Mutterings in 07'

An older gentleman sits next to me at the office in St Leonards. Currently in the most stable time his life, he is part of a substantial yet fading population - the old caucasian Australian male. A man of decorum, charming and funny in the most inoffensive manner possible, he has earnt his place as the most lovable fellow in the office, and he's brilliant at what he does. He is a local North Shore boy, shielded by a life of prosperity and distance from the inner suburb experience. He speaks earnestly (and without any sense of superiority or haughtiness) of holiday houses, frequent flyer miles, stocks, bonds, and various financial securities which make me drift off to my happy place. He has lived through the conversion from imperial to metric systems, and through at least 15 governments from Menzies to Howard (the last bastion of hope for his generation). He is, with the watered down profile provided, a liberal voter.

Slightly out of touch with the complexities of modern Australia, he turned and said to me with the innocence and sincerity of tone he has become well known for, 'I wonder why Howard is dropping so much in the polls when he's done such a good job'. This is the group which the Howard government has known all along would support them thanks to economic luck and a healthy tax cut for their end of the spectrum. For the most part blunders such as Tampa, Cornelia Rau's wrongful detention, hesitation to sign the Kyoto protocol, and the farce that was the Dr.Haneef debacle (among other incidents) slip through their collective consciousness. It's the same conservative mentality that believes the Howard governments' arguement against the development of nuclear power plants. They mustve forgotten how far nuclear technology (and safety) has come since Chernobyl.

However it's also true to a large extent that they are not to blame, that they are a product of their generation and their environment: one of prosperity and a much more homogenous population, perhaps that which it seemed the Coalition strived for in its later years. The point is, scathing and hissing at liberal voters is useless, better instead to opt for a silently patronising tone and recognising the irony of what they stand for: Howards 'better Australia'. Multimillion dollar tax-payer funded campaigns advertising a new 'citizenship test', funded largely by people who wouldnt pass it themselves. Call an election, then call a tax cut, people imagine Costello standing on the corner of George st handing out $34 million. Part of the coalitions success then, is appealing to individuals' base attractiveness to money and the undeniable appeal of seeing a few more dollars next to their name. This makes it extremely difficult for the layman to see through and realise the ironically conservative nature of the current government. The prosperity they promise cannot come from holding onto our old ideas, pass strict laws on immigration (read: terrorism), regress from current trends in nuclear and environmental policy, and generally not move in the direction of the rest of the world.

The Liberal government, by and large, is like the old man sitting next to me, just without the charm. They stand defensive, eyes weary and ragged, legs shoulder width and palms stretched outwards in 'stop position', in the hope that time somehow runs counterclockwise. They speak dreamily of material prosperity without actually noticing that the rest of the world speaks another language. So i'll continue to enjoy the company of the silvertail next to me, and hope that with a new government both our generations will be better off, only he might not know why.

Racism in Cricket

There is absolutely no excuse for racism in sport. Although this is somewhat a narrow minded view in the global context of equality and fairness the issue only seems to attract any media attention when presented on the sporting field. Recently, Andrew Symonds complained that he was the subject of racial abuse on the cricket field during the fifth one day cricket International against India in Vadodhara. Symonds complained that he was subject to “monkey chants” from the Indian crowd who constantly tormented him whilst he was fielding at the boundary rope.

Let me ask you: how is a monkey chant racial abuse? Does Symonds believe that he is cross bred with a gorilla and a human; maybe two gorillas? If not, then he should not be affected by such claims. Now, any slur can be taken offensive especially whilst under the pressure of a tightly contested sporting event. However, India was thrashed by Australia by nine wickets. Where is the pressure? Mr Symonds, you are softer than a kindergarten girl who cries after being teased for wearing pigtails to school.

This incident is being compared to other instances of racial abuse. For example, during the Australia – South Africa game at the WACA ground in Perth South African players were racially abused as ‘kaffirs’ whilst fielding on the boundary rope. Such taunts are several degrees more severe than a ‘monkey’ chant. Although the Symonds event in Vadodhara is rather trivial in comparison to other instances of racism in cricket, it does highlight an important issue.

In the global context, racial abuse is regarded as a terrible offence and much is done to abolish it. However, in places such as the sub-continent racism is common. People often refer to another’s caste, class, birth, status etc in a derogatory manner as a method of slight. In Australia, such actions are regarded as outrageous and so the media condemn the crowd. But in India, the slander which Australian cricketers torment the Indian cricketers with is regarded as outrageous in India in the same way Symond’s monkey chants are taken to be offensive here. If the same slander that Australian players use on other International teams were used in a local Australian state game it would not affect the local players. That is, the manner in which sledging affects a player is simply due to a clash of cultures.

What was it that caused Harbhajan Singh to confront the entire Australian team after he was dismissed in the second ODI at Eden Gardens? India was also losing at that point and it would seem rather silly to confront a side that is thrashing you to all corners of the cricket field. Nevertheless, Singh stood up to the Australian side and had to be pulled away from the umpire. This was regarded as comical by the Australian media. When Singh complained of inappropriate sledging, the media portrayed the Indians as sore losers. Obviously, something terrible was said (if you were an Indian with Indian values as opposed to Australian cultural values). So, to an Australian player it is mild offence; to an Indian player it is terrible slander.

The simple fact is that the content of Australian sledging is insensitive to other cultures. This is simply ignored because Australia keeps winning and so the complaints of the other team are simply taken as poor sportsmanship. Now the attention is shifted towards the Indians: no doubt there will be an investigation and consequences. But the simple fact is that Australian players are sore losers. If they are going to sledge in whatever manner they wish then they should accept sledging in whatever manner the opposition wishes. Given that the content of sledging cannot be monitored if sledging is allowed, then action must be taken to police what is said on the field.

Much of the sledging occurs at the crease around the batsmen and so it is a simple task for the umpire to judge whether sledges are inappropriate. Psychological games are part of cricket but it should not be interpreted to use issues irrelevant to the game of cricket to upset the batsman. Umpires should therefore be given the power to award penalties or fines to players who sledge inappropriately. Such a practice is logical since they are at the centre of the playing field and can hear all that is said to the batsman.

Once the players clean up their act all this media attention can focus on crowd behaviour. The idiots who taunt players in any manner should be harshly dealt with after being banned from cricket games. Usually, much of what fuels the crowd is what is either said or observed by the crowd. Singh’s confrontational stance to the Australian players during the second ODI obviously fuelled ideas of unfair abuse amongst the Indian public. Put simply, if we are to remove racism from sport it must begin with the players. In cricket, this begins with policing the content of sledging.

Dress

If Adam and Eve had not eaten the forbidden fruit then we would never have to face the everyday dilemma of deciding what to wear. We would all be naked and content, happy that we are free from those prison bars that form the fibres of the clothing that we wear. However, frolicking through our urban jungle with nothing but a smile is merely a fleeting thought. The dilemma of deciding what to wear still hangs over us like a grey storm cloud.

Every day is faced with the daunting task of compiling an outfit. Often this decision is made after having carefully considered a number of prerequisites. Where is it that we are going? What is the occasion? Who will be present? What are they likely to wear? Have I worn this combination before? It would seem sane to consider the weather or look at what is comfortable or at what is not dirty. Yet we still ask those relatively simple questions which also prove somewhat difficult to answer. This leaves us staring at the mirror, digressing into a more dangerous topic – the faults that the mirror reveals.

The fact is that in today’s society, dress plays an important role. Firstly, there are the obvious social consequences. These namely include image, status and expressions of individuality or culture. Secondly, there are political consequences. That is, the dress we wear will help us to pose as confident, intelligent, respectable and trustworthy. Often we would employ such tactics in both the interview room and the court chambers. In such cases, the dress makes that ‘silent recommendation’. When it seems that people these days often judge a book by its cover, it adds more stress to that every day dress decision.

Nevertheless, clothes are only a ‘title page’ to your identity, character and person. Although it is important to edge out competition to win over either the opposite sex, boss or judge by dressing well what is more important is the substance that the clothes encase. If we lived in a world where our judgement was based purely on visual consideration, then ‘clothes make the man’, however this is not the case. Dress may divert another’s attention away from our faults but the minute we open our mouths they can gauge who we truly are. Dress only provides a good starting point and plays no further part in the development of a relationship.

We often regard our dress as the key to success when it comes to developing relationships. Yet if we are truly confident with ourselves, then the dress plays only the practical role and not the political one. More often than not, those who are confident with themselves often find that they are not faced with the daily dress dilemma but also never find themselves analysing their reflection. This confidence stems from a simple belief: the person sees in himself what he wants others to see in him. Armed with this ideal, the dress chooses itself.

FYI

From the Desk of:
Mr.Alfred Waled Ubani

With great pleasure I Mr.Alfred Waled Ubani, working with a bank here in Nigeria as a Manager. I am writing you in respect of a foreign customer (an Oil consultant/contractor with our National Oil & Liquidified Gas Sector) whom made a US$25M depository for an investment program that has remained dormant for years now. Hence, I have decided to contact you due to the urgency of this transaction.

On my personal investigation, I discovered that the account holder died on December 2002 in the Ukrainian aircraft crash. I made further investigation and discovered that the customer died without making a WILL on the depository.

It may interest you to know that I am only contacting you as a foreigner because this money cannot be approved to a local Bank account here,but can only be approved to a foreigner with an account since the money is in US Dollars. I have decided as a matter of urgency upon this discovery now seek your permission to have you stand as next of kin to the fund as No one has ever come forward to claim this fund. It may also interest you to know that I have secured from the probate an ORDER OF MADAMUS to locate any of deceased beneficiary. In accordance to Nigerian Law, fund deposited for over a period of Six (6) years without claim will be reverted to the Government treasury, if nobody applies to claim this fund.

I will like you to provide immediately your full Names and Address,Date of Birth, Occupation, Tel & Fax Numbers so that an Attorney will be able to prepare the necessary documents and affidavit which will put you in place as the next of kin. The Attorney will draft and carry out the notarization of the WILL and also obtain the necessary documents and letter of probate/administration in your favour for the transfer.

At the successful conclusion of this business, your goodself shall be entitled to have 40% that is, USD$10M of the total money while I will have 55% that is USD$13.750M and 5% that is SD$1.250M for communications and other expenses. I am ready to invest a reasonable percentage of mine into any viable business you suggest as a joint partner. Your percentage will also be a source of upliftment. You have absolutely nothing to LOSE in assisting me instead, you have so much to GAIN. Be rest assured that this transaction would be most profitable for both of us.

Your response is highly imperative as this is a TWO-man business deal transaction as I shall then provide you with more details and relevant documents that will help you understand the transaction. I need your assistance and co-operation to this reality as I have done my Home-work and fine tune the best way to create you as the beneficiary while I would use my connection and money to secure almost all the paperwork for this transaction which will be done by the Attorney and my position as the Branch Manager guarantees the successful execution of this transaction with you as the beneficiary to this fund.

I will appreciate your early reply for commencement of business.Contact me for acknowledgment by E-mail and whereby you are not interested,please indicate in your reply so that I can seek for the assistance of someone else.

If this proposal is acceptable by you, I expect that you will not take undue advantage of the trust I Will bestow in you. I await your urgent response.

Thanks with great regards.

Mr.Alfred Waled Ubani

Food poisoning your career?

A recent story on www.chow.com for you amusement.

Leftovers: The Career Killer
Does bringing your lunch hurt your chances for success?

By Helena Echlin

Dear Helena,

This coworker of mine, who is above me in the company hierarchy, usually brings her lunch to work—leftovers in Tupperware. The other day she asked me, somewhat seriously, whether it didn’t make her look less “successful” to bring her lunch, and whether it might hurt her in climbing the corporate ladder. I’d never thought about it before that moment, but then I wondered—did it? Don’t you have to look successful to be successful? —Concerned About My Friend’s Climb Through Middle Management

Dear Concerned About My Friend,

Bringing leftovers in Tupperware is like wearing an old cardigan to work: There’s nothing wrong with it, but it doesn’t project power and success. What you eat can send a subliminal message about who you are, just as much as what you wear. As Beverly Langford, author of The Etiquette Edge: The Unspoken Rules for Business Success, says: “Your lunch is part of your nonverbal communication, just like your jewelry.”

So what kind of meal says “management material”? The ideal lunch is expensive. “Having sushi delivered to the office reeks of power—and wasabi,” says Stan McElrae, creative director in a San Antonio advertising firm. By contrast, a Tupperware of last night’s lasagne makes it look like you’re struggling. “Those who pack a lunch are … typically crunched for cash,” claims Rupert, a legislative aide to a senator in Washington, DC, who did not want his real name used.

Your lunch should also be easy to consume. Langford recommends a sandwich, explaining: “You can eat it quickly; it makes you look like you’re a go-getter and you want to save time.” You shouldn’t bring lunch, because that could suggest you’re not completely focused on your work. People will know that you chose to spoon chicken fricassee into a container rather than get to the office five minutes earlier. Says McElrae: “I don’t think about that kind of thing when I get up in the morning; I’m thinking about whether I’ll get to Starbucks and what work I have to do that day.”

Another reason not to bring your own lunch is that it sets you apart. “It means you can never go to lunch with anyone,” Langford says. “It sends a signal: ‘Don’t invite me to go out with you.’” Even if your colleagues bring their food back and eat with you in the office, you’re still isolating yourself by eating separate food. Langford remembers: “I had a colleague once who was vegetarian and always brought her lunch. It was like a statement, ‘I’m different.’ It was tiresome.”

Most important of all, never bring anything smelly. Langford says, “One of the biggest complaints about working together is smells.” Sam, a legislative aide in Washington, DC, who asked that his last name not be used, particularly cautions against nuking fish leftovers in the microwave. “How do you contain the stench? If you close the kitchen door, the room will be foul for days.”

Put simply, if you bring the rest of last night’s fish curry, you risk losing the position to the guy who’s using pizza as a networking tool. As McElrae says, “There is nothing like ordering a pizza to unite everyone in the office.”

While I agree that home-packed-lunch might send off subliminal messages in the minds of your colleagues, the idea that you are just not cut to be a senior manager because of what you eat sounded absurd to me.

Ofcourse what you eat might dictate how you eat it. For example trying to eat 'chapati salan' at your desk might not make up for the tidiest meal thus reflecting poorly on your table manners etc.

Secondly, if you are really that self-conscious about how others might perceive you when eating left-overs from last night and thus susceptible to peer pressure, you just might not be senior-management material anyways.

I say, eat what you want and set a trend! Be a leader if you want that Director's position!

Link to Original story

Slinging Shit

This evening on National Nine News the headline read “the Naked Truth – Kevin Rudd visits a Strip club in New York”. Kevin Rudd has recently admitted visiting a New York strip joint after a conference in 2003 after “too many drinks”. In the wake of an election announcement, the timing is extraordinary. Recently it seems that Team Howard is trying to sling as much dirt as they can on the Rudd Train to see how much of it can stick.

A couple of days ago, the Australian stock market fell markedly reflected by the fall in the dollar. Team Howard subsequently stated that the opposition does not have the skills nor the experience to manage such a situation. But how does the Government control short term effects on the stock market? I am sure policies passed by the government have an effect on trading yet these are only seen in the long term. What sort of skills and experience are you talking about Mr Howard? The same economic skills that kept interest rates low? Perhaps Mr Howard called the US Federal Reserve and told them to start playing with their figures. Good work, Jonny.