Posts by Aidan
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
The only real issue is what we call each other: “partner” can be an ambiguous word. Sometimes it is easier to acquiesce to the use of the word “wife” when dealing with tradespeople or call centres. I don’t really mind doing that. It’s less bother than correcting people.
Reclaim your inner husband! Those titles are useful shorthand, as you’ve found out, and who said it had to be about marriage anyway? Stuff `em. Our marriage celebrant had a great attitude – she had kids from one marriage, kids from her second, never changed her name the whole time but was happy to be called Mrs ##### (where ##### = 3 possible names) as she said, correctly IMO, that she was all those things and her own name too. Good on her.
My wife told me she wouldn’t cohabit with me unless I was prepared to get married. Obviously this approach isn’t for everyone, but that was the right approach for me, as I had to really think about what I wanted and the commitment I was making. Having spent 10 years in share housing as far as I was concerned moving in with her was an extension of that, which it clearly was not. It was a different beast entirely.
My experience (2000 vintage) was that many people were surprised we were getting married. They couldn’t see the point. I insisted my wife not take my name which she wasn’t sure about at first, but can’t imagine it being different now. It did cause some problems at school (to begin with) and once at immigration.
-
Southerly: Getting There is Half the Fun, in reply to David Haywood,
The nice European university who paid for our tickets made a decision (on our behalf) that it would be fine…
Just because you can, doesn't mean you should.
Hell, flying back to NZ with small children is bad enough. I spent two and half hours walking back and forth "jiggling" my 4 month old son. As soon as I stopped he screamed, as the flight attendant found out. She was ok with me walking after that.
Double-plus-agree about express queue for parents with kids. It happened once that we were ushered to the "priority & flight attendants queue". My pathetic relief was, well, pathetic, but heartfelt. If I was desperate again I think I'd try just rocking up there and if asked say you were told to by .. *airly waved hand* .. someone.
-
I know Russell was concerned about the reporting of the Snowden leaks. That there was a lot of accusations of broad abuse without a lot of evidence. The stuff that keeps tumbling out does not look good.
E.g. early on USA admit to widespread snooping on "foreigners overseas"
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/07/us/nsa-verizon-calls.html
then we get this quote from Snowden
"Other agencies don't ask us where we got the information from and we don't ask them. That way they can protect their top politicians from the backlash in case it emerges how massively people's privacy is abused worldwide," he said."
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2013/07/07/world/europe/07reuters-usa-security-germany.html
Which pretty much sums up my problem. The politicians say "this is the law, it protects you, we do not break the law". But the law is so easy to circumvent, childishly so, and there is no oversight of the secret programs. You can pretty much guarantee this is being abused.
-
Southerly: Now I Am Permitted, in reply to David Haywood,
Thanks Bart, I shall investigate this option! As of now I shall abandon this chair for a while, and proceed to do something stretching.
<scientist>Surely easier to just carry an armful of pavers everywhere</scientist>
-
Hard News: A GCSB Roundup, in reply to Graeme Edgeler,
The PM is always the chair of this committee – section 7(3) of the Intelligence and Security Committee Act requires it (or allows the PM to select someone, but that has not happened since the Committee came into existence). I very much imagine Key would have preferred not to do it on this occasion
Paranoia again. Thanks for the cold splash of reality Graeme.
-
Was Key's decision to chair that committee because he wanted control, and didn't want it going places he wanted to keep hidden?
-
So we're all being a bit paranoid.
Speaking of which, Kate Dewes came across as a little prone to paranoia, but the sheer volume of apparent mail intercepts is quite shocking. Is it likely to be true?
-
Hard News: A GCSB Roundup, in reply to Chris Waugh,
A member of the US Embassy media team, Sean Gillespie, was at the hearing taking photographs of Mr Dotcom. He said later that he was there in a private capacity.
Surely easier to subscribe to his twitter account? As a screaming ego-maniac he posts plenty of pics of himself.
-
Hard News: Media3: Watching the Fourth Estate, in reply to Paul Campbell,
I agree with Paul that the “we only hack all the non-US scumbags” is not all that comforting. Unlike Haroon Meer who wrote that post, NZers have already had our “Oh, we aren’t special …” moment with the ANZUS nuclear-free NZ kerfuffle, and the Rainbow Warrior bombing.
When I came to Australia I realised they still thought the US gave a shit about them. I still don’t think the penny has really dropped yet.
-
Hard News: When "common sense" isn't, in reply to Rich of Observationz,
Which sort of makes his point. People identifying with a group and seeing "the others" getting away with something something grumble mumble.
The point of that article was that this might well be normal human behaviour, and by acknowledging it maybe we can do something about it.