Woman on Woman

There have been a million and one articles, blog posts, and opinion pieces recently on how women are bringing women down, about women being their own worst enemies, about women oppressing women blah blah blah blah blah. What utter crap! Why is it that when one woman criticises another woman she is bringing women down, but when one man criticises another man we hear no such pathetic labelling?

Let me get this clear. When a woman criticises another woman it is not a 'cat fight', it is not a signal that feminism is dead, it is not evidence that women oppress women more than men ever have for Pete's sake. This is utterly ridiculous. It has got to the point where I, as a woman, cannot criticise another woman, no matter how abhorrent her actions, because I risk being called a bitch or jealous or something worse.

Germaine Greer recently wrote an op ed criticising Gillard's fashion sense. Many came out calling her a bitch, a hypocrit etc. While we can perhaps question what the point of Greer's article was when there are perhaps more important matters to write about, her article is not proof that she has turned on women. It's just proof that she doesn't like Gillard's fashion sense. And she doesn't have to, that's her right.

Why can't it just be, when two women are disagreeing, two people disagreeing? Why is does it have to be such a big deal? What does it say about us that it always is? Female conflict is not somehow more unique, or sexy, or catty, or less reasonable because the two participants are female. It's two humans having a good old fight because that's what humans have always done, and what they will continue to do for centuries to come, I am sure.

(Thanks to Helen Razer and Ben Pobjie for the inspiration)

Matthew Newton

Much has been said about Matthew Newton's actions and mental health of late. He has been arrested on two occasions in the US recently, even though he is supposedly there to be away from the limelight and to receive help for his bipolar disorder and drug issues. We also know that he has a history of being violent towards two of his previous girlfriends.

I want to stress from the beginning that I do not condone violence against women (or anyone for that matter), to the contrary, it is abhorrent and something that no one should ever have to experience. I do, however, have room for empathy for Matthew and what he is going through at the moment. I cannot condone his actions, but I can understand that he is suffering from what is an evil mental illness that he did not choose to have and he can never fully make go away.

Having known several people with a mental illness, and having experienced my own battles with anorexia and depression, I know all too well that mental illness is all consuming and takes over your life. It can make you do the most irrational and inexplicable things. I know that most people with bipolar, or other serious mental disorders, do not commit the acts that Matthew has committed, but from the outside we cannot begin to understand the state of Matthew's mind and I can only ache for him that he is obviously in such an awful place at the moment.

I can only hope that the media backs off and gives him the space to receive the help he needs and to take control of the monster in his mind. 

QandA does it again

The question of whether God exists is one that we will probably never be able to answer, and yet, we continue to discuss, analyse, and argue over this.

'QandA' on ABC last night further explored this question through featuring Cardinal George Pell and renowned atheist, Richard Dawkins. Upon hearing about their pending appearance on the show, my immediate thought was 'well, must avoid that!'.

The fact is, I find both Pell and Dawkins to be uninspiring figures. Having grown up as part of the Catholic Church, Pell was never someone that I admired or looked to for inspiration or guidance. His words never resonated with me, they did not contain a truth that I could relate to. They were too backward, too exclusive, too judgemental. And then there is Dawkins. I admit I know very little about Dawkins. I did try to read his book 'The God Delusion' but I couldn't get past the first chapter. I found his writing condescending and deliberately combative. Conversations around religion and God interest me, but aggressive and belittling arguments turn me off like nothing else.

So it was with great trepidation that I gave in and watched this 'QandA' special. Just as expected I endured great frustration throughout the episode, but, probably not surprisingly to my friends, it was Dawkins that angered me the most. I find his manner unbelievably judgemental and pretentious. He constantly insinuates that anyone who believes in anything other than the non-existence of a god is deluded and naive. I don't think I am a believer anymore, and yet I still found his arguments incredibly offensive. I know some incredibly intelligent people who choose to believe and I have the utmost respect for them for doing so.

Pell did not escape my wrath. He was typically conservative and backward in his views, and at times, also appeared rather arrogant.

Another 'wanting to tear my hair out' element of this episode was that, like in so many other conversations on this topic, religion and belief seemed to be interchangeable with Catholicism, or at least Christianity. Christianity is not the only religion and yet, in Australia at least, it the most lampooned, it is the most judged, and it is so often the butt of jokes. I find this to be a complete a cop out. Where in these conversations is talk of Buddhists being delusional or naive? What about Hindus? Or Jews? I think in Australia it is too easy to make fun of Christians because Christianity is the dominant religious belief. We understandably don't want to upset Jews or Hindus, but Christians, who cares about them right? Let's call them dumb and laugh in their face and not give a crap how they feel about that. I think we should expand the conversation whilst being respectful of other people's views and beliefs.

I really think this episode of Q and A would have been strengthened by including representatives of other religions. Although, I should give him credit, I'm pretty sure Dawkins would have been just as insulting and infuriating.

Discussions around religion and atheism fascinate me. I grew up in  a Catholic family, attended Catholic schools and attended Church on most weekends. I admit I was not an intellectual Catholic. It was a culture that I was a part of and I was happy in that culture so I did not see any problem with it or reason to question it. It was only when I got to about the age of 17 or 18, after befriending someone who attended my Church who had decided to become a Catholic, that I actually started to really question and consider God's existence. I remember thinking that this friend knew more about this religion that I belonged to than I ever did. I chose to stop attending Church, I think wanting to test whether it made a difference to who I was.

I have now got to a point where I am pretty sure I do not believe, but I'm not really fussed about it. If a god does exist, well ok, if not, well so be it. I have so much admiration for atheists like Alain de Botton who choose not to believe but are able to see and celebrate what religion has to offer. This resonates with me. I think Catholic social teaching had a great effect on my passion for social justice and I will always be grateful for that, and as I said, I do miss being a part of a community and having a common gathering place that the Church offered me.

So what I do vehemently believe in is the right of people to withhold the belief they wish to withhold without experiencing judgement, abuse, or aggression from anyone, including those from other religious or belief groups. I think those like Dawkins  who seem to be adamant about making those who do believe feel small and stupid should back off and perhaps find a more constructive pass time.

And just to be clear, Cardinal Pell, climate change is real, and gay marriage should be legal. Seriously. 

Unbearable Lightness

I just found a blog post I wrote a while ago, and because of my technical incompetence I thought I'd lost it, but it turns out it was saved in my drafts! It's similar to my post about Bronte, but perhaps more comprehensive.


I was reading an article this morning about Portia de Rossi's new book, Unbearable Lightness, which details her battle with an eating disorder. She was a Geelong girl who had made it big as an actress in America and yet she was deeply unhappy, as well as scared and uncomfortable with being gay. She used weight control as a method to deal with all her psychological problems.

Unfortunately this is an all too common tale, especially amongst young women, and one that I can associate with. Having battled through anorexia in my late teens and early twenties I know what it is like to think that by being as thin and controlled with your eating as possible, all your other problems might disappear. Surely with thinness will come happiness?

And I think the word 'battle' is an appropriate one. Every day was quite the struggle, waking up wondering how I was going to get through the day without eating too much, wondering how to fill in the time between food so as not to think about food too much. But it was impossible to think of anything else really. When you're that starved of nutrition, the body smartly goes into survival mode, and all one can think about is where your next feed is going to come from.

I became a walking zombie - I stopped feeling anything really. I never felt overly happy or sad, it was just a whole lot of nothingness. I lost all my friends because social occasions were just too risky. Catching up with friends usually involved food, and unhealthy food at that, so they had to be avoided. I was weighing myself up to five times a day, just to ensure that I had not put on any weight since the last time. And anytime that I did allow myself to eat something unhealthy I was in total fear that I would become obese.

I had lost all reason, all rationality. I had to drop out of uni and the shame of this felt pretty awful. I had always been a good student and it never occurred to me that I would ever struggle to keep up. But I just couldn't do it. I just couldn't concentrate. I was skin and bones and yet when people who cared told me that I had to eat I thought they were overreacting and just didn't understand. I was in control and there was such power in that. No matter what else was going on around me, only I could control what was going into my mouth.

That time is all a bit of a blur to me really. I had a couple of part time jobs to give me something to do but really my life was without purpose. It's so terrifying now to think that I could respect and love myself so little as to let myself get to that point. I wanted to take up as little space in this world as possible. I was effectively, albeit slowly, killing myself.

I eventually took myself off to a psychologist who specialised in eating disorders who suggested that perhaps I needed to go to hospital, that I was maintaining such a low weight that I was risking my long-term health, if not my life. It was the wake up call I needed. At first I tried to fight the idea, because I didn't feel that I was really that unwell to require hospitalisation, but a bed became available in the eating disorders ward and I knew it was time to make myself better again.

It seems like another person's story when I think about my time in the hospital. Surely that wasn't me? There I was in a ward with other young women who had tortured themselves into thinness. What were they doing? How could they do this to themselves? And yet I was one of them. I had to sit at the table with them with nurses watching our every move to ensure that we ate everything on our calorie-laden plates. I had to attend occupational therapy classes with them to learn how to shop and eat healthy meals. I had to go to group therapy sessions with them to talk about how we got to be in this place. How did I get to be in this place?!

I was told several times that I was one of the best patients the nurses had ever seen in the eating disorders ward. This praise was exactly what I needed. Previously I had prided myself on being the person who could lose so much weight while everyone else around me talked about how difficult it was. But with this praise from the nurses came the determination to continue to be the most compliant and willing patient. While the other girls fought to have less food on their plates, I gladly ate it all. It was a relief really. Finally I could eat.

After five and a half weeks in the hospital I got myself to the weight that I needed to get to in order to be discharged. It was such a relief in many ways, but in others it was terrifying. The outside world had become a bit scary because in the outside world I didn't have anyone praising me for eating, and it was just such a big scary place. It wasn't particularly easy; the fear about losing control of my weight and becoming obese stayed with me for a while. But from utter determination I slowly began to regain some kilos and got myself to a healthy weight. It was quite astonishing. I was able to feel things again, whether it was positive or negative feelings I was experiencing, at least I was feeling again.

In the end I was one of the lucky ones. While some sufferers die, and many other sufferers struggle for years and years and have several relapses, I was able to recover after about two years and have never relapsed, and fingers crossed, never will. To think I put myself and my family through that is quite a difficult thought. And to think that girls and boys are still doing this to themselves is so incredibly sad.

I am happy to say I have come quite a long way since those days. I actually don't dislike what I see in the mirror most days and have been able to maintain a healthy weight since I put it back on after my stint with anorexia. I like to eat healthily but I far from obsess about it.

So to anyone out there who thinks thinness and total control brings happiness all I can tell you is that you are so incredibly wrong. We need to value and respect ourselves and to realise that no matter how bad we think it is, it can get better, and with a little bit of strength from within ourselves, and with support from those around us, it will get better.

Ok, we get it

The conflicting, confusing, non-stop messages are everywhere. Eat this. Don’t eat that. Eat more of this. Eat less of that. This is really good for you. Actually, not it is not. Eating this could give you cancer. Eating more of this could prevent cancer.

Oh my gosh. Stop it. Stop it now, please!

As someone who has an interest in nutrition I often read these articles to see what the latest message it. Like most of us, I want to be healthy and look after myself and make sure I’m putting in my body is not going to give me cancer, but I’m not sure I can handle this crap anymore. Michelle Bridges from Biggest Loser, that includes you. Your show belittles people, deliberately makes them cry for more entertaining TV and then tempts them to eat calorie-dense food in a competition aptly named ‘temptation’ - so no, you do not have some sort of moral high ground that your appearance on TV and newspaper columns seems to assume you have.

The sensible people tell us that life is too short to obsess over what we are or are not eating. The important thing is to look after yourself, eat well most of the time, and be content. And I get that, I get the message of that, and I agree. It is really hard to eat well ALL of the time. Really darn hard. Especially during those long days at work, when the hours drag, and there is nothing better to do than munch on the chocolate sitting next to you. Or when you’re out to dinner and you’re trying to be good, but a vegetable stir-fry does not seem nearly as satisfying as a lasagne or some other item on the menu drenched in cheese.

But I think all we can do is try. And keep trying. No one is perfect. Probably not even Michelle Bridges herself. Sometimes we are going to eat too much pasta and feel like we’re about to give birth to a baby. Sometimes we are going to eat too much chocolate and feel like we’re going to turn into a chocolate egg. But I think all we can do is to eat well most of the time, and laugh at ourselves and give ourselves a break when sometimes we go a little bit overboard.

Bronte

I've just watched the wedding of Bronte Cullis http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ivQFN_cMFk0

It's pretty hard to watch it and not shed a tear. I remember Ray Martin's story in the mid 90s about Bronte's struggle with anorexia. It was not an easy watch. She was no incredibly emaciated and yet, she couldn't see that she was close to dying. I remember thinking, why would you do this to yourself? What could possess someome to starve themselves and essentially kill themselves in an incredibly slow and painful manner? You could see how distressed her family was because their daughter, their sister was dying.

And yet, in my later teenage years I undertook a similar path. I didn't see it coming, it wasn't a conscious decision. I was lost and unhappy and anorexia was how this unhappiness manifested. I have recently seen photos of myself from this period and it is distressing to see how thin I was, and yet at the time, when friends and family and teachers were imploring me to eat, I thought they were overreacting and interfering. I had always been slightly chubby and now I was finally thin and in control, so why could they not just leave me alone. But then I had to drop out of uni, unable to cope, and was left with very few friends. Things were just getting worse and worse and I knew I had to do something about it.

To get better was a battle. With the help of a very strong and supportive mother and a psychologist with a lot of experience in the field, I finally had the strength to put myself into hospital and begin the fight to get better. Being in hospital and to see other young women struggling with the disease was actually a blessing in disguise. I didn't want to be one of them. I needed to get better and I was the only person who was going to be able to do it. Admitting myself for five and a half weeks in hospital proved to be one of the best decisions I had made in my life. There were no distractions - I was in there to put on weight, and I did. The hard part was when I left. Now it was all up to me. I didn't have nurses watching over me as I ate, or dieticians telling me what I was going to eat for every meal. I remember shortly after leaving hospital, making myself a pasta meal on a Friday night, and just bursting into tears because I was so distressed that this meal was going to cause me to gain an incredible amount of weight. It was certainly a struggle fighting such overwhelming and irrational thoughts. But I did it. I survived.

So Bronte's story really hits home. It's such a beautiful thing to see her so happy and so healthy. I can completely relate to her talking about the need be tenacious. It took tenacity to become so thin in the first place, and it took tenacity to get myself better.

She is a survivor, and so am I.

I am furious

It has been a while, that's for sure. While writing is one of the few things that I am confident that I am good at, for whatever reason, I haven't had much of an urge to do it this year. I suppose you could call it a 'writer's block', or perhaps it's due to it being a rather depressing and uninspiring time in politics, a strong sense of apathy has set in. But this controversy over offshore processsing has got my blood boiling and in need of a good carthartic writing session!

The whole situation seems so utterly ridiculous to me. Let me get this straight - we want to send these desperate people to Malaysia, a country that is not a signatory to the Refugee Convention and has a history of incredibly inhumane treatment of asylum seekers?

Offshore processing, of any kind, is inhumane, and not to mention incredibly expensive. The recent High Court decision has also highlighted that it is actually illegal. And yet, instead of this causing the Labor Cabinet to think that perhaps it is time to take the compassionate route and start processing asylum claims (in a speedy manner) on our own shores once again, it looks like they are going to do a very dirty deal with the Opposition to make offshore processing legal.

I may be incredibly naive but I still can't comprehend how the ALP can allow this to happen (although, it should be noted that there are some very unhappy backbenchers). Asylum seekers risk their lives by going on incredibly unsafe and over-crowded boats, leaving their homes and often, family behind, in order to find a safe place to live. Such a small number arrive on boats in Australia, compared to the number that flee to other countries, and yet there seems to be such panic and fear amongst the populace, that is only exarcerbated by our leaders. And please don't question their validity as refugees. Over 90 per cent of asylum seekers arriving on boats are found to be genuine.

So they have genuine reasons to fear for their lives, and yet we feel the need to send innocent and desperate people who are crying out for our help to some overseas place and lock them up in detention centres with conditions worse than the gaols we put our most dangerous criminals in. Does this make rational sense to anyone?!

I want to know where the compassionate leadership is. I want to know what happened to the 'left' ideas that used to drive Gillard. She is playing politics with people's lives, just like the Howard Government did for so many years. We elected a Labor Government with such hope that compassionate politics and policies would now have a part to play, and for a short time they did when the Rudd Government abandoned the awful Temporary Protection Visas, but with one step forward, with Gillard we've gone ten steps back.