Posts by Emma Hart
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Up Front: Submission Pun Goes Here, in reply to Tom Beard,
That’s why I’m going to let my sub rest for a couple of days
That's often a very good idea, beca... I'll stop right there.
People's refractory periods vary. There's no shame in it.
I hinted at the argument that in my ideal world "marriage" could be deconstructed and extended to a range of different relationships
After consideration, I removed a section about adoption and parenting rights. Best, I thought, to keep it focused.
I should add, too, in case people aren't reading Oliver's post: it is worth making a submission that just says "I support this bill". Those submissions are counted, those numbers will be reported.
-
Up Front: Submission Pun Goes Here, in reply to Danielle,
Isn't that really a romper?
I prefer to think of them as oversomes.
-
Up Front: Submission Pun Goes Here, in reply to Lilith __,
I don’t really know how legwear comes into it, but if any argument has the overalls on, it’s yours.
Overalls like... these?
-
Up Front: Submission Pun Goes Here, in reply to Phil Lyth,
My experience is that MPs on select committees will always give a fair hearing to novices, people who are making first submission.
Oliver's post at TLG is quite reassuring on this as well:
Being heard in person can be an extremely daunting experience. The committee knows that, and will bend over backwards to make you feel comfortable.
It's still a Bit of a Thing, exposing personal pain to people who may be entirely unsympathetic.
Hope it is full of more submissions in support just like that.
This one is absolutely harrowing. It won't be the only one.
-
Hard News: Before Lust, in reply to BenWilson,
I think we're not afraid of nudity so much as embarrassed about not having perfect bodies. People who are super buff have no shame, so far as I can see. You wouldn't bother with all the trouble of buffing to then not let everyone see.
Nah, I completely disagree. I mean, obviously, completely based on casual observation, but I've noticed no correlation between the women who hide under towels or change in toilets vs women who just wander about naked when getting changed, and socially-promoted body shape. Body confidence seems more related to other kinds of confidence. Maybe for women who spend a lot of time and effort trying to be thin, and hairless, and perky, that very striving means their bodies can never be good enough.
We can't even let our kids run around naked any more, between being terrified of the sun and terrified of paedophiles. It's very hard to have a healthy relationship with nudity when you're told you can't take photos of your kids in their togs at the swimming sports.
When I see billboards thrusting oversized vaginas at bored passers-by
You will never see a vagina in advertising. We've only just got to the point where it's all right to say vagina - in an ad for a "feminine hygiene product", that only airs after the watershed. If we were all "sex is so boring and dull we're all so over-exposed", it should be no more controversial to say 'vagina' than to say 'leg'.
-
Up Front: Choice, Bro, in reply to Kyle Matthews,
Somewhere in Labour HQ there's a bunch of work being done on that.
I think Labour, at some point, does have to consider this (grossly oversimplified) question: what do we do on those occasions when the South Auckland vote and the Wellington Central vote are in conflict?
-
Up Front: Choice, Bro, in reply to Sofie Bribiesca,
Well maybe not but the church from his area went straight onto tv to say he is warned.
I don't doubt it. Nor that their opposition, and his, is perfectly genuine. What I'm not buying is the idea that this will cost Labour Mangere, or indeed "seats".
-
Up Front: Choice, Bro, in reply to Sofie Bribiesca,
and he will be voted out if he went against them
Sofie, if Labour didn't de-select him and he stood again in Mangere, you think that electorate would vote against Labour, on this single issue? Here are the results from last time so you can calculate the swing.
-
Up Front: Choice, Bro, in reply to Paul Williams,
Incidentally, what did others make of Suo William Sio's contribution?
He stood up, and a friend and I simultaneously tweeted, "Uh-oh."
I found most of it weak. I found his framing himself and his community as victims who might get "called names"... ironic? Mildly offensive? I think he could have made his position clear without that.
As far as rhetorical content went, I was most impressed with Nikki Kaye's speech. She quite deliberately invoked her party's history, its activists, even Ronald Reagan, to show that being pro-marriage equality was a sensible, traditional right-wing position. It was a hugely clever speech.
-
Heh. So. Look what came out of the ballot today.