KJ Elizabeth

Reason has always suggested to me that the cancer epidemic in this country and other developed countries around the world is caused by man made toxins and chemicals.

It’s been reported today that Tasmanian Devils are carrying high levels of flame retardant carcinogenic chemicals. The chemicals are used in the manufacture of many products (such as white goods & computers) and are presently the subject of an international campaign to be banned.

Tassie Devils are in the process of being wiped out by a contagious face tumor of unknown origin. The chemicals that have been found in the devils are known to weaken the immune system. The correlation between the high levels of chemicals and the tumor is simply that at this stage (a correlation, not a cause) but it appears to be linked some how, and scientists now have another clue in the quest to solve the tumor puzzle.

The finding of high levels of chemicals in the Devils raises questions as to whether these chemicals are also in high levels in the human population, and scientists have called for urgent studies to investigate this possibility. If a link between the chemicals and the tassie devil face tumor is established, perhaps this will lead to a change in direction among cancer research that is more focused on the links between man made products and cancer in humans. One wonders why a critical eye has, relatively speaking, barely been cast on industry and it’s consequences on human health. It took us some time to accept the dangers of nicotine and asbestos, hopefully we’ll move much faster this time. But as always, industry will do its up most to protect its financial interests. What will you do to protect yours?

If you wish to do what you can to preserve your health, I think it’s best to go organic and use as many natural, unprocessed and untreated materials in your day to day living as possible.

Filed under Environment No Comments

I’ve heard this question bandied about a lot throughout the coverage of the presidential nomination campaign: Is America ready for a black or female President? The word “ready” is interesting. It’s a polite way of asking Does America still have racism and sexism in its heart? If America is not “ready” for a black or female President, it means America still has significant levels of racism and sexism that would prevent a black or female candidate being elected. So the question of whether America is “ready” is more a question of whether race and sex effects how people view these candidates, and how they will vote.

My own view is that if Hilary is not elected, it won’t be because she is a woman, it will be because she is Hilary Clinton. There’s too much baggage with that name. She is not her husband, but she has been in the game a long time. It is time for not only a new face, but a new family! I’m uncomfortable with the prospect of the last four presidents of the US coming from 2 families, Bush and Clinton. You have to wonder about the veracity of America’s democracy when two families are hogging the top job.

People assume I would support Hilary Clinton because she is a woman and I am a feminist. I want to see more women in positions of power, sure, but I also want to see the right person in the job. Supporting a female candidate because she is a woman is not smart feminism in my books. Maybe I’ve watched too much of The West Wing, but I’m backing Obama.

Filed under Politics No Comments

Filed under Silliness No Comments

In a story on the Andy Warhol retrospective currently showing at a gallery in Queensland, The 7:30 report just incorrectly said that Andy Warhol was shot by a woman from a “bizarre group called the society for cutting up men’.

WRONG!

Valerie Solanas, the woman who shot Andy Warhol, did not belong to a group called The Society for Cutting up Men (SCUM).

SCUM was more or less a hypothetical organisation dreamt up by Solanas in her essay The SCUM Manifesto. SCUM was a concept, a literary device, not a real group that Solanas was a member of. Her shooting Andy Warhol had nothing to do with SCUM. She thought Warhol had ripped her off. Solanas was unhinged, but SCUM was not real.

There is so much hysteria and myths around Solanas and that essay. The right-wing men’s rights movement in particular have a serious preoccupation with it. The work is completely misunderstood. It’s not literal. If any body actually bothered to read the whole essay they would find that it is highly critical of women as well, and capitalism.

If you’re curious you can read more about my take on SCUM.

Filed under Gender Issues No Comments

Filed under Politics No Comments