented and found a formula that works.
  5. “If you’re with a boy one month and a girl the next, your kid is going to grow up with one hell of a complex.”
    Before you ask, yes, I have been told this. I have no doubt they were well-meaning intentions that precipitated this, but I couldn’t help but shake my head. If I stayed with one partner for all eternity and was unhappy, surely that would set a poor example for my kid. If I was changing up my boyfriend (or girlfriend, for that matter) every month, not only would I be concerned about my mental health, but I’d be concerned for my kids. However, I am not one for changing my partner at a whim. I also like to think I keep my kid away from the details of my romantic life until it is at such a point that I feel comfortable in inviting that new person into our home. It’s called discretion and respect for my kid.

So where am I heading with all of this? The stigma held against bisexual people is NOT lowering. It is remaining constant, if not increasing. It is there from straight people and from gay, transgender and transsexual people. It is everywhere. Think about it. An actor comes out as gay, no biggie. An actor comes out as bi, and suddenly everyone has “been with” them and it’s more of a storm than if a straight person simply said, “I kissed a girl and I liked it…”

Secondly, the article struck me as strange for using the term “monosexual privilege” (while citing Shiri Eisner). I was left asking myself is “Privilege even a THING???”

See, to me, we are too busy attempting to come up with rational, NICE (read: vaguely academic) terms for all kinds of bigotry and nastiness. Privilege is just one of those all-encompassing prefixes to otherwise not-so-nice occurrence of life, namely people openly displaying their conscious or sub-conscious prejudices. Male privilege, speaking from a stand point of a male in society unaware of female issues. White middle-class female privilege, speaking from a stand point of a white female with no understanding or awareness of lower-class issues. The list goes on, and you can use for every stand point. If you say anything that might be offensive to one or more groups of people, you are speaking from a stand-point of privilege. It is simply another term for speaking from the situated self.

I guess, with all of this, I am attempting to get people to think about what it is they’re saying before it leaves their mouth. I am asking Google to show the way in actual tolerance and acceptance, by reviewing their embargo on auto-fill of “bisexual” as they said they would. It isn’t a “bug”, it’s prejudice plain and simple. You’re speaking, through your inaction, from a place of “multi-faceted, technological giant corporate” privilege… Oh goodness! Now I’m talking like one of “them”!

Marriage Equality – Weighing on the argument.

First, a little preface to this mini-rant. A friend is engaged to his boyfriend, and is living in Queensland. For those who do not know Queensland over-turned a rather progressive ruling for Australia when it decided to not allow same-sex couples a civil union (not quite a marriage, but close) but, rather, allow them to register their relationship, and then endangered their right to surrogate assistance. Now, all I have been seeing amid all of this, is the very loud religious overtones shining through. However, I am able to cut through this and see the issue for what it is. I think parties on both sides of the fight need to see this for what it is: A fight for civil rights, not religious ones. I hold my own belief system and sexuality. I do not understand why I should be forced to adhere to another person’s belief teachings or have one relationship model elevated to a higher status than mine simply because it is their model of choice. As a friend commented once:
‘…if you dont [sic] want to love Jesus, then don’t. If you don’t want to marry a man, then don’t! But how can you tell someone else they can’t because you think so?
‘It’s basically like me going up to you and saying “I don’t think it’s right to cross your legs when you sit down, because of the personal beliefs I hold. Therefore, you are not allowed to do it!”‘
I know this is a rather hot topic for some, but please if you comment bear in mind the feelings of others.


ImageMarriage equality is NOT a religious issue. I’m sorry, but it really isn’t. We had an institute of marriage well before the Church came along. Various cultures had their own ideas on what constituted marriage, and allowed people to freely enter into what would have been recognised as a marriage in this day and age. There was little stigma regarding differing approaches to marriage as well, with one type of marriage only being observed for thirteen moons, with the particulars being revisited and discussed amongst the married parties at that point to see if they wanted to continue or dissolve the union.
Going even further back, the ancient Egyptians had secular and sacred marriages, both of which were held in the same level of respect as one another. The secular marriage had a few more legal assurances to both parties (in particular, that the female was assured of leaving the union upon dissolution with exactly what she entered it, plus half of whatever the pair accrued).
The native Americans had their own traditions, different for each tribe.
I could go on to describe each tradition across the world. In all of these cases, though it may have been something of an anomaly, same sex couples were recognised. They held the same level of respected union as opposite-sex couples, were afforded the same level of legal or community assistance, and were not necessarily barred from the union of marriage unless there were other circumstances in the way (children from a previous union, disputes of property ownership, etc).
What we see now is a world-wide community wherein a religious order has become so heavily integrated into the political system that people find it hard to separate one from the other. Our societal compass has become so heavily directed by the moral teachings of one group of people that there is no room in some people’s minds to any other kind of system.
For those who say marriage is a sacred institute, I could not agree more. Marriage is, indeed, a sacred thing. Love is the highest sacred calling we humans have.
Jesus preached love for our fellow man. Not love until it makes us feel strange, not conditional love, but love across the board, without borders and selfless.
In all of native, or nature-worshipping traditions, love for the world and one another was the over-riding premise to morality.
In Islam, love of Allah and one another is what drives morality.
How then, can we see not allowing two people, regardless of their sexuality or displayed gender (because don’t get me started on non-binary gender in this issue), share and commit to love as following our moral compass?


Want to know more about this issue? These are some links for the Marriage Equality argument in Australia. Not in Australia? Please feel free to post your own links in the comments below. On the other side of the argument, please feel free to discuss this issue as well. A well-rounded discussion involves two sides, and I would appreciate your side of the discussion. Do keep things civil though, please.

Australia Marriage Equality

Equal Love

Parliament Information on the Marriage Equality Amendment Bill 2012

Surcharge for Debit or Credit Cards? Why?!

With the world becoming increasingly automated and payments online becoming the norm, the option to pay bills without the use of a credit card or a debit card is becoming harder and harder. At least, if you want to maintain control over exactly when your bills are being paid out of your account.

Sure, you can set up direct deposits, if you know you’ll always have the right amount of money in your account when the company decides to ask for it. With so many more people living hand to mouth these days, that is becoming harder for some people. Also, given that some of the charges for keeping a credit card are increasing, having one of those and then having your salary paid into that account is harder as well. It seems, at least amongst younger people, that a debit card and a savings accounts are the only mean of paying bills that they have.

Why then do some companies still insist on having a surcharge on payments made via credit card or debit card?! Is it really that much more work for them to process the payment? Do they get charged for such payments at their end? How can they justify these extra charges?

I tried to find the Australian charges for retailers on credit card and debit card payments and came up with nothing. Which is unfortunate, because I think consumers would really like to know what is involved in a retailer accepting such payments. I know I for one would like to know whether an online business is screwing me over. If they only get charged x percentage of the transaction to accommodate that method of payment, why are they charging me three or four times that amount? I think everyone would benefit from a more transparent economic system… Well, except the major banks and credit companies… But surely they get enough as it is?

Oh dear, I think my “socialist” roots re showing again, better go and cover up that red.

Media140 Perth.

I was fortunate enough this week to volunteer for this event.

For those not familiar with what Media140 is all about, the site is here: media140. They can explain themselves better than I can, suffice to say it was a three day event covering the digital future we are facing and how best to move forward in that world.

I was the tweet-queen for this event. You can find my colleague’s storifies for the three days here: Digital Business, Digital Me, and Digital Family..

Through all of the talks and presentations, there were some over-riding concepts.

We, as in the current generations of adults, are entering the world of a truly digital future. This requires new ways to look at this new world, as the old ways of thinking are not necessarily conducive to moving forward. While we embrace this new technology with open arms, we are still trying to overlay them with old modes of thought that do not run concurrent. As such, we need to adapt our minds as we adapt our lives and bodies to these new devices we seem to take everywhere. This means new ways of thinking about commerce, connectivity and engagement with life in general. Part of the responsibilities in this new role we have taken on is to open the channels of communication about the issues surrounding web use.

Our children learn first by watching our examples. If we do not lead by example, how can we assume they will listen to us when we try to sit down and speak with them about the potential pros and cons of the web? Notice I used “speak with” and not “speak to”. This is something very important to me personally, and was touched on by a few speakers. We need to speak with our kids and not orate to them. They actually know more about the digital world than we may give them credit for, or even the they give themselves credit for.  We need to allow them to bring what they know to the table, but also give them an environment where they feel they can ask us about things they don’t understand. *** Potential backlash warning *** I think this is a fundamental problem in many families I have seen. Sometimes this includes my own. We do not give our children what they so desperate need, and that is the feeling that it is okay to fail, it is okay to ask questions, it is okay to not know.

And at this point, it’s time for some squee. Miss9 just came up for big squishy huggles. Okay. Squee-mum is done. Back to the other stuff.

Ahem. So. Where was I? Yes. Too many parents that I see think they can fix all of their kids problems for them. How does this give them the space to learn from their own mistakes? We have this societal mentality of failing being such a bad thing. Combine this with the idea that we, as parents, do not want our children to have to make the mistakes we have made, and we have a recipe for disaster. To this end, I have given up on trying to give my child access to the repository of my learning. My mistake, vast and varied as they may be, are not hers to learn from. They are mine to learn from. While some may see it as a kindness to try and impart their knowledge to their kids, I strongly believe all it achieves is resentment on their end at not being allowed to discover for themselves.

Right, so that’s that rant over and done with. Yes, those were the main themes covered by the event Media140. New ways of thinking for new technologies. Food for thought most sincerely.