Saw the young one and a large one who has lost the end of its tail! Haven’t noticed that before so might be a new injury. They seem fairly territorial, I find them in the same spots fairly frequently. The young one is a little too close for comfort, straight outside the door!! The bigger one is about 15m away from the house. They have incredibly sharp claws. Otherwise known as lace monitors

My photos are poor, but you can see how well they blend into their surroundings.

Update pics on the shed/house build.
Got the front steps finished today. Pretty happy with the result

Some more photos of the shed/house. The kitchen corner cabinet had been sitting for years in my partner’s mother’s shed. It’s perfect size for the tiny home. The IBC tanks began their life as bulk food containers, they are great water tanks. We now have 4 which are all full from the summer rain (4000L of water).

Today I finished making the screen door and enclosing the front (where it originally had a roller door.) Happy with how they turned out. Just need to finish the trim. Will be lovely to leave the barn doors open all night during the summer without getting eaten by mosquitoes. I love the view. Just need to make some steps now. .. and finish painting inside … and…. and …. (there’s no hurry!)

Some photos of the process of building our shed/house. It was a single garage. We bought it secondhand, the owner helped us pull it down and transport it. We used reclaimed timber for the foundation. The patio is made from pallets. I made the barn doors with skylight sheeting to let as much light in as possible. I’ve almost finished the screen door, then will make some steps to the patio. We’ve been living in it for a few months now, still plenty of bits not finished… work in progress…

The Palestinian death toll is over 28,000 and yet here I am debating words? Why? Because words, in particular the working definition of antisemitism by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance IHRA, is being used as a weapon to silence people and defend Israel. And these words are increasing being worked into laws. Lawmakers in more than half-dozen US states are pushing laws to define antisemitism

There is no place for any type of discrimination, I am not antisemitic. However many attempts to speak up against the atrocities of Israel against the Palestinian people get shut down as antisemitic and the working definition is thrown up as a shield of protection for Israel.

US attorney, Kenneth Stern, drafted the original definition. Stern has since stated that it has become a weapon. I drafted the definition of antisemitism. Rightwing Jews are weaponizing it. He has also submitted written evidence to the US Congress. Why the man who drafted the IHRA definition condemns its use

Stern states that the working definition was intended to be used as an aid in standardising data collection about the incidence of antisemitic hate crime across different countries. It was never meant to be used as a legal device to curb free speech.

Many countries and organisations have adopted the IHRA’s working definition, while others have resisted it. “More than 100 Israeli and international civil society organisations have asked the United Nations to reject a controversial definition of antisemitism because it is being ‘misused’ to protect Israel from legitimate criticism.”.

In the UK a group of judges condemned the education secretary for demanding universities adopt it

“The legally entrenched right to free expression is being undermined by an internally incoherent ‘non-legally binding working definition’ of antisemitism. Its promotion by public bodies is leading to the curtailment of debate”.

A paper by Susan Blackwell in 2021 examines the text through the lens of Critical Discourse Analysis to expose ideologies.

Blackwell discusses that even though the working definition states that it is non-legally binding it mimics dimensions of the law creating quasi-laws or soft laws. For example, the EU Handbook for the practical use of the IHRA working definition of antisemitism has sections titled Law Enforcement and The Judiciary.

The impact this has is described,

By mimicking normative dimensions of the law, quasi-laws … empower special interest groups to act as proxies for the state. These groups then pursue their agendas through threats of legal prosecution, borrowing from the coercive force of the law, while lacking democratic legitimacy. They target expressive content for censorship, in the absence of any precise legal mandate.
Even if governments can be persuaded not to ‘create hate speech codes’, the damage will be done by the back door: efforts to apply the definition as soft law have an overwhelming impact on freedom of expression.”

Blackwell agrees that the document is “designed for abuse.”

“Those who would characterize the use of the IHRA definition to censor free speech as a “misinterpretation” or “misuse” of this text, are failing to understand its social and political context: this is exactly what it was intended for.”

“Its authors had a political agenda, and the legal applications they had in mind for it can be described as “lawfare”: the use of the law for political ends.”

The Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism (JDA) was written in direct response to the IHRA and offers a helpful alternative definition. It is critical of the IHRA definition in that,

“it blurs the difference between antisemitic speech and legitimate criticism of Israel and Zionism. This causes confusion, while delegitimizing the voices of Palestinians and others, including Jews, who hold views that are sharply critical of Israel and Zionism. None of this helps combat antisemitism.

The Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism provides a helpful way to combat antisemitism.

“The Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism is a document meant to outline the bounds of antisemitic speech and conduct, particularly with regard to Zionism, Israel and Palestine. Its creation was motivated by a desire to confront antisemitism and by objections to the IHRA Definition of Antisemitism, which critics have said stifles legitimate criticism of the Israeli government and curbs free speech.”

I was interested by the recent conversation threads on self-censoring.
I too at times feel the social pull, desiring to belong and fall in with the dominant view. I could reword that and say that I try to be polite, don’t want to antagonise people, get tired of defending a position etc. But generally, all those mechanisms are a means for me to fulfill the biological/instinctual need for belonging. I want to belong therefore I act in a certain way that will ensure a sense of belonging. It’s a natural thing to do, we are social animals. Not conforming to cultural norms in some aspects of my life has showed me the harshness and stigma of being the outsider. It also thickened my skin and gave me impetus to understand the mechanism of belonging. We humans are designed to have a strong social instinct. And that is a good thing but when it’s used as a weapon by institutions of power to silence me, well there I draw the line.

There are many ways that institutions of power have maintained control of their subjects throughout history. There have been various forms of punishment and discipline. Self-censorship has developed as contemporary mechanism of control. We have been conditioned to control ourselves, we don’t need to be subjugated to an ever present overlord, we have one installed within us. The biological need to belong has been weaponized to curtail any potential opposing opinion and therefore silencing us.

The topic of self-censorship reminded me of Foucault’s analysis of the Panopticon. The Panopticon initially was a prison design by Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832). The physical design placed the prisoners in a round structure at the perimeter and the guards in a tower in the middle. Being very efficient, the guards could observe all cells from one spot, reducing the number of guards required. It was designed so that the prisoners couldn’t tell if they were being watched or not. All they could see was the guard tower. The prisoners would assume they were being watched all the time and Bentham theorised that they would modify their behaviour accordingly. Essentially they would guard themselves.

For Foucault (1926-1984) the Panopticon model was not just a prison design but a model of power and control that could be used in a variety of settings by any institution of power. He argued that this had become a way of social control in contemporary institutions and practices.

A thesis by Emily Brown explains a current panoptic experience through the use of surveillance in our society. Our online footprint is tracked, what we like and don’t like is tracked, our biometrics are gathered like face and voice recognition. “There is little of society left untouched by technological surveillance.” Essentially we live with the experience of being watched. Brown explains how a government’s overuse of surveillance though the internet can create self-censorship online. This is both conscious and unconscious behaviour. It is motivated by discomfort and fear. “People self-censor in order to avoid the social disapproval of others.”

Self-censorship is desirable to a government because it curtails dissent. Over surveillance creates an environment hostile to free speech. When people feel pressured not to dissent, their resulting normalised behavior is self-censorship.

“In modern societies people are increasingly watched, and their activities documented and classified with a view to creating populations that conform to social norms.”

Through the mechanism of normalisation, people being surveilled follow the rules of the institutions without questioning them or resisting them. Brown expresses the dangers of this,

“The consequences of this will be dire; in a society where alternative ideas are not expressed, they will eventually cease to exist, setting us on the path to authoritarianism.”

News sites are announcing that the world is now 1.5℃ warmer than pre-industrial levels. This is devastating. But what is worse is that new studies on marine sponges reveal that we have actually reached 2℃ and that the land is warming at a faster rate than predicted.

Additionally, temperature increase is not experienced equally across the planet. The Arctic is warming four times faster than the global average.

Marine sponges reveal global warming has already exceeded 1.5 degrees

World’s first year-long breach of key 1.5C warming limit

The recent guilty sentence of Jennifer Crowley I find unacceptable. I’m sorry for the parents that lost their children in the deadly shooting at Oxford High School in 2021. Ethan Crowley (15yrs) was sentenced to life in prison without parole. The mother has now been found guilty by jury to 4 counts of involuntary manslaughter each with a 15 year sentence. Prosecutors accused her of being negligent in allowing her son to have a gun, and ignoring warnings signs.

There are many things that I find wrong with this situation. When I looked at some of the articles (I know they are not necessarily facts but hear me out) Jennifer stated that her husband took Ethan to buy the gun as a gift only days before the shooting and took him to a shooting range. (His trial is in March.) I’m not sure at what point that makes Jennifer guilty of allowing her son to have a gun. We live in a culture where domestic violence against women is rampant. Perhaps this woman had no say in the home? Perhaps the threat of violence that women inherently experience in culture silenced her. So is it acceptable to criminalise women who are silenced by society and culture?

At Ethan’s trial he said himself that he was accountable for his actions, that neither the school or his parents knew what he was about to do. Yet they found the mother guilty and the school has not been made accountable. The school called the parents in that morning concerned over a picture he had drawn and wanted them to take Ethan home. The parents apparently had to go to work and didn’t take him home. The school failed to check Ethan’s bag in which he had a gun. But neither the school or principle or teachers were charged. Weren’t they equally to blame? Then there is the accusation that the parents didn’t take responsibility and take Ethan home and went to work instead. So perhaps they needed money to survive? Is poverty or the threat of poverty a crime? We live in a society where we are made to survive paycheck to paycheck.

At Ethan’s trial, the defense pleaded for the opportunity for parole based on a claim of mental illness. The judge rejected this based on the child’s ability to plan and carry out his actions, therefore any claim of mental illness did not impede his actions. So how can they now accuse the mother of not getting him help when the judge deemed he was not mentally ill? I know mental illness is defined differently in legal, clinical and social definitions. But you can’t swap those definitions around to make them convenient for your case.

Then there is the issue of getting help for a child with behavioral or mental issues. Apart from the fact that it is near impossible to get appropriate help, no one seems to ask the question ‘Why are there so many children with behavioural and mental health issues?’ According to this court case (and others) it must be due to parents. All parents must be the cause. We know that can’t be the case yet we find it acceptable to put blame on some parents. Why isn’t anyone asking ‘What is happening in our society and culture that is manifesting in children’s behaviour and mental health?’

This neoliberal capitalist society has got us convinced that we the individual is responsible for how our life turns out. It has been instilled into us that failure to succeed in the dominant culture is an individual problem and must be addressed by individual treatment. Furthermore this system gives psychiatric disorders to situations that are normal responses to the stressors of life under neoliberal capitalism. If an individual is unsuccessful under the neoliberal order then it is viewed as an individual illness needing individual treatment rather than a problem with society itself. This allows the people in power to be absolved of any responsibilities for the social conditions and injustices that contribute to distress.

The people in power keep us pointing at each other rather than pointing up.

Lets not attack and blame each other for the horrors that this system of oppression puts us through and start pointing in the right direction – the powers that create policies under neoliberal capitalism.

There are many good resources to read/view on this. Here are some

Mental Health Challenges Related to Neoliberal Capitalism in the United States

The Invention of Individual Responsibility

There never was a treaty in Australia. First Nations people and allies here are still fighting for treaty. Even according to International Law at the time of colonisation in Australia it was illegal to colonise by the means that they did. The First Peoples here were deliberately not recognised by the British Empire. Australia is one of the few countries globally that celebrates their national day on the day of colonisation. It’s is a cause of much grief.

I hope the current NZ Government does not get a chance to water down the treaty like they are proposing.

Went swimming in the creek just down from the shed/house. Cut a new path through the bush, about a 12min walk. Gets quite steep at the end but able to scramble down ok. Met a little friend down there who landed on me for a bit then flew off. 🌏

I’d first like to acknowledge the First Nation peoples on the land which I live. The Yuggera and Barunggam peoples. The impact of colonisation on the land now called Australia will no doubt feature in my future writing.

I live in the Queensland Australian bush. My partner and I built a shed to live in. It was quite a feat for 2 middle aged women! Its an ongoing process. I’ll share some of the progress we have made. We live very simply off grid, not self sufficient. Our backyard has lots to explore.

I grieve the destruction of this beautiful planet and all the life on it. I’m in a position of privilege to live here and I look forward to sharing it with anyone who’s interested. 👋