Tagged: WTF?


Seriously?  “We have to shit on your civil rights because WMD, but we can’t explain why”? Has New Zealand fallen through a time portal to 2003?

If the wheels are indeed falling off the Smile’n’Wavemobile, this has to be a sign.

Now, this whole GCSB story is just not one of my areas of expertise, and far better-qualified people have covered it, like Gordon Campbell, karol, and Bryce Edwards.

But here’s my uninformed 2c, which may just make some sense to others like me who don’t use phrases like repressive state apparatus in everyday conversation:

Spying is represented in my brain by two things: James Bond (dapper, British spying) and Jason Bourne/Mission Impossible [and all the clones thereof] (slightly worrying definitely anti-democratic American spying).

And the thing is, you just can’t watch a lot of US-made espionage drama (or even cop shows, which inevitably do a CIA plotline somewhere in season 4 or 5) without having it very heavily engraved into your brain that The CIA Cannot Spy On US Citizens.  Because they’re the elite Cold War-fighting scary men-in-black agency, and That’s The Rules.

The FBI, on the other hand, are extremely fashionable and hack into your bank accounts for great justice to catch serial killers.

So when (she finally gets to the point) the Prime Minister talks about letting the GCSB spy on New Zealand citizens, my brain just says “hey, hang on, that’s against the rules!  We have the SIS for snooping on our peeps, and the GCSB for snooping on those people, and that’s important!”

Digging a little deeper into this, the difference is a little creepy-patriotic: I basically expect our intelligence community to treat NZers with far more dignity and respect for human rights than scary Soviet double-agents, who should of course be detained without trial and locked in a room with Daniel Craig until they give up the reconstructed Nazi superweapon plans.

It kind of worries me that this is how my brain thinks about these topics, but it’s there nevertheless.

Oh, and obviously?  You have to be incredibly suspicious of any agency (*cough*police*cough*) which consistently fucks around with the regulations on its behaviour and then gets bailed out by the Government.  Seriously, when do beneficiaries get this treatment?  “Oh, you’ve been claiming $5 more per week than you’re entitled to, we’ll just retrospectively bump the cap on that benefit up so you’ll be okay.”  I think not.

Father’s creepy control issues garner media sympathy for no discernable reason

Let’s play a game, dear readers.

What is the most ridiculously fucked up thing about this story?

Is it:

a)  The truly astounding levels of entitlement displayed by the bio-douche involved

b)  The fact this even made it to court

c)  How the bio-douche’s utterly scary entitlement complex is only heightened by the fact the pregnant woman has said she doesn’t intend to abort, thus meaning he wants to legally force her to give up custody of an apparently wanted child

d)  The fact that news.com.au seriously thought that “Desperate father asks court to prevent abortion” (or, in the URL, “Father’s desperate abortion fear”) wasin any wayan appropriate headline?

I’m going with D, personally.  Protip, patriarchy:  subtext needs more sub.

Oh Internets, you bring the crazy

There’s a comment sitting in moderation for this post. It’s still sitting there because it confuses the heck out of me.

A person of the same name has left similar comments at Questioning Transphobia and Queerty (oh, Google, what the frack did we ever do without you?) – claiming to have a psychic connection with Kellie Telesford, claiming to know (through said psychic connection) and repeating details of Kellie’s murder, stating that Kellie “is a man” who “feels very feminine”. Crackpot? Sincere commenter? Bizarre troll? I have no idea.

So, what to do?

WTF, Russia?

No words, really.

A Russian advertising executive who sued her boss for sexual harassment lost her case after a judge ruled that employers were obliged to make passes at female staff to ensure the survival of the human race.

The judge said he threw out the case not through lack of evidence but because the employer had acted gallantly rather than criminally.

According to a recent survey, 100 per cent of female professionals said they had been subjected to sexual harassment by their bosses, 32 per cent said they had had intercourse with them at least once and another seven per cent claimed to have been raped.

If anyone needs me, I’ll be over there bashing my head against a brick wall.