Harris Biden Her Time

(Official White House Photo by Adam Schultz) Wikimedia creative commons

Perhaps it is the circles in which I travel, but of late it seemed to me every person who thinks deeply about life had one thing to say about the USA: How is it, in a country of 336 million people, that Joe Biden and Donald Trump are the only candidates for president? * (There’s also a Kennedy offspring, whose name escapes me, who plans to run. Ed)

This rhetorical question became academic after President Biden’s selfless decision in June to step aside and not contest the November election. Maybe nobody else noticed, but Biden flagged this about a day before it was revealed he had Covid (again). “If a doctor tells me to, I will step down.”

FYI Ronald Reagan said the same thing when pressed about his age and his health.

Not so much a promise but to keep the media guessing.

And the world’s media sent packs of journos, analysts and photographers to the US to provide a running commentary (interspersed with cunningly edited faux pas from the debate the Democrats would rather forget).

It was clear that Joe Biden’s 64-year career in politics was coming to an end, as the inevitable ageing process caught up with him. Let’s not forget President Biden’s steady hand as Barack Obama’s vice president from 2009 to 2017. But he was becoming frail, and something had to happen.

Collectively, we kept waiting for an Obama or Kennedy-like personality to emerge from the pack. There is Kamala Harris, a black, female Vice- President whose media profile was below the fold, as they say. Biden’s decision to endorse her as the Democrats candidate will change that exponentially. Regardless of reports that Harris has fumbled various tasks allotted to her, she is a 59-year-old, well-credentialled lawyer who has been in the White House for nigh on four years. If Harris wins the election and becomes President, she will be 64 next time round and hopefully will have a younger deputy by her side.

But should this debate really be about age or disabilities?

Franklin Delano Roosevelt (FDR) served as the 32nd president of the United States from 1933 until his death in 1945. He was not only the longest-serving US president, but he was also the only president to serve more than two terms. This was despite being confined to a wheelchair and relying on leg braces for mobility. Roosevelt developed polio aged 39 and spent the rest of his life running the US from a wheelchair.

Donald J Trump, who can walk unhindered, is a political naif compared to FDR. Trump stands out for unpalatable precedents, including surviving a court challenge that pending criminal charges should disqualify him from running.

A scrum of judges, when asked should Donald Trump be granted immunity from prosecution, answered ‘some’. Or at least that was the word headline writers grabbed from a lengthy judgement. As some wag posted on social media when this was announced: ”So the American Revolution was for nothing”.

According to the official White House bio, Joe Biden, 46th President of the United States, ran for the White House on a platform which said he would “restore the Soul of America, rebuild the backbone of America – the middle class – and unite the country”.

Did he in fact do as he promised? Furthermore, as a rising 82-year-old, could he promise more of the same for a tenure which would have seen him celebrate his 86^th birthday in office?

My research unearthed only one other candidate who led a major western country aged in his 80s. William Gladstone won a UK election in 1892 aged 82, resigning two years later. He was, however, PM on three other occasions (1868–74, 1880–85, 1886), all packed into a 60-year career in politics.

Point being, Donald Trump is no Gladstone.

Talk show hosts, comedians and lefty social media influencers pounce on any nonsensical utterance from Donald Trump. He’s an easy target but (a) he doesn’t care, (b) he can work a crowd), (c) he’s a salesman whose pitch attracts those who share his views and (d) he doesn’t care.

There was much conjecture about Biden’s mental acuity, not much of it from medicos, I might add.

Surely this was the main reason Democrats and ageist people alike wanted Biden to step down. They’d been calling it long before the debate debacle with Donald Trump.

There has also been similar speculation about the mental fitness of former president Trump, who comes to the campaign with a lot of baggage. This year Trump turned 78. If he wins the November election he will be 82 at the next election (though he recently told Christians to ‘vote now and you’ll never have to vote again’).

As with many things Trump says, that is open to interpretation.

The long (too long) televised debate left Joe Biden under the spotlight long enough for his emerging vagueness to become obvious. His faltering gait, especially when climbing up to the Presidential jet, a more than obvious sign of ageing (or underlying health condition).

In Biden’s defence, his long battle to overcome a stutter could explain his faltering speech patterns. Moreover, his decision to stand down indicates he is still capable of wise decision-making.

From a Down Under perspective, it is clear we don’t like old people running the country. The oldest person to be appointed Prime Minister of Australia was Sir John McEwan. He was 68 when appointed to a six-week caretaker role after the disappearance of sitting PM, Harold Holt.

The oldest person ever to serve as Prime Minister of Australia was Sir Robert Menzies, who left office one month and six days after his 71st birthday.According to www.australianpolitics.com, 9 of 31 Australian PMs took office aged in their 50s. McEwen, William McMahon and Malcolm Turnbull all took office in their 60s, but none were the result of an election. McEwen was a stop-gap PM after Holt disappeared; McMahon and Turnbull overthrew their predecessors.

The youngest PM lasted only four months. Chris Watson (ALP) took office at the age of 37. Of all our PMs since Federation, only 9 were younger than 50 when appointed.

Compare this with the USA, where 12 presidents got the keys to the Oval Office aged 60 or older, and four of them (Biden, Trump, Reagan and George Bush), were between 64 and 78 when sworn in.

From my perspective as an elder, the weeks and months of people urging Sleepy Joe to go revealed a clear bias against older people as no longer being capable of holding down serious jobs.

There is no official retirement age in Australia (apart from judges who must stand down at 70 and Catholic priests, who can work until they are 75). The Age Discrimination in Employment Act forbids employers from forcing their employees to retire.

Much of the desire to retire revolves around when you qualify for the age pension (in Australia this is now 67).

An ABC report in 2023 cited Census statistics that showed more than 65,000 Australians in their 70s worked full time (3% of that age group). The 2021 Census also revealed that 5,200 people aged in their 80s worked full-time. About double that number worked part-time.

Our cohort continues to slave away when they should have their feet up, primarily because of punitive social security and tax systems, and/or personal circumstances.

We’ll get our chance next year to pick the (relatively young) politician who promises to do most for the disadvantaged. It won’t happen of course, but we will hear lots of promises from Peter Dutton (55 in 2025) and Anthony Albanese (62).

Domestic events aside, the US election in November is the most crucial since Nixon faced impeachment. It means a lot to Australia to be able to work with a capable, cogent, energetic leader and Kamala Harris seems to fit the job description.

The US media appears to have allowed Harris a brief honeymoon but do not think it will stay like that. It won’t.

Discrimination in the 1960s, by an unofficial feminist

Despite being ranked equal first for educational attainment, Australia came in at 44^th overall in the Global Gender Gap Index 2020 rankings, slipping five places from the previous year. But things are better than the discrimination evident in the 1960s and 1970s*.

discrimination-gender-equity-feminist — She Who Rides Trail Bikes

By Laurel Wilson

In 1965, Merle Thornton and her friend Rosalie Bogner walked into the Regatta Hotel in Brisbane and chained themselves to the Public Bar as a protest about the discrimination which forbade women from drinking there (instead, relegated to the ‘Ladies’ Lounge’ to drink their Shandies).

At the time, I remember wondering why any self-respecting woman would want to drink in the noisy, smelly, smoke-filled drinking pit that was the usual Public Bar. But then I was just a naive teenager, content to wear the black stockings, gloves and hat that my school rules required, even in the midst of a Brisbane summer. That same school had a rule in which the girls were not allowed to talk to the boys – the playground was separated into the girls’ section and the boys’ section. It seems a ridiculous rule now, and I thought the same at the time. I do remember attempting a small rebellion at one stage, encouraging the girls to sit on one side of the dividing path and the boys on the other, but it came to naught, so my incipient reputation as a ‘stirrer’ was saved for another day.

Then on to University, where it was often rumoured that the women were in danger of being harassed for ‘favours’ by some of the male tutors and lecturers. I didn’t experience this myself, but it seemed to be common knowledge who to avoid.

Prior to graduating, I came to the realisation that because of discrimination, women were officially paid less than men for doing the same job, apparently under the assumption that men needed more money in order to provide for a family. The flaws in this ‘logic’ are too gaping to bother elucidating. I decided at the time that I wouldn’t seek any employment that had such a discriminatory policy. By the time I was in my last year of University, the female wage for teachers was 90% of that for men and there was equal pay by the time I graduated. The requirement that women resign on marriage had gone by the board some time previously (see time-line below).

I had a Holden Ute and a trail bike which I used to race on the dirt track at Tivoli near Ipswich. Of course I had to have a full set of leathers. I had a red leather jacket and black pants (with red hearts on the knee patches). As I was wearing a full-face helmet, it was sometimes a bit difficult to tell there was a female on the bike, except that I was pretty slow. There were a couple of other women racers as well. We’d race in the same races as the men, but there was usually also a ‘ladies’ race’. I didn’t think of it as pioneering anything at the time, but I guess it was a bit unusual.

I asked an artistic friend of mine to paint a red Suzuki ‘S’ on the driver’s side door, which he duly did, but added an embellishment of his own by painting the Women’s Lib sign on the tailgate. I don’t think that the rather conservative principal of the school where I was teaching was favourably impressed with that.

After some years teaching, I took a break for a while then applied for a job with the Probation and Parole Service as it was then called. There was a vacancy in Toowoomba, which would require travelling to towns further west from time to time One of the interview questions asked was what I would do if I got a flat tyre. My reply was that I would lift the bonnet and wait for someone to give me a hand. That seemed to satisfy them, as I got the job. I’m not sure how many other women were doing that job at the time, but we were definitely in the minority. I believe it was somewhat grudgingly accepted that women employees were needed as there was a growing number of female probationers and parolees. Not that we were confined to supervising women only, so I guess you could call the Service an equal opportunity employer.

Being a State Government job, it was quite well paid, and in those days, a permanent position. I assumed that there would be no problem obtaining a loan to buy a house (for the princely sum of $17,250 – a three-bedroom weatherboard on a large block near the Showgrounds in Toowoomba.) I had quite a good deposit, and as I’d been banking with the same bank since I was at school, I assumed I’d have no problem obtaining a loan. Not without a male guarantor! I withdrew my money from the bank and never darkened their doors again. I’m looking at you, Commonwealth Bank!

Tuesday 8^th March was International Women’s Day. According to an article from the BBC that I read, the date of 8^th March was formalised after a strike in Russia in 1917 in which Russian women demanded “bread and peace”.

The strike began on the 8^th of March and after four days, the Tsar was forced to abdicate.

We can only hope history repeats itself!

Discrimination against women in Australia 1960s-1970s

Despite the introduction of the Federal Sex Discrimination Act in 1984, women continue to be disadvantaged. In case you forgot, the Act prohibits discrimination on the basis of sexism, homophobia, transphobia and biphobia, as well as sex, marital or relationship status, actual or potential pregnancy, sexual orientation, gender identity, intersex status or breastfeeding in public.

TIMELINE

1956: Until this year women were prevented from teaching full-time after marriage. The Temporary Teachers Union lobbied for this restriction to be dropped;.

1961: Women could buy the contraceptive pill but initially it was only available (on prescription) to married women and carried a 27.5% ‘luxury item” tax;

1966: Australia lifted the legislated marriage ban, which prevented married women from holding permanent positions in the public service;

1971: The Bank of New South Wales (now Westpac) became the first Australian lender to lend money to a female without a male guarantor;

1969: First abortion rights granted (with limitations);

1972: The right to equal pay introduced (see note at end);

1972: The newly-formed Women’s Electoral Lobby made the contraceptive pill more freely available;

1972: Gough Whitlam introduced a single mother’s pension. It was later broadened to a single parent pension (available to men and women);

1973: Commonwealth employees were granted 12 weeks paid maternity leave and 40 weeks unpaid leave;

1974: The minimum wage was extended to cover women;

1975: No-fault divorce introduced, formation of women’s refuges;

1979: Women were granted 52 weeks unpaid maternity leave;

1983: Married women could apply for an Australian passport without needing an authorisation from their husbands;

1991: the marriage age in Australia of females was increased from 16 to 18 (the same as males;

2011: Federally-funded paid parental leave introduced;

2020: Gender pay gap between men and women confirmed at 13.8%;

2022: Despite the 1972 equal pay declaration, Australian typically earn about $25,000 a year less than men (Workplace Gender Equality Agency).

FOMM back pages

What the left hand doesn’t know

Last week, Friday the 13^th, I intended to write about International Left Handers’ Day. Apparently it’s been a thing since 1976 – a clever way of making people aware of this difference, at least once a year.

Clearly the organisers of International Left Handers’ Day do not suffer from Triskaidekaphobia, a fear of Friday the 13th.

Phobias are an irrational fear of one or more of hundreds of strange things that induce panic attacks in some people. So you may not be surprised to learn that Sinistrophobia is a fear of left handed people (or objects close to the phobic person’s left hand).

I was made aware of International Left Handers’ Day by my friend and musical collaborator, Silas Palmer. In posting links to social media pages about Left Handedness, he revealed that three of the four members of Melbourne band The Royal High Jinx (he plays drums, keys, accordion and fiddle), are lefties in the literal sense. That is a clear statistical anomaly, as the norm is 10% of the population.

So what does it all mean to the 90% of us who use the right hand for most tasks requiring dexterity?

Well, it could be that you share an abode with a partner or other who is left-handed or have children who turned out that way.

I tried teaching She Who Is Also Left Handed to play guitar but it did my head in. Even now, I just can’t handle watching her chopping up onions or meat with the knife in her left hand. (You’d freak out more if I tried doing it with my right hand. Ed)

There’s been a lot of research into the science and psychology of handedness. Recently, a team at Oxford University found for the first time the role played by DNA. Scientists found the first genetic instructions hard-wired into human DNA seem to be heavily involved in the structure and function of the brain – particularly the parts involved in language. Left-handed people may have better verbal skills as a result.

The research published in Brain magazine concludes that being left-handed (or port-sided), has often led to a raw deal.

“In many cultures being left handed is seen as being unlucky or malicious and that is reflected in language,” said Prof Dominic Furniss, a hand surgeon and author on the report.

“What this study shows is that being left-handed is just a consequence of the developmental biology of the brain, it has nothing to do with luck or maliciousness.” (Despite the word ‘sinister’, which is derived from the Latin for left-handed. Ed)

If you grew up in the 1950s, the education system was not at all in favour of left-handed children. As the teaching of writing became widespread, teachers encouraged right-handedness by (mild examples), tying the left arm behind the back and knuckle-raps for writing with the ‘wrong’ hand. Those that persisted with their left hand were left to cope in a world designed for right handers.

Psychologist Chris McManus has suggested that the Industrial Revolution encouraged this, due to the right-handed design of the machinery in mills and factories

McManus, in his book Right Hand, Left Hand, finds an account from a school near Falkirk, Scotland, in 1880, noting that “eight children had come to school left-handed”. The phrase “had come” implies that they were not allowed to remain so.

With the decline of attempts to convert children, the numbers of left-handers has risen sharply over the course of the 20th century.

Some estimates put it as high as 18% and, as we will see, there are statistical anomalies.

Songwriter and film score composer Dory Previn wrote the definitive song about left-handedness.

The lyrics of Left Hand Lost (from the 1972 album, Mary C Brown and the Hollywood Sign), are infused with Catholic references linking the left hand to evil deeds (as in finding work for idle hands).

Previn, who wrote a good half dozen albums full of self-reflecting songs about mystical kings and iguanas, lemon haired ladies and waking up slow, starts this one with a liturgical chant.

The real attraction to this topic was a chance to name-check a few famous guitarists who have mastered the art of playing ‘Molly Dooker’ (1940s Australian slang).

Most of us would know about Paul McCartney, but there’s also a long list of players (living and dead) including Jimi Hendrix, Kurt Cobain, Noel Gallagher (Oasis), Annie Lennox, Tommy Iommi (Black Sabbath), David Bowie and Sting. Down under lefties are represented by singer songwriters Eric Bogle and Courtney Barnett, Dick Dale (Bombora), Beeb Birtles (Little River Band), Oscar Dawson (Holy Holy), WA slide guitarist Dave Hole, Kevin Curran (Hail Mary) and Kate Miller-Heidke Band guitarist Keir Nuttall.

Keir plays a 21-year-old Guild Jumbo acoustic that has been customised to suit a left hander.

“It sometimes requires the addition of wooden braces inside the body to compensate for the additional stress from reversing the string order (as well as the nut and bridge),” he explained.

“All of my electric guitars are made left handed. But you often pay more, as the good ones are snapped up by collectors, so the prices are driven up.”

Keir says he started off self-taught so it was too late to switch by the time he realised that it is expensive and frustrating being a lefty.

In an effort to join in on jams at parties, he learned the basic shapes playing a ‘normal’ guitar upside down.

“When I taught guitar I would encourage my students to learn right handed to spare themselves the pain. Guitar is about the co–ordination between both hands, so I believe it doesn’t matter whether your dominant hand is fretting or picking.”

This could be a good time to explain that some left handers (like the aforementioned Dick Dale and the late indigenous singer, Gurrumul), learned to play a conventionally strung guitar upside down.

The website https://leftyfretz.com/ is devoted to left handed guitars and how to play them. But the webmaster has also compiled an impressive collection of left-handed trivia. Like, did we know five of the last nine US presidents (not Trump) were left handed? Mensa, the elite organisation of people with high IQs, claims 20% of its members are lefties.

From this exhaustive list of left handed celebrities, I plucked just two Aussies (Hugh Jackman and Nicole Kidman). Did you know that 40% of the world’s best tennis players are southpaws (US baseball term)? Rafael Nadal was a right-handed player but taught himself to play leftie to give him an advantage (which it clearly does). Former tennis great turned commentator John McEnroe is also a Portsider.

I noted Simpsons creator Matt Groenig on one of these lists. This may explain why at least four of the characters (Marge Simpson, Bart Simpson, Ned Flanders and Mr Burns) are corrie dukit as they say in some parts of Scotland,

Specialist stores like Ned’s Leftorium do exist. The website www.anythinglefthanded.co.uk operated a shop in London’s west end from the mid-1960s. Management quit the retail space in 1996 and has been operating a home-based internet business ever since. Just in case you were wondering, some of the product lines that do very well include can openers, scissors, spiral notebooks and pens (the latter have curved nibs so the writer can see what’s being written without putting the heel of the hand on still-wet ink).

If you’d like an insight into left handedness, try writing today’s headline with your opposite hand; that is, righties try with the left and vice versa. A fun game for any old Friday afternoon.

The changing language of disability

The changing language of disability: I briefly met the deputy editor of The Conversation, Charis Palmer, in December, at the launch of the Yearbook. I handed her my card and told her my weekly blog had been running for three and a half years. I said I often quoted articles from The Conversation as I considered it an accurate and balanced source.

“Well don’t forget you can re-publish any of our articles, anytime,” she said before being descended upon by fans of The Conversation.

In just six years, The Conversation, with its evidence-based stories written by academics and curated by journalists, has gathered an audience of 5.2 million, extrapolated to 35 million via republication in other outlets. The following article by Professor Roly Sussex digs into the background of the language of disability. As he observes at one point, perhaps the pendulum of political correctness has swung too far the other way.

One example of this is the new Mental Health Act in Queensland, where psychiatric wards become ‘mental health units’, patients become ‘consumers’ and family members ‘carers’ or ‘loved ones.’ It has to be said that however stodgy the language sounds, it is an improvement on words like ‘inmates’.

Sad to say people today still use words like ‘moron,’ ‘retard,’ or the less insulting but now redundant deaf, dumb, blind or lame.

I hope you enjoy this erudite piece from Prof Roly Sussex, Queensland’s popular man of letters.

From ‘demented’ to ‘person with dementia’: how and why the language of disability changed

File 20171101 19867 1pqxw8c.jpg?ixlib=rb 1.1 — The initial aim of political correctness, to establish non-hateful language was, and still is, admirable.
Nathan Anderson/Unsplash

Roland Sussex, The University of Queensland

In the second half of the 20th century, we came to accept that in certain cases we should avoid deliberately hurtful language. While many deride political correctness for going too far, its initial aim to establish non-hateful language was, and still is, admirable.

In the early 20th century, “moron” was a medical term for someone with a mental age of between eight and 12. “Mongol” was a person with Down syndrome, and also was indirectly a slur on people from Mongolia, some of whose features were supposed to resemble those with Down syndrome. “Retarded” described someone mentally, socially or physically less advanced than their chronological age.

We know these terms now primarily as pejoratives. “Mongol”, following the Australian tendency to form diminutives, has even given us “mong”, meaning someone who is stupid or behaves as such. Yet there is also a consensus such language is unacceptable. How did we get here?

The path to dignified language

In December 1948, the United Nations passed the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Affirming the dignity of all humans, Article 1 of this landmark document states:

All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

Article 2 goes on to specify this should apply

without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.

The declaration, prompted by the dehumanising events of the second world war, soon led to concerted initiatives to avoid hurtful and denigrating language.

Race and ethnicity was the first area to be addressed in Australia, where the philosophy of respect was enshrined in the Racial Discrimination Act of 1975. This included the currently controversial section 18C, which made it an offence to offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate someone else on the basis of race or nationality.

In the 1980s the scope was expanded in Australia to include gender and sexuality, with the legitimisation of terms like “queer”, and an increasing range of different kinds of sexuality now evident in the LGBTQI designations.

Words like ‘deaf’ and ‘blind’ are commonly used in negative ways.
from shutterstock.com

The third big change involved the language for people with disabilities, whether cognitive or physical. Here the English vocabulary was full of terms that mixed description with pejorative overtones.

People first

Words like “deaf”, “blind”, “dumb” and “lame” are not only descriptions of physical ability and disability, but are commonly used in negative ways. For instance, “deaf as a post”, “blind Freddie”.

We have now moved away from such language. Especially unacceptable are nouns like “retard” or adjectives like “demented”. In their place we have the principle of people first. The person and the disability are separated.

Instead of a phrase like “demented person” we have “person with dementia” or “person living with dementia”. The New South Wales Department of Ageing, Disability and Home Care has a list of such terms.

We should avoid terms that suggest deficit in a negative way, such as “disabled”, “invalid”, “retarded”, “handicap”, “spastic” and “cripple”. We should also avoid terms that explicitly specify limitation like “confined” (say, to a wheelchair). “Suffering from” is to be eschewed for the same reason, since it suggests the person is passive and incapable.

A number of paraphrases allow us to avoid sensitive terms. Instead of “blind” we have “visually impaired”. People are not “disabled” but “differently abled”.

Some of these terms can go too far and are effectively euphemisms because they sound overdone and excessively delicate, like “intellectually challenged”.

It is preferable to use language that doesn’t exclude people with these conditions from society. A good example of such inclusive language is “ambulant toilet”, often found in airports and public places, which simply indicates the toilet is suitable for anyone able to walk.

The Disability Discrimination Act 1992 consolidated these issues in Australian legislation, which now forms part of an expanding suite of anti-discrimination legislation both here and overseas.

Ambulant toilet is a good use of inclusive language.
shutterstock.com

Talking to someone with a disability

A general guideline for talking to someone with a certain condition is to ask that person how they wish to be described. In some cases, words like “deaf” have been reclaimed by bodies like the National Association of the Deaf in the US. The presence of the capital letter legitimises the term’s use, so long as it is done respectfully. In a similar way, various gender groups have reclaimed the word “queer”, and the fact they use it licenses others to do so too.

The requirement for respectful and considerate speech is not just a matter of good manners; it has teeth. Governments, education systems, companies, societies and other bodies often have guidelines for language use for people with disabilities.

The US National Institutes of Health recommends “intellectually and developmentally disabled” or “IDD” for people with Down syndrome. Bodies like Dementia Australia have language recommendations.

Institutions and governments can apply a variety of sanctions to people who violate this principle in a persistent and hurtful way. These principles are now common in the English-speaking world and countries of the European Union, especially as enshrined in its Charter of Fundamental Rights.

In little more than a generation and half, we have become a more caring and inclusive society, and one much more aware of the importance of avoiding hurtful language. We don’t always get the expression right. But we are getting better at seeing the effect of what we say and write from the point of view of others.

Roland Sussex, Professor Emeritus, The University of Queensland

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.