Posts by David Haywood
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Southerly: I Fell Down, in reply to Deborah,
Thank you so much for your very kind message, Deborah! I do consider myself lucky – an extremely lovely wife, children, extended family, and friends. But the last few years have certainly been difficult it has to be said, and it's very frustrating that I've been unable to do the writing (and other more intellectually satisfying activities) that I’d like. I did have a very enjoyable day off recently when the Lovely Ian Dalziel (TM) came out to visit the wilds of Dunsandel – quite the treat & some very interesting discussions were had.
I think much of my worn-downness stems from the fact that I don’t get any psychological payoff from actually finishing anything – I just fire-fight the current emergency job & then move onto the next. The most I seem to manage is mild relief that an expensive disaster had been avoided.
Plenty of people are employed in jobs for years with no job satisfaction whatsoever (I was myself), so I certainly can’t complain…
-
On re-reading this piece (written a few days ago) I find it to be somewhat more gloomy than intended. I should point out that plenty of people in Canterbury still have unrepaired and falling-down homes – and, of course, that nowadays there are a lot of people throughout Canterbury and New Zealand with no home at all. I’m up early (a time of day that I greatly enjoy) and the sun is shining; my life certainly isn’t bad in any way – I didn’t mean this blog to come across as a complaint.
-
Polity: Budget 2016: Fantasyplan, in reply to Ian Dalziel,
And a lovely tactful spelling correction in your quoted text, Ian! (A word that trips up an awful lot of people...)
-
A very nice piece of writing, Rob -- thank you!
-
Legal Beagle: Future Leaders for…, in reply to Glenn Pearce,
My tongue was in my cheek David
Apologies, Glenn! With looking after two strong-willed children all day my tongue-in-cheek detector gets a little rusty.
You no doubt recall that we had a discussion on this very topic in 1983 (Mr Child's social studies class) and I wondered if this was Round 2!
[Gosh, just realized that was 33 years ago -- I think we might be getting on a bit (though it's infinitely consoling that no matter how old I get I'll always be 5 months younger than Jolisa).]
-
Legal Beagle: Future Leaders for…, in reply to Glenn Pearce,
Conversely, if you’re not expected to live to the end of next term, remove the ability to vote?
I don't see that allowing people to vote who will turn 18 in a given (nominal) electoral term implies that people not expected to live should have their voter rights removed.
Does the fact that we allow people to vote at a certain age imply that we should also remove people's voter rights at a certain age?
It seems to me that we should allow the right to vote to as many people as we possibly can, and conversely, remove the right to vote from as few people as we possibly can (preferably none).
We probably all know 16-year-olds who have more empathy and decision-making skills than some people twice their age. It seems prudent to err on the side of caution (as much as possible) when we decide as a society to prevent a certain group of people from being able to cast a vote.
-
Thanks for an interesting piece (as always), Graeme.
I remember feeling quite indignant at university still being some years away from being able to vote, but the fact – as onsos has also pointed out – that any attempt to change the voting age would take years, and involve me being dedicated to and working towards a cause well after the age that I could vote anyway, meant that I just grumbled and waited.
I wonder how many of the suffragettes would have been so fired up if (by some weird metamorphosis) that knew that women would turn into men in about 18 months time and be able to vote anyway?
It seemed to me then (and now) that it would be a fairly minor tweak to keep the voting age at 18, but expand the definition so that persons who’d be turning 18 at any point during the forthcoming (nominal) electoral term would be able to cast a vote.
To put it another way: it does seem particularly unfair that those turning 18 a day or two before an election should have their votes denied when they will be of voting age for almost all of the forthcoming (nominal) electoral term.
-
I’d rather you spelled every single word wrong than you not be here Steven
I certainly second that!
-
I was introduced to Anke by David Haywood, whom I seem to remember quietly slinking off as the conversation took in sex work, pornography, and possibly female ejaculation.
Ahem... I prefer the term "fading into the background" rather than "slinking off" (sounds slightly more dignified somehow).
For the record, it was just the first two topics that I find terribly depressing to discuss. The third is just fine, and indeed I have a good friend who used to work in the field of female ejaculation (and so I may even have been able to constructively contribute to the conversation!).
I read an early draft of Anke's article and, I'm afraid, had to skip large sections. It was very well written & researched, but far too upsetting for me.
It's an important piece of work that should be widely promulgated -- but to people less easily upset by that sort of thing than I am (I can't even watch 'mild' fictional violence on TV).
-
Thanks for writing this piece, Emma. I was too unhappy and socially awkward (between the ages of 12 and 33 approximately) to do any of the fun things at university described here. But it's interesting to find out what people were doing, and nice to know that they were enjoying themselves so much. A shame to see the venue for all those happy memories disappearing (despite its appalling ugliness and uselessness as a work of architecture).