Sharing is Caring

I'm a little unsure about this, but I thought I'd share my paper with whoever wanted to read it. It's a rather personal thing for me to share, not that the topic is personal to me just that ya'll are either gonna think I'm hella smart or "what the hell is she doin gettin a masters degree for?!"  Which, come to think of it, you might still think that AND think that I'm hella smart ;)  I can never explain what my degree is. I always just pray that when I say Master of Public Health that people just know what it is.  The way that I just know what it is.  I still get people who have never heard it and think I'm going to be a nurse.  Actually, I get hospital administrator a lot now that its got 'masters' in front of it.  It gets even more hairy when they ask what I want to do with it. Like I know!  Though, maybe this paper will answer some of those questions for all of us.  I found it so endlessly interesting that while I only had to write 1,000 words tonight and could have been done in an hour, I spent another 5 hours (also missing my last bus home and forcing myself to get a taxi) researching and finding things I wanted to include (like the Vatican!)  I suppose if I had to write a thesis for my Masters, it would be on this topic.  (With all the whinging I've been doing the last few weeks, lets all be thankful that I don't have to write a thesis!)  Feel free to tell me what you think here or privately if you like.  I'm interested to see where people (even conservative peoples) stand.  I'm also interested to see what y'all think of it academically since one of my main grievances with Sydney Uni is the harsh harsh grading system that has me cursing everytime I get an assignment back.  (Just remember sisters, its already haded in, no need to red line it!)  SO without further ado, I give you my paper:

RELIGIONS INFLUENCE ON INTERNATIONAL FUNDING FOR SEXUAL AND REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH AND RIGHTS



Few topics are more controversial than reproductive health, religion, and international aid. Religion by its very nature has influenced foreign policy since the beginning of civilization. In the last few decades as international aid has increased, religion’s influence has undoubtedly played a role. This paper will explore religions influence on international aid directed toward sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR).

The Millennium Development Goals and the International Conference on Population and Development

With the advent of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) on gender equality (3), maternal health (5) and combating HIV and AIDS (6), funding initiatives have shifted from the previous commitment to reproductive health as a whole to a fragmented approach. In 1994 at the International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD, 179 countries and over 1200 NGOs agreed on a 20 year plan to address SRHR (Glasier, 2006). In Cairo, a broad set of ‘packages’ were agreed on which included 1) family planning services, 2) basic reproductive health services, 3) sexually transmitted diseases-HIV/AIDS: prevention, treatment and care and 4) basic research, data and population and development policy analysis. Despite this commitment, reproductive health was controversially excluded from the MDGs just six years later. The exclusion of SRHR is the result of religious influence in and of itself. Conservative and religious states (Iran, Iraq, Libya, Sudan, the Vatican, and the United States) yielded their power over the UN based on religious ideology (Glasier, 2006).

Even though the exclusion fragmented funding and decreased funding to family planning and basic reproductive rights, the amount of money flowing into HIV and AIDS and maternal health is higher than ever. The UN is still committed to reproductive health; in 2005 the World Health Assembly (except the United States) reiterated their commitment to a global reproductive health strategy. There is recognition among the international community that “the MDGs and the reproductive health agenda are each the means and the ends of each other. Each requires, sustains, and promotes the other” (Malwade Basu, 2005). The UN is continuing their objective to fight for SRHR through a number of sects, most notably, UN Population Fund (UNFPA) whose main goal is “to reduce poverty and to ensure that every pregnancy is wanted, every birth is safe, every young person is free of HIV, and every girl and woman is treated with dignity and respect.” (United_Nations_Population_Fund, 2010).

The United Nations and the Vatican

When it comes to religious influence, the UN walks a fine line. Technically religion should not influence UN decisions at all, which is summarized by the 1981 Declaration of Religious Tolerance. The Declaration states that it is wrong to discriminate based on their religious beliefs and beliefs should be fully respected and guaranteed (http://www.religioustolerance.org/un_dec.htm). The UN may be tolerant of religious views, but that doesn’t mean that it is not influenced by religion. The Vatican holds a Nonmember Permanent Observer position on the council and allegedly are granted the same status as voting states in UN conferences(Kissling, 1999). Regardless of the Vatican’s voting status, they have undeniable influence on voting members. The Vatican and more conservative states opposed much of the ICPD vehemently and are charged with being behind the exclusion of SRHR in the MDGs (United_Nations_Population_Fund, 2002, Glasier, 2006).

At the time of the ICPD, the United States was under the Democratic Presidency of Bill Clinton. Vice President Al Gore and a large set of representatives attended the conference to show support for the cause (United_Nations_Population_Fund, 2002). However, six years later at the time the MDGs were being drafted power in the United States had shifted to Republican President George W. Bush. President Bush is largely known for making policies based on his conservative evangelical Christian background. Bush, the Vatican, and conservative Islamic countries oppose many aspects of SRHR (Glasier, 2006) and are charged with blocking SRHR’s inclusion in the MDGs. Barbara Crossette quoted Ambassador Gert Rosenthal of Guatemala in her paper Reproductive Health and the Millennium Development Goals: the Missing Link well when he says: “Why reproductive health wasn’t put up as one of the seven domestic policy goals—I think the answer’s obvious. It’s a very contentious issue just as it is domestically in this country [the United States]. A lot of Islamic countries and countries that are close to the Holy See prefer not to talk about the subject, in spite of the Cairo declaration.” (Crossette, 2005).

The United States, The Global Gag Rule, and PEPFAR

It is not only the UN that religion influences regarding international funding. As stated above, the United States, the largest ODA funder by volume, is heavily influenced by religion depending on which political party is in power. Under Democratic Presidencies (Clinton and Obama), the US is generally less religiously influenced though religious rhetoric has been present under every president. Religion has always been present in foreign policies from the United States stemming from Protestant themes of anti-authority, liberalization, and individualism that go back to the 17th century with the United State’s independence from Great Britain (Verclas, 2008).

In the United States, the dichotomy between Democratic and Republican policies is never ending. The ideological agenda of the United States under conservative presidencies has resulted loss of funds from initiatives that promote and improve SRHR. In 1973, President Nixon created the Helms Amendment which prohibits any U.S. Aid money to be used to perform abortions, domestically and internationally. This amendment has existed for over 35 years without much dissent. However, in 1984, President Ronald Reagan instituted the Mexico City Policy as a way to reinforce the Helms Amendment(Crane, 2004). Becoming widely known as the US Global Gag Rule, Non-Governmental Organizations could not receive monies from USAID or the State Department to “perform abortions in cases other than rape, incest, or threat to the mother’s life, provide counseling and referral for abortion, or lobby to make abortion legal or more available in their country” (Crane, 2004). Not only could the NGOs not use US monies for these initiatives, but they were ineligible for any USAID money if they performed these services with funds from any other source. These restrictions are profoundly harsh on women’s health programs and have been attributed with the closing of many women’s health clinics due to funding loss(Fillinger, 2006).

The Gag Rule stayed in effect under George HW Bush, but was rescinded shortly in Clinton’s presidency. Unfortunately, as Clinton faced a religiously funded Congress, in 1999 a light version of the Gag Rule was re-instated(Crane, 2004). In 2001, under George W. Bush, the Gag Rule was re-instated. This time, NGOs still could not receive funds from the US if they provided any of the services mentioned as well as being required to enforce the Gag Rule on other NGOs they worked with, severely restricting partnership abilities and limiting free speech and free association (Skuster, 2004). If the Gag Rule were instituted for US based NGOs it would be deemed unconstitutional due to its prohibition of advocacy and restrictions on partnerships. Foreign NGOs however, are outside the scope of the constitution and therefore are not protected(Saunders, 2004).

Access to family planning has been proven to prevent unintended pregnancies, which would therefore reduce the number of abortions (Fillinger, 2006). Even though there’s been a lot of research done to show the effectiveness of family planning services, these studies were not taken into account when the Gag Rule was re-instated. Evidence based, medically accurate information was disregarded in exchange for Christian beliefs of abstinence education and anti-abortion. The Gag Rule was intended to curb the number of abortions performed worldwide (Cohen, 2001). This however, hasn’t happened and most likely contributed to an increase of abortions as well as severely hampering HIV/AIDS initiatives and other SRHR initiatives. Fortunately, the Gag Rule was rescinded again on President Obama’s first day in office (Jakobsen, 2009), though should a republican president take over in 2012 or 2016, it is likely that the Gag Rule would again be reinstated.

The Global Gag Rule is a clear example of a heavily religiously influenced policy from the United States. George W. Bush increased funds to HIV and AIDS during his presidency, which surprised many in the public health field (Crane, 2004). However, all of his policies are underwritten with his religious ideologies. The Presidents Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief has also come under a lot of scrutiny for pressuring NGOs to conform to religious ideology or face loss of funding (Saunders, 2004). It is an unfortunate situation for many NGOs, the US is the largest funder of international aid, yet the restrictions that come with it hamper their efforts considerably.

Europe

The most generous European nations include Denmark, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway and Sweden who all give the UN recommended amount of 0.07% of the GNI to Official Development Assistance (ODA) (Claeys, 2004). Europeans often don’t understand why the United States can allow religion to play such a significant role in the policy decision making process, but it’s important to realize that religion plays a role in every society. On the surface European countries generally oppose allowing religion to influence funding choices(Verclas, 2008). The prominent view is that it’s the government’s duty to restrict religion as a form of protection of religious freedoms (Verclas, 2008). Germany for example is one of the top funders of foreign aid, believes itself to be a very secular country and doesn’t like the idea of the Church influencing foreign policy. However, while the church does not blatantly influence policy, it may have an influence that is more behind the scenes. Verclaus (2008) states that “Without significant public dissent the government collects church taxes that support the main religious institutions in Germany [and] religious organizations dispense most of Germany’s foreign aid.” The level of influence the Church has on the government and foreign aid would be difficult to determine but it would be foolish to say that there is no influence.

Arab and Islamic Nations

There is a considerable lack of information regarding Islamic nations and funding trends, especially toward SRHR. Most of the information available originates from battle over the ICPD and the MDGs. Conservative Islamic nations such as Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq and Libya had serious grievances with the ICPD and were part of the dissenters that kept SRHR off the MDGs . A few states even boycotted the ICPD stating, “We are against these issues of homosexuals, abortion and the ultimate freedom of women, which will allow for the expansion of immortality in the streets.” (Cohen, 1994). Based on this information, it is safe to assume that Islamic states do not offer international aid to SRHR directly. Furthermore, there are no Islamic members of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).

Arab nations are giving aid, regardless of whether there is much analysis of the aid they give. It is estimated that between 1974 and 1994, Arab countries gave on average 1.5% of their GNI as ODA to developing countries, which is considerably higher than the UN recommended 0.07% that most OECD members still have trouble reaching (Neumayer, 2003). Through Neumayer’s research (2003) Arab nations are more likely to give to the poorest countries, other Arab countries, sub-Saharan Africa, and countries that have a UN voting record that is similar to Saudi-Arabia (I.e. against Israel). The information available does not find a heavy connection between Islam and aid from Arab countries and does not address Arab countries funding toward SRHR (Neumayer, 2003).

Faith Based Organizations

Religion has an enormous influence on states and bi-lateral agencies in the world. With the majority of people subscribing to certain religion, it is inevitable that their views would seep into policies around the world. Religious views of individuals and groups are held with great passion and importance, but their influence doesn’t need to be seen as negative. There are thousands of examples of Faith Based Organizations (FBOs) providing services in all areas of health and well being. World Vision is one of the largest Christian FBOs working toward poverty eradication and education. Catholics for a Choice is a group who consistently advocate revoking the Permanent Observer states of the Vatican within the UN which, even they support the Catholic Church, they see as a breach of separation of church and state and an example of the Church overstepping its bounds.

In terms of SRHR, there are still many examples of FBOs trying to do their part. FBOs have been especially important in countries in Latin America where Catholicism is a predominant force and are working with the health and human rights issues of people living with HIV and AIDS(Pitkin Derose, 2010). Many religious groups recognize the fight for improved SRHR is a human rights issue and therefore believe religion and the Church should be involved in a positive and proactive way. The International Interfaith Network for Development and Reproductive Health produced a report for the World Summit in 2005 calling for the inclusion of SRHR to the MDGs(IINDPH, 2005). There are also, perhaps surprisingly, Islamic based organizations that are fighting for SRHR. Islamic Relief is an NGO that is “dedicated to alleviating the poverty and suffering of the world’s poorest people” and released a large report that breaks down different SRHR issues and explains how Islam can successfully address them (Islamic_Relief, 2009).

Conclusion

Partnerships are imperative in public health. The fight for improved mortality and quality of life depend on innovative partnerships. To believe that public health and SRHR can exist in a secular bubble would be a serious misstep. The challenge is going to be finding the balance between using religious influence to further the cause without allowing it to influence harmful policies. There aren’t necessarily any answers to this conundrum; it will continue to be a trial and error effort that needs to be closely monitored.






CLAEYS, V. W., E. 2004. Official Development Assistance Levels and Spending for Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights since the ICPD. Geneva: International Planned Parenthood Federation European Network.

COHEN, S. 2001. Global Gag Rule: Exporting Antiabortion Ideology at the Expense of American Values. The Guttmacher Report on Public Policy: Issues and Implications.

COHEN, S. R., C. 1994. The Cairo Consensus: Population, Development and Women. Family Planning Perspectives, 26, 272-277.

CRANE, B. D., J. 2004. Power and Politics in International Funding for Reproductive Health: the US Global Gag Rule. Reproductive Health Matters, 12, 128-137.

CROSSETTE, B. 2005. Reproductive Health and the Millennium Development Goals: the Missing Link. Studies in Family Planning, 36, 71-79.

FILLINGER, T. 2006. Enhancing Human Security: US policies and their impact on women in sub-saharan Africa. Race Religion Gender & Class, 337.

GLASIER, A., GULMEZOGLU, A., SCHMID, G., GARCIA MORENO, C., & VAN LOOK, P. 2006. Sexual and Reproductive Health: a matter of life and death. The Lancet, 368, 1595-1607.

IINDPH 2005. A Faith-Filled Commitment to Development Includes a Commitment to Women's Rights and Reproductive Health. In: HEALTH, I. I. N. F. D. A. R. (ed.) Religious Reflections of the Millennium Development Goals. Washington, DC.

ISLAMIC_RELIEF 2009. Reproductive Health Policy. In: RELIEF, I. (ed.). Brimingham, UK: Islamic Relief.

JAKOBSEN, J. B., E. 2009. Religion, Politics and Gender Equality. Country Report: USA. In: DEPARTMENT OF WOMEN'S STUDIES, B. C. (ed.). New York: Columbia University.

KISSLING, F. 1999. The Vatican at the United Nations: A Cause for Concern. Human Rights Tribune. Catholics for a Free Choice.

MALWADE BASU, A. 2005. The Millenium Development Goals Minus Reproductive Health: An Unfortunate, but Not Disastrous Omission. Studies in Family Planning, 36, 132-134.

NEUMAYER, E. 2003. What Factors Determine the Allocation of Aid by Arab Countries and Multilateral Agencies? The Journal of Development Studies, 39, 134-147.

PITKIN DEROSE, K., KANOUSE, D., & KENNEDY, D. 2010. The Role of Faith-Based Organizations in HIV Prevention and Care in Central America, New York, Rand.

SAUNDERS, P. 2004. Prohibiting Sex Work Projects, Restricting Women's Rights: The International Impact of the 2003 US Global AIDS Act. Health and Human Rights, 7, 179-192.

SKUSTER, P. 2004. Advocacy in Whispers: the Impact of the USAID Global Gag Rule Upon Free Speech and Free Association in the Context of Abortion Law Reform in Three East African Countries. Journal of Gender and Law, 11, 97-126.

UNITED_NATIONS_POPULATION_FUND 2002. An agenda for people: the UNFPA through three decades, New York, New York University Press.

UNITED_NATIONS_POPULATION_FUND. 2010. About UNFPA [Online]. [Accessed].

VERCLAS, K. 2008. Religion and its Impact on Foreign Policy in the United States and Germany: Similarities and Differences. Baltimore: American Institute for Contemporary German Studies; The Johns Hopkins University.

I want to blog

I want to blog sooo bad!  I have a lot to say at the moment.  AND NO TIME TO SAY IT.  And if I wrote a blog now I wouldn't waste your time telling you about how my new living arrangement is surprisingly awesome, about my new travel plans, my view of the beach, or my excitement for more visitors.  I'd only talk about how I have to write these 4 damn papers and can't seem to get them done.  And then I'd be mad that I wasted my time writing a blog instead of writing the papers.  So I'm not going to write a blog and I'm not going to give you all the updates I know you are dying for, cuz I'm going to finish this damn paper.  So tomorrow I can complain about having to write 3 damn papers...

Homeless in Australia

and it feels amazing!  I didn't realize how much that apartment was sucking the life out of me.  As soon as I left for the last time the constant headache I've had all week lifted and I was seeing rainbows :) 

If you can't seem to figure out how you missed so much, no worries, it all happened within a three day period. Here's a brief synopsis of what happened:
-I told roommate I wanted to stay until first week of January.
-She said that didn't work for her and I'd have to leave at least three weeks earlier.
-Leaving three weeks earlier didn't work for me because its right before Christmas and New Years Eve and there are no reasonably priced hotels or hostels available then (I checked).
-I figure my best option is to leave asap, and finding a cheaper apartment will help with my money situation.
-I give roommate 3 weeks notice, which is one week more than I needed to and exactly what she asked for when I was deciding what to do.  Also, giving three weeks notice is a HUGE risk for me as apartments in Sydney go FAST and nothing stays available for three weeks and they won't hold it for you.  So I had to give notice without having a place to go.
-Roommate freaks out.  Says she's keeping the bond if she doesn't find someone else in that time.
-Roommate and I go at it over the bond.  Her argument, I'm leaving earlier than originally planned when I came in February, so she has grounds to keep the bond.  My argument is that original timeframe is null and void and never set in stone, and I'm giving 3 weeks notice so it shouldn't matter.
-She says that bond is dependent on whether she finds someone in three weeks.  So I could potentially pay rent the next two weeks, then she would keep my bond anyway. 
-I tell her to use my bond as my last two weeks rent as they are equal, to insure I get it back.  She's not cool with that.  I'm pretty sure she could kill me in my sleep without blinking an eye.  I decide for my own safety and sanity (since there's no way in hell Im paying rent without assurance that I get the bond back) I best move out this week.  Kicker is, even though I've paid through Friday, I have to leave today because I'm going away to Melbourne tomorrow morning.

Don't worry, things get better from here.

The same day as the original argument, I found and paid on a place at Bondi, Australia's most famous beach!  So I get to live on the beach, in a cool house for the summer.  It's an international house, all kids from all over staying for 1-6 months.  Its kinda like a hostel, but homey-er and cheaper!  There's even a garage (for my bike) and a backyard with a BBQ and a flippy cup table (you know I'm gonna like it now).  And free laundry!  So one hurdle covered.

Yesterday I packed up all my stuffed, found lovely friends who had space for me to store my bags while I'm away.  I also sold my scuba fins (which was hella exciting)!! So at least I have a place for my stuff while I'm gone. But it gets better.  The guy I'm renting from came today and took my furniture.  I could have left it, I don't need it, and its not that great of stuff anyway, but I did not want roommate to profit from it for being such a horrible person.  He came this afternoon to pick it up and gave me a ride to the city.  In the van on the way, he asked how long I'd been living there, I said 8 months, he responded, "oh my god, I would have killed myself, what a depressing apartment."  He had only been in there 2 minutes and I hadn't told him about the situation at all!  I felt so validated. He also said that roommate seemed very hostile.  Which is exactly the one word I would use to describe her.  Through conversation I told him about the situation, and he said he'd have a place for me when I get back from Melbourne either in the same house or a different one a block away, which will be done being renevated in a week.  AND that he'll comp me the extra weeks rent for the furniture and partly I think cuz he felt bad about how bad roommate is f'ing me over. 

K.A.R.M.A.

So now, I'm about to go to trivia with my friend Sandra, I'll crash at her place tonight, leave for Melbourne in the morning, where I'll meet up with my friend Tatiana!  I get to spend 3 days in Melbs, then I meet up with Hannah (from WI), Macca, and Little Macca and the four of us take off on our Great Ocean Road Walk.  4 days of walking, camping, partying.  Going.To.Be.Awesome.  When I get back late next Friday, I'll stay at Wake Up, the same hostel I stayed at when I first arrived.  Only because I get back so late on Friday and I have class at 9am the next day.  On Sunday I can move to Bondi!  And frantically write 4 massive papers before Ashley comes on the 23rd!!

I've been seriously lucky.  I have some awesome friends.  They really came through for me the last few days.  And made me feel a lot better that I a) have a support network should I ever need it; and b) I did the right thing and am not in the wrong in this situation.  As my friend Mika just said, "Only you. Only for you would everything work out perfectly without any planning."  Maybe its luck, or karma.  Honestly, I know its hokey but sometimes I think its Sara pulling some cosmic strings for me.  Whatever the source, I am grateful and hope I didn't just jinx it! 

My favorite holiday!

Its Election Day in Australia, aka My Favorite Holiday!!  Though, it was hardly a holiday for me this time round. It's been a crash course in all the differences in political systems and culture between the US and Australia.  My academic reason for coming to Australia was to compare a different yet similar government and public health system, what better way to do that than during a national election.

There are two main parties in Australia, Labor and Liberal.  The Liberal party is somewhat similar to our Democratic party....though in Australia the Liberal party is the conservative party.  And as the conservative party, they stuck with the stereotype and chose a twat to be their Prime Minister candidate (Tony Abbott).

The biggest difference I've learned tonight is the way they decide which party is in power.  I was under the misconception that they voted for their Prime Minister (PM) the same way we vote for President.  And based on who won that election, their party would seize power of the government.  What actually happens is that voters vote for their local Member of Parliament (MP) (Congress person) and which ever party wins the majority of seats seizes power of government.  So, even though Julia Gillard and Tony Abbott, the two up for PM have been the only two people campaigning, most voters don't actually vote for them.   (Some do, as they are MPs in their own districts, so if they don't win the PM spot, they will still be in Parliament.)  The poor politics part in my opinion is that the MPs, which are the people you actually vote for don't really campaign at all and assume that people will vote for them because of their party affiliation.  Which may be why independents and greens are becoming so popular....

This was a special election.  Kevin Rudd (Labor Party) was the PM 2 months ago.  The party held a political coup and ousted Kevin Rudd and made Julia Gillard PM.  It was VERY fast, literally happened over night.  Kevin Rudd proposed taxing the mining industry, which is Australia's largest industry.  This created a huge uproar and Labor started losing popularity.  So Labor decided Kevin was out, and Julia was in. Julia then called the election early (would have been early next year) so she could actually win her seat.

The early election seems to have backfired on Labor.  The Labor party has lost more seats than they expected and Australia is now facing a hung parliament.  Watching the election results tonight feels very much like watching election results in the US in 2004.  They won't know until at least tomorrow, and maybe later, who actually holds the majority of seats.  Adding folly to the situation, 4 seats have been won by parties other than Labor or Liberal.  The Greens (the largest independent party) historically won a seat in Melbourne, and three other independent candidates won seats, taking away from the main parties.  The winning party needs 76 seats to claim the majority, at the moment Labor has 70, Liberal has 71, Independents 4, and 5 seats undecided.  Which means, at this point, it is impossible for Labor to win the election.  The best they can hope for is a hung parliament.  Labor will have to take all 5 seats to win the majority.  Innnnteresting.

There is a different sense of tension then what I'm used to from working in politics in the States.  Because Labor and Liberal are quite similar, there isn't a sense that the country's going to hell in a hand basket if the opposing candidate wins.  Or at least thats how I sense it.  Aussie's might feel differently.  It does definitely seem like you're choosing the less of two evils though.  Julia Gillard does not inspire a lot of confidence in voters, but Tony Abbott is a bit scary.  Tony's main running point is "the boat people."  Aussie's hate folks that come over on boats...i.e. refugees.  Australia's refugees are very similar to the US's illegal immigrant population.  While its a serious issue and Australia needs to make sure that they aren't being taken advantage of by people smugglers...Tony Abbott and everyone who hates "boat people" just sound racist.  (similar to how people who hate all Mexicans because they may be illegal just sound racist).  Abbott's other running point was to end 'wasteful spending' of the Labor party.  It sounds a lot like conservatives saying they're "fiscally responsible" but in Australia's case, the Liberal party wants to only guarantee mothers 6 months paid maternity leave instead of a year, and there is absolutely no talk of scaling back their healthcare system.  So yea, Tony Abbott may not be the best choice for Australia but it doesn't seem like a whole lot will change now that he's in.

UPDATE: Its been a few days since the election....and still no result!  It turns out though that the independents have to choose a party to join.  If Julia gets them, Labor wins power.  If Tony wins, Liberal wins.  So Julia and Tony are courting the independents and throwing money and whatever they want at them to get them on their side.  I have a problem with this system.  If I voted for an independent I wouldn't want to them to have to commit to a party, they're independent of parties...  The other problem is that they are throwing money at them...way too much power for three MPs to have.

Interesting points

• Australians are required to vote.  By law.  As someone pointed out to me...that kinda goes against everything that democracy stands for...
• Politicians are about 10 years behind on campaign strategy.  I saw Julia's speech before the election and she said Tony Abbott oh more times than I could count.
• Australian election season is 5 weeks long.  (this one was at least, but Im pretty sure a regular election season would only be about 2 months)
• All elections are held on Saturdays

I'm Awesome

I had a pretty funny weekend I thought I might share. Friday night my friend Uschi and I went out to our favorite club...The Golden Sheaf! We love the Golden Sheaf because of the high proportion of seriously hot men that are there every weekend. We didn't know why, but we knew we liked it.

At the Golden Sheaf.

We may have figured out why there are so many hot guys there. After this weekend, I'm pretty sure its an undercover gay bar. Now I love me some gay bars from time to time, but in this instance, I'm disappointed. It was like a haven for hot men, now its a haven for hot unavailable men. It may also just be a convenient excuse as to why none of them approached us any of the numerous times we've been there.

After this revelation we decided to hit Kings Cross. Kings Cross, for those not in Australia, is Shady McShadesville. There's a whole tv series based on true stories of the drug/prostitution/corrupt police of Kings Cross called Underbelly which I refuse to watch on the premise that it scares the piss out of me. That being said, The Cross is also like the hottest place to go out at night. For reasons unknown to me its where everyone ends up going out. I tried going out in Kings Cross once and saw the most violent fight I've ever seen between a drunk man, a bouncer, and the police. After that I decided that Kings Cross wasn't for me. Why would we decide to go there then? Well, it was close, and open late, and both Uschi and I are dealing with Ben dramas that we wanted to forget about. Kings Cross it was!

When we first arrive, I saw a club named The Lincoln. How appropriate! In Chicago, I lived in Lincoln Square, off Lincoln Avenue, in the Land of Lincoln, with a dog named Lincoln. I thought it was a sign of great things to come and decided to take a picture. I was wrong. As I held my camera up and zoomed to take the picture, the bouncer came running over and grabbed my camera. Apparently you can't take pictures of the outside of a club. He really freaked out and wanted to know why we were taking a picture of the club. To which I told him the dumb Lincoln thing, he still was not impressed. Uschi talked him into taking our picture in front of the sign, which I thought was just as good. Until I saw the picture:

Really dude? You can't work a point and shoot camera?

After that debacle, I decided I didn't want to drink at that establishment. Who freaks out over a picture?! So we walked on. We were going to go to bars that didn't have a cover, so we ended up at a very dead pub and with in 2 minutes a guy approached us and asked "Got any drugs?" I literally laughed out loud, said no and rolled my eyes in the same moment. He went up to Uschi and tried to sell her drugs and listed off all the stuff he had. To which we laughed and promptly walked away. Seriously? Kings Cross you are living up to your reputation.

I've heard of World Bar many times, but never been. All I know is that they serve your drinks out of teapots and people tend to steal the teapots. Uschi and I decided to bend our no-cover rule to go to World Bar. I went up to the bouncer to ask what the cover was. I was willing to pay $5, I would've paid $10 but that was pushing it. The cover was $15. No effing way. I hate the idea of covers anyway. I don't feel that I should have to pay to spend money in your establishment. And I am definitely not paying the cost of 2 drinks! We tried another bar with a cover...that one...$20. I laughed in the bouncers face and walked away.

After that we gave up and went to get a burrito. Then took a cab home. Kings Cross, I am not a fan.

Last night (Saturday) my friend Alexis had a party at her apartment. There was Flippy Cup. It was epic. And I must say that my Flippy Cup skills came back just like riding a bike! Early in the night, I lost possession of my phone. A girl I had just met took it and apparently was texting a 'Ben.' I wasn't completely unaware of what was going on, but I couldn't be bothered to care what she said, lol. The string of messages that resulted were completely inappropriate and hilarious. I'm pretty sure I won't be hearing from that Ben again.

The really funny part of last night was after I left the party. I stopped to drunkenly get a kabab. Kababs are everywhere in Sydney. The equivalent of getting Taco Burrito King at 2am. I can only eat them after drinking because I'm pretty sure there's about 3,000 calories in each one. And they're delicious. I took my happy self and my kabab home where I proceeded to not send drunken text messages or drunk dials, but drunk skyping. I took it up a WHOLE new level. But really, it was only Jacob because with the time difference, calling him at 3am is actually perfect ( I think its like 7pm in Norway then). Recapping the conversation with him today he told me that it was "a very Kassi-like conversation." I basically went on an egotistical narcissistic rant. I told him over and over again that I'm awesome and he's an ass for not seeing it. Ha! After making him feel like an ass I was "very sweet in a very odd way." Classic Kassi right there. I may have also done a bit of bragging about how tone my legs are and my new found ability to do full push ups.  He introduced me to this hilarious song that he dedicated as my theme song, and I couldn't agree more. Except that I actually am awesome :)

Beware:  The video will make you laugh so hard your drink comes squirting out of your nose.  Also, its heavy on the cursing.

The quest thats consumed my life

I'm not sure you all appreciate my blog titles as much as I do :)

My life has been consumed, more than normal, with trying to lose weight.  I say more than normal because ever since I actually succeeded at losing weight, all I can think about is losing more!  Since its always on my mind, and I'm feeling especially helpless as of late, I've decided to share my strategies and frustrations as a way to hold myself accountable. 

I'm feeling helpless to lose more mostly because I've been pretty much been on a "plateau" since the bout of strep throat threw me under 90kgs.  Its not really a plateau, I've just leveled out.  I can't change much more about my lifestyle.  I already work out as much as my schedule will allow, and living on my own again, I feel like Im doing the best I can in the diet department.  I don't have the best diet, but its as healthy as I can realistically get.  Its a struggle to get fresh produce in, its expensive for me to buy it and it always goes bad before I can eat it all.  I no longer eat for the love of food, its all about convenience now.  My housemate makes fun of me when I boil a half dozen eggs.  She says its odd that I eat everything in one "vessel"  ie roasting a pumpkin (squash to you and I) for dinner with nothing else, boiling eggs for snacks with nothing else.  I say its a healthy snack, and its convenient.  And why make things with more than one ingredient when something like a roasted pumpkin is more than enough food for me?  :) 

So here is what I've recently done to try yet again to get off this damn plateau:

• I bought a bike.  A bike will not only save me bus fare and time, but will also give me one more exercise outlet in my day.  I haven't gotten used to the time thing yet though, lol.  Everytime I ride I end up getting to where I'm going about 35-40 minutes early, lol.
• I cut out all fast food and fried food.   I didn't eat a lot of these before, but I've put an all out block on them now. 
• I'm attempting this week to cut out all sugar in the form of drinks and sweets.  If theres sugar in something else I eat thats ok, but no sugarey drinks or sweets.  Aussies love their sweets.  Danishes, cinnamon rolls, chocolate croissants, etc.  They are off the list!  No matter how yummy they look while I wait for my coffee.  I also stopped taking sugar in my coffee, which isnt that hard here since they dont make coffee here, they make lattes, meaning lots of milk and a little bit-o-espresso.  And no more pop.  I go through phases with pop, sometimes I'll get up to one a day then I'll stop, then I'll slowly go back up to one a day.  So no more cokes.  I did allow myself a diet coke the other night cuz I was at a bar and needed the caffeine, but diet coke doesnt have any real sugar in it.  My other loop hole is that if Im really craving something sweet I'll have a piece of toast with jelly on it. 
• Keep alcohol to one night per week.  I haven't really committed to this yet, but I haven't been drinking more than that lately anyway.  I know alcohol has sugar in it, but the one night I drink it will be my exception.  This will also help my bank account :)

So there you have it...my attempt at dieting.  We'll see if I can actually drop any kilos from it.  I don't have high hopes, but I have been about to stick to the sugar-free thing for 3 days now.  I recently read an article that people take in most of their calories from drinks now.  Which I believe is definitely true for me.  And we tend to not count the calories in our drinks.  Since I read that, I've paid more attention to what I'm drinking and as a result have been drinking a lot more water. 

Sandals on a bus

Don't bother sweeping in Broome...

...the red dirt is everywhere. Ah ah ah. Who appreciates my 'Kevin joke'??

I don't have many pictures of Broome because it rained.  The only time it wasn't raining (just drizzling) I went on an old people's tour.  Seriously.  I didn't know it was an old people's tour until the bus picked me up and I was the only one under the age of 70 on the bus.  I felt like I was 15 on a family trip with my grandparents.  Homosassa anyone?

When it wasn't pouring buckets Broome was really pretty.  Its known for its contrasting colors, red dirt, green bush, blue water, white sand.  Beacuse of the unseasonably wet weather it was more green than normal.  Which can actually be said for all my pictures going down The Center as well.  The best color-contrasting picture:

Yea.  Its pretty.  I wish I could have seen it in the sun. 

At low tide...very low tide, you can climb down the rocks and find dinorsaur fossils in the rocks!  This however, is a picture of the replica of dinosaur fossils.  The doesn't usually get low enough for you to find them, only on special low tide occasions.  And I'm pretty sure it was high tide when we were there anyway.  Still cool in my opinoin!

Do you recognize this rock?!  You might not.  Buts its Australia!!  Its a natural formation, and actually I was trying so hard to get Tasmania in the picture that I cut out Western Australia, where I was.  Tasmania is not part of the natural formation, someone put that there, but having the mainland Australia almost split into the states is still impressive.

The only picture I took in town is of the old time outdoor movie theater:

I didn't get a chance to check out a movie here.  Did I mention it was raining?

This is the Japanese cemetary.  Broome is known for Pearl farms.  Bet you didn't think about someone having to dive to the bottom of the ocean to get those pearls for you.  Anyways, its risky business.  Or at least it used to be before Scuba equipment existed.  Ever seen that Cuba Gooding Jr. movie about him being the first black navy diver?  The equipment they used to dive for pearls was about the same.  You basically wore a few hundred pounds of waterproof suit with a tube going back to the boat for oxygen.  They lowered you into the ocean and the boat was coast around the top while the diver walked along the bottom trying to find shells.   They had to pick up the shells and put them in their basket before the boat moved too far forward, if they weren't fast enough or bent down to pick up the shells they would fall forward and not be able to stand straight again.  They'd get dragged along the ocean floor for lord knows how long and most likely die.  If they didn't fall over, when the came to the top it was like to get decompression sickness.  Decompression sickness is when you come up to the surface too fast and the nitrogen thats in your bloodstream expands and causes extreme pain in the joints, or embolisms in your brain or heart, etc.  Its bad news.  You learn about decompression sickness in dive certification, now they have techniques to avoid getting it.  They didn't know about it when the Japanese were diving all day everyday.  Why Japanese you ask?  Because they're little.  Yup, its that simple.  They're little and could get into the equipment easier than others.  Japanese migrated over to Broome to work on Pearl farms, were treated like crap, and died quite often.  Hence the Japanese cemertary.  They are also restoring the headstones that crack or break off, which is why some are black and some are still the old sandstone originally used.

More colors just for the fun of it :)