Orcadian Jottings #5

Today's fun and games included:
Ferry from Houton to Lyness (Hoy).
Drive up and across Hoy to Rackwick (via Dwarfie's Stane)
Back to Lyness and the Scapa Flow Museum
Down to the tip of Hoy at Longhope
Back on Ferry

Birds seen included hooded crows, curlew, grey lag geese, common gulls and eider ducks. Plus many seals on the shoreline.

Orcadian Jottings #4

A short place holder of what we did today:
Maisehowe
Stennish Stones
Ring of Brodgar
Stromness
St Magus Cathedral, Kirkwall
Brough of Birsay
A busy day! And the weather was fantastic.
Plus curlews, seals, shelducks, peregrine falcon and short eared owls.

Orcadian Jottings #3

Our break continued today with a trip to the south of the main island, passing through Kirkwall and thence to South Ronaldsay. At the tip of which we visited the Tomb of the Eagles, an interesting privately owned bronze age 'hut'. Actually it's a lot more than that but its function is really unknown. When it was discovered (by a farmer in around 1956) it contained a large number of disconnected human bones so did it have some sort of ritual function?. It was out on the cliffs and we managed a nice walk along the cliffs as well.  Lots of birds nesting and a very blue sea. And from there we could see the mainland in the distance.

Getting to South Ronaldsay meant traversing two or three smaller islands which had been daisy chained to the mainland by a series of barrages put in place between 1940 and 1943 at the instigation of Churchill. Why? Because these channels were the western entrances into Scapa Flow, the major northern harbour for the British fleet during WW1 and WW2. It's a place I had looked forward to seeing at first hand as I've read so much about it in relation to the Battle of Jutland and also the scuttling of the German fleet in 1919. It was a lot bigger than I had imagined and was clearly an ideal haven and refuge for vessels. On such a tranquil day the hustle and bustle of wartime. A place well worth visiting. I hope we can find time to visit the Scapa Flow museum which is on Hoy.

And back to the B & B for a break before going out to the Merkiston Hotel for dinner.

Orcadian Jottings #2

The weather held off for us today as we visited the 5000 year old village of Scara Brae. A settlement comprised of some ten stone built buildings situated on the edge of a bay. A reconstructed example gave a really good idea of what they must have looked like when they were inhabited. All internal 'fixtures and fittings' were made of stone slabs - the beds, dressers, cupboards etc. Apparently this site is the best and most northern of its kind. Well worth a visit.

After this we had a short walk (3-ish miles) in the surrounding countryside. Lots of birds to spot, including a hen harrier swooping over the grassland looking for voles and whatever other small mammals it could lay its claws on.

And then on to Barony Mills in search of some Bere flour. This is a local speciality and is milled from a variety of barley. This mill is the last water powered mill still working on Orkney and is run by a delightful chappie called Rae Johnson, a fourth generation miller. I had a really enjoyable chat with him about flour related topics: a meeting of bread enthusiasts. I'm going to use the Bere flour to have a go at making some Bannocks.

Orcadian Jottings #1

On the Orkney Islands for a short break - Jan, Lol and myself. We flew to Kirkwall from Newquay, via Edinburgh. The weather does not look that promising and we are probably in for a wet and windy few days. The B & B we are staying at is very comfortable.
The landscapes are very barren, with few trees. Windswept is as good a word as any to describe what we see out of the window.

RIP - Harry Laws

Earlier this week we paid our last respects to my father-in-law, Harry Laws, and buried him in his plot in South Wales. He was a good man, a gentle man and a gentleman. He was 94 and had lived through a lot but never more so than during his four and a half years continuous service abroad duing WW2. He served with Montgomery at Tobruk and El Alamein but wore the title of Desert Rat with great modesty. Rarely did he speak of his exploits and never, in my experience, without prompting by someone else or by some event. In either case, his subsequent comments were invariably fairly brief and it was quite difficult to get much detail from him.

I spoke a few words at his service by way of a eulogy and a personal tribute. It's something I've done on several occasions previously (six times if my reckoning is correct) at the funerals of friends and family. It's not something I relish doing but it is something I am always prepared to do. It's never less than a priviledge and it is a way of showing respect for the deceased. Apart from the funeral of a school friend when I was eight or so (David Combstock from Bedwas who was tragically killed in an accident at the open air swimming baths in Caerphilly), the first funeral I went to as an adult was that of my maternal grandmother, Florrie B. The service was conducted at the house in Trethomas and, at the time, I was horrified at how impersonal it was. I don't think she was mentioned once by name and the service could have been for anyone. I wish I had had the confidence to say something on her behalf at the time but I hadn't and it's something that I've always regretted. However, I did make a mental note that I would step forward in future and say a few words at a funeral if ever asked or, indeed, volunteer if it looks as if no-one else can face doing it.

So, RIP Harry Laws (and Marianne from Beckenham, Dad, Cheryl, Bob from Poole, Mrs James from Rhiwderin and Bob from Truro). All gone but not forgotten. 

Rape: nothing to be cheerful about.

I had intended to take up my 'Reasons to be cheerful' theme in this posting but a number of disconnected events coalesced into something that certainly isn't a laughing matter. These events are:

1. The report that the Welsh footballer, Chad Evans, has just been sentenced to 5 years in prison for raping a teenager who was too drunk to give consent to have sex with him.

2. A small piece in the latest issue of New Internationalist detailing the use of rape as a weapon of oppression and/or war in many parts of the world.

3. Some preparation I am doing before I update, at their request, a local school on progress with Amnesty International's Violence against Women campaign

In many countries, the UK included, women's vulnerability to rape is a common theme of public service announcements. More often than not, however, these awareness campaigns are aimed at women, telling them how to avoid being raped, how they should prevent sexual harassment by dressing appropriately etc. The not-so-subtle implication is that women are in some way responsible and, if only they were sensible, they can avoid problems. Let's not miss the point - the onus for preventing rape does not lie with the victim: it lies with the perpetrator. I agree with those who argue that stopping rape and harassment by men requires telling them not to do those things. In this context it's good to see that there are many instances of anti-rape advertisements directed towards men. However, with reference to one that I've seen recently, I do wonder if such messages should really be communicated with a women's nearly naked navel, crotch and thighs and some suggestive text. It just seems perverse to me to use a sexualised image to prevent unwanted sexual behaviour. Isn't the sexualisation of women part of the problem? An oft-quoted mantra by those in the advertising industry is that 'sex sells' but surely it doesn't have to be that way for absolutely everything?

I mentioned that I'll be wearing my Amnesty International school speaker's hat soon and talking in a local school about the Violence against Women campaign. I hope I can give the students (Years 11, 12 and 13) some food for thought. Although I certainly would not want to come across as 'preachy' (and that's not my role anyway), I will try and address some specific points directly to the males in the classes. I'd like to challenge their attitudes to women and I'll try and weave in the following:

1. Respect women's autonomy over their own bodies. Accept and trust that they are the best people to make choices for their bodies and themselves. Accept that "No" means "No" --and recognise that silence does NOT equal consent. Acknowledge that only "Yes" means "Yes."

2. Respect women's moral agency. Accept and trust that they are the best people to make moral choices for themselves. Recognise that their moral choices are theirs to make. They are the ones who have to live with them, not you--so it is not up to you to make them for any woman.

3. Show respect for women by the things you say. Don't call women "bitches," "sluts," "whores," "c***s," or any other derogatory name that is tied to the feminine. If you feel the need to insult a particular woman, there are plenty of words you can use that don't demean all women.

3a. As a corollary to the above, don't use the feminine as an insult to other men. When you call a man or boy a "pussy," or a "sissy," or tell him that he does X "like a girl," you turn being a woman into an insult.

4. Show respect for women by the media you use. Be mindful that sexism in the media pollutes our culture and does incalculable damage to women and girls. Take the time to ask yourself if the films you watch, the lyrics and imagery of the music you listen to, the books/magazines/websites you read, the jokes you laugh at, etc., send positive or negative messages about women. Press for change where you can--and take your attention and money elsewhere where you can't. Don't support it by paying for it.

5. Remember where the problem lies. The only person responsible for sexual assault is the person who violates another person's bodily autonomy (see #1). It doesn't matter what a woman was wearing, where she was, who she was with, whether she was drinking or taking drugs, whether she's ever been sexually active (with the perpetrator or anyone else), etc. Stop putting the burden on women to prevent sexual assault (they can't) and start holding your own gender accountable for committing it.

I could go on, but these are the big issues as I see them. They are mostly about respecting another person's rights. Wouldn't it be wonderful if we could all do that? 

Reasons to be cheerful: Part 1

Despite the evidence provided by most of the 100 plus postings that now comprise my blog, I'm not really a miserable old git. Really, I'm not. No, honestly, I'm not. OK, perhaps I am some of the time but, I hasten to add, not without complete justification. I mean, look at the state of the world.....Ooops, there I go again!
Seriously, there are many things that bring me great joy and pleasure and I've decided to weave some of these into my blog. I thought I'd start off by acknowledging one of the biggest things that makes me cheerful and that is......................the fact that I wake up every morning. Being able to open my eyes is such a good start to the day. Long may it be so.

A great example of a heartfelt apology - not!

In my previous blog, I mentioned the dastardly deeds of the apologists and those they serve. I also touched on the sincerity of some of their so-called apologies. Whilst visiting a USA blog site today, I came across a great example of someone being caught out and the Humpty Dumptyism that crawled out of the woodwork in the aftermath.
The perpetrator was Rush Limbaugh who is deservedly little known in the UK. Who he? Think of the most rabid Daily Mail columnist you can, give them a radio show and you are on the right lines. Oooh, it pains me to say it but I am being rather unfair to the Daily Mail when I make that comparison: he really is worse than the excrement in print they routinely throw at us. To move on, recently Limbaugh has become embroiled in a controversy over remarks he made about a law student, Sandra Fluke after she had a speech supporting insurance coverage for contraceptives. Amongst other things he called her a ‘slut’ and a ‘prostitute’ and continued his attacks over a period of days. There has been a considerable backlash to what he said and many advertisers have withdrawn their sponsorship of his show. And now we go Through the Looking Glass and enter the realm of Humpty Dumpty.

The argument his apologists make for him when he gets into hot water (and he’s got previous: he suggested, quite emphatically, that Michael J. Fox was exaggerating his Parkinson's symptoms, he commissioned a "Barack the Magic Negro" song and he called soldiers who criticise war "phony soldiers") is that we all just don't get his unique sense of humour. Where have you heard that excuse before? Or the related “what I really meant to say was……. and you’ve (deliberately) misunderstood me to make me look bad” defence?

Limbaugh’s response to such situations always follows a boringly predictable path. He says something entirely unacceptable. People complain. He repeats his comments. People complain some more. He continues to not only deny any wrong-doing but ridicules his accusers. He starts to lose advertisers which, in turn, risks the only things he cares about--money and attention and thus he then feels compelled to apologise (or is forced to apologise given the torrent of pressure against him). In all cases, his apologies are less than fulsome and obviously insincere but, sadly, they always seem enough to get him off the hook – eventually. Time passes and the advertisers come back to his show. And Limbaugh lives to pollute the airways for another day. Job done – by a master at Humpty Dumptyism.

But it’s not all doom and gloom. Not everyone is taken in by him and his escapades give political cartoonists a field day – I’ve included just a few for your amusement. One day he’ll go too far and there won’t be many people grieving his demise.

Humpty Dumpty's Guide to Defending the Indefensible

I know it’s hard to believe but sometimes governments and politicians do stupid, even bad, things. When they do, their colleagues, government officials and sympathisers inevitably try to defend their conduct, even when those
actions are clearly wrong and/or obviously counterproductive. There’s a word for this and it’s called being an "apologist," although people who do this rarely apologise for much of anything. After all, a sincere apology means an admittance of guilt and few politicians would ever want us to think that they are less than infallible.

All of us need to be able to spot the rhetorical ploys that governments, politicians and their acolytes use to justify their own misconduct. To help you through the labyrinthine lexicology of ‘apologist-speak’ I have compiled ‘Humpty Dumpty’s Guide to Defending the Indefensible’. There is an obvious connection to recent events in the UK (think ‘Jerry Can’ Maude) but such practices are commonplace in many, many countries and, indeed, widely practiced by non-politicians as well. So, ladies and gentlemen, here is what to look out for when the whitewash and
bull***t need to be applied. Select which approach is likely to most successful to the task in hand, be it local (store petrol at home, James Murdoch’s defence or just about anything that our government sets out to do)) or international (Iraq, Afghanistan).

1. We didn't do it! (Denials usually don't work, but it's worth a try).
2. We know you think we did it but we aren't admitting anything.
3. Actually, maybe we did do something but not what we are accused of doing.
4. Ok, we did it but it wasn't that bad ("waterboarding isn't really torture, you know. It’s just a little uncomfortable").
5. Well, maybe it was pretty bad but it was justified or necessary. (“We only torture terrorists, or suspected terrorists, or people who might know a terrorist or people who look like terrorists")
6. What we did was really quite restrained, when you consider how powerful we really are. We could have done something even worse.
7. Besides, what we did was technically legal under some interpretations of international law (or at least as our lawyers interpret the law as it applies to us.)
8. Don't forget: the other side is much worse. In fact, they're evil. Really, really evil. As evil as evil can be.
9. Anyway, they started it.
10. And remember: we are the good guys. We are not morally equivalent to the bad guys no matter what we did. Only morally suspect, misguided critics could fail to see this fundamental distinction between Them and Us.
11. The results may have been imperfect, but our intentions were noble. (Invading Iraq and Afghanistan may have resulted in tens of thousands of dead and wounded and millions of refugees, but we meant well).
12. We have to do things like this to maintain our credibility. You don't want to encourage those other bad guys, do you?
13. Especially because the only language the other side understands is force.
14. In fact, it was imperative to teach them a lesson – again.
15. If we hadn't done this to them they would undoubtedly have done something even worse to us. Well, maybe not. But who could take that chance?
16. In fact, no responsible government could have acted otherwise in the face of such provocation.
17. Plus, we had no choice. What we did may have been awful but all other policy options had failed and/or nothing else would have worked.
18. It's a tough world out there and Serious People understand that sometimes you have to do these things. Only ignorant idealists, terrorist sympathisers, craven appeasers and/or treasonous socialists would question our actions.
19. In fact, whatever we did will be worth it eventually, and someday you’ll thank us for it.
20. We are the victims of a double-standard. Other people/countries do the same things (or worse) and nobody complains about them.

I don’t claim that the list is exhaustive but it’s a good start. Bear it in mind when next you watch the news and have fun spotting the tactic being deployed. I listened to an interview with Tory Dave earlier on and recognised the oft-used ‘we have to make difficult decisions’ variant of #17. Putting Tory Dave to one side (if only!), there are some masterful Humpty Dumptyists at work the world over and personal integrity is no bar to the Apologist. They really do think we are stupid. In fact, an alternative title for this blog could be ‘DNP’s Guide to Having Your Intelligence Insulted’ but that’s a story for another day……!

Aging activist? Moi?

Through my activities as a trainer with Amnesty International I have had an exchange of e-mails recently with a younger (much, much younger!) person. It ended up with the said young person gently reproaching me with the words “you aging activists are all the same”. I was taken
aback: activist, yes, but aging? I was not quite sure how that had happened as just the other day I was 19 and getting ready to explore the world!
After more serious reflection, however, I have to agree with her. It’s sad but true: I guess I am an 'elder' now. Although my correspondent was respectful, I felt she was being somewhat dismissive of my views. How typical of her generation she was I don't know but I hope the young can give us elders a little compassion now and then. Many of us already feel the cold winds of eternal night as they begin to blow through our aging joints and we may rant and rage. Some of us have waited most of our lives for the global awakening, scarcely daring to dream it might happen before we pass on. In our enthusiasm and/or impatience we may overreact, repeat old behaviours, regress to the 60s.....
Don't take our rants too personally. They’re just the last desperate and/or joyous cries of a passing generation. If there's a kernel of truth in what we say, run with it. If it’s empty noise, smile kindly at us and move on.
I think we elders still have a lot to teach but, I have to admit, not always what we think! Many of us serve best as excellent bad examples. And that's not such a bad role. It can be fun - in an cranky, off-beat, liberating sort of way. We don't have to impress and because we have already lived through so much, we now have less to lose but still lots to give. We can listen, support, and lend a little historical perspective now and then if it seems essential. But, let’s be honest, many of our tired old fears and dated approaches - no matter how relevant they once were - belong to another era. And the oppressors already have scripts and weapons to defeat our bygone tactics.
I am really impressed by the sophistication of some of the young this time around (those behind 38 Degrees and Avaaz spring to mind). They are way ahead of where my generation of activists were in the 60s, 70s and 80s, when the opposition could so easily divide, divert and disrupt our movements. It’s critical that the young continue to take the lead (and I'm more than happy to ride piggy back on the innovations they bring). I hope they break the rules, choose the direction, attempt the impossible, seek allies everywhere, facilitate meetings, build momentum, goad us into a greater awakening, and keep the rest of us uncomfortable, off-balance, and wondering what will happen next.
And the cartoon below? A Google search under 'aging activists' didn't bear much fruit but it did come up with this cartoon. OK, it's a tongue in cheek take-off of the seven ages of man but it did prompt me to think of what my 'activism curve' might look like. I've superimposed it in red and I'm comfortable with the message it gives: the older I get, the angrier I'm getting! I hope I don’t ever lose my passion or desire to take action for what I believe in.

Go monkey!

In a posting at the end of last year (here), I mentioned the traumatic start to life Adam Bird had had. I also pointed readers in the direction of the inspirational blog his mother, Catherine, was (and still is for that matter) keeping (here).
There have been many ups and downs over the past few months but Adam is still hanging in there and slowly improving. There's quite a way to go yet but, in the words of Catherine: "what a little hero he is. Go monkey!"
And so say all of us.