The bits and pieces, pain and joy that we call Life. And books. Lots of books. And movies. And this chair. That's all I need. Oh, I need this desk lamp.
Vote bellow the line.Also, where did you get that table from? I looked at the senate tickets here and it looks like they've preferenced the Drug Law Reformists, Country Alliance and Wikileaks (in that order).Also, aren't you voting Wikileaks? Is this the lower house you're talking about? If so, just ignore the how-to-vote shit and number the boxes as you see fit.
Clearly I don't know what I'm talking about. Yes I'm voting Wikileaks, which is Senate yes? Oh are the Sex Party only Senate too? See this is how informed I am. In that case I don't need to worry about the SP. Got this off facebook but from a credible person who is very engaged.Am gonna click your link now.
Thanks for that, helpful. Now I need to work out House of Reps.
Since your electorate is fairly green, the Sex Party may very well be running a candidate in the House of Reps.But, since you have to number every box in the House of Reps anyway, the only time you have to worry about party preference deals is if you intend to blindly copy your party's "how-to-vote" card. And since how-to-vote cards are for the illiterate (not poking fun) and people who are so disengaged they don't know who the other parties are, I can't imagine this is what you're doing. If it was, you wouldn't be asking these questions.Party preference deals are far more important in the senate because people who don't want to number 100 boxes (most people) have the option of selecting one box above the line and letting that party distribute their preferences.Again, you have to number every box in the House of Reps, regardless. So if there's both a Sex Party and a One Nation candidate on your green paper, put a "1" next to one (a "2" next to the Greens?) and a "7" (or whatever) next to the other (if that's what you want to do). Hope this helped.I'm doing mine today.
Yes it helps I'm settled now on what to do. Thank you. And that table from above, yes I think it's wrong, so thanks for setting me straight. I've asked for clarification on the facebook page where I got it from.In other news, I think this week will be just me posting political funny stuff. Cause you gotta laugh.
Hmm, just found this article Alex, on how Sex Party preferences could flow down and push one P Hanson into the senate.http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=15425I had decided to go wikileaks anyway, not the Sex Party. But interesting.
And I can't see One Nation on the senate tickets in the link above.
It looks like One Nation is group C on the VIC senate paper, but they're not listed under a One Nation ticket, which probably means they were too sloppy to get their paperwork in correctly and/or on time. It looks like the Sex Party has preferenced the One Nation goons 52 & 53 out of about 100 or so. The article looks to be talking predominantly about QLD, where they've preferenced them in the high 20s. In NSW, where Hanson is running, they've numbered them around 40.I have my own doubts about the Sex Party, where their funding comes from, and if there might be any hidden agendas there; but I don't see this as a strong argument that the Sexers are in bed with the Red Necks or anything like that. On the other hand, given the way preferences get tallied in the senate, then yes, I suppose it could very well play a factor.I also tend to think there's a bit of a bias against small parties and independents by "proper" media. Not that they shouldn't be exposed to criticism and ridicule, but I tend to think they cop disproportionately more than the big boys. And I find sentiments like "we need to reform the system to keep this flotsam out" a bit aggravating. It suggests to me an ideal to limit political office to a certain political class. And that rubs me up the wrong way.
Yes my biggest problem with The Sex Party is the name and also that there is the focus on sex (and possibility of hidden agendas). I don't think sex should be politicised in that way, it should be more of a private thing? Unless you're talking about repro rights, gender stuff, same-sex attraction etc but sex is different, ie the act.I dunno. I haven't looked into them much.Agree with your last par too.
I'm probably a bit more nuanced on whether I think sex should be private.Firstly, I'm hugely in favour of sex-ed, and I don't think it would hurt teens to see real footage of sex acts as part of that education. I'm also strongly in favour of porn and of people having the right to both create and consume it. Hell, I even worked in the industry (in a sense) for a bit.On the other hand, I think a lot of what goes on in the porn industry is horrible, profit-driven exploitation (which is where I start asking questions about the Sex Party) and a lot of what gets made appeals to a very dark side of human sexuality (especially in men -- you remember that video I linked to ages ago) and is probably quite damaging for young people to be watching -- especially in the absence of proper education and exposure to equally graphic depictions of more normal, healthy, positive (boring?) sex stuff.Also, the way that more and more graphic, over-the-top sexualisation has become normalised in popular culture, niggles me a bit. I may be pro-porn, but I also want to be able to get away from it, if I so choose*.And then there's this argument about how wall-to-wall depictions of women conforming to some idealised male wank fantasy is pro feminist because it encourages strong, liberated young women to "own their sexuality". Call me cynical, but that smells a lot like bullshit marketing spin to me.*note: I have a pretty broad definition of porn, that encompasses pretty much everything crafted for the purpose of sexually arousing an audience.
Post a Comment