best superpower.

is to turn bad into good.

From Jeff:

Guy pushed me out of the way to get into the train, shoved me when I got in it, got in my face and yelled, "WHAT, DO YOU HAVE SUPERPOWERS?"

Actually, yes. It's Being a Decent Human Being. Apparently a rare power in New York. I shall use my powers for good! Who needs kind words today?

Righteous Anger

... of all varieties today. Firstly because it's election eve in Taiwan, and secondly because I saw an article which my friend Cara shared on Facebook.

On national identity. What is your fucking problem, yo?

You don't own designations. Don't say 'I am a real Taiwanese' because that implies there is such a thing as a 'fraudulent Taiwanese'. Just because someone's idea of where the limits of this nation begins and ends (or if it in fact is a nation) does not invalidate their status as 'Taiwanese.' A nation such as ours is as much based on difference as it is on consensus. Borders and nationalities are redrawn and reinvented time and time again. If you cannot propose a vision of the nation which co-opts my imagination, I consider that to be a failure of yours, and I look elsewhere.

Political parties and individuals who rely on stirring up conflict as their sole political platform should slap themselves. This is not a pan-blue or pan-green issue.

—What is your nation if I may ask? says the citizen.

—Ireland, says Bloom. I was born here. Ireland.

(God bless Project Gutenberg; via Ulysses)

Then secondly, an article by Margaret Cho.


When someone says something negative about my face or body I will always and forever just completely lose my shit, because I have so much hatred in me, a violence that lies just beneath the surface of my delightfully illustrated skin.
(via Margaret Cho's blog)

I know what you mean (and I don't mean that in a patronizing way). I respect your anger, and I think there should be more of it because those who don't understand where its coming from need to know.

Finally, right now.

In Kinmen, sitting up in bed wrapped in a heavy duvet. Outside the villages are Ming and Ching dynasty houses, red brick and swallow tail roofs, intermingling with anti-communist slogans, riddled with bullet holes; dilapidated, fallen, renovated; occasional two-story south east asian colonial style family homes, glazed tiles from Japan peeling off the walls, perhaps once richly coloured banners above and flanking doorways faded to pale pastels. Intricate geometric patterned wooden window frames, painted in azure and gold.

The economic boom that had been hoped for with the Three Small Links has passed Kinmen by unscathed. May it remain so, a sleepy, backwater, unprosperous island town, occupied mainly by the aged and the young, carrying the burden of history with apparent ease; tarnishing gradually, gracefully (and secretly all mine).

And you? What legendary things are you up to today?

Like. Very Much.

I know when you complicate things just to confuse me.

Girl Lego

This appeared on Emma's facebook stream recently. I'm keeping it aside because I might do something with it later.

"apparently Lego are launching 'a product line for girls'. Silly me, I thought they already had a product line girls played with. It's called Lego."

You are fighting

for things that I take for granted.
I don't think it's too much to ask.

[via The Guardian]

On beauty... some further reflections

Yesterday Helen and I went to Villa 32 for onsen. In the female section of the hot spring women of various ages and body types bobbed around naked in the water, lounged in loose robes in recliners, or sat and chatted on the edges of rock pools - relaxed, naked, without make-up, their hair pinned in bathing caps and towels.

Everyone glowed with health and well-being; bodies glistened from the moisture in the air. I thought it'd be a marvelous place to sketch, but that would be against the rules (no cameras, no mobile phones - so drawing other people is probably out of the question as well, though I didn't ask).

What occurred to me is that these women seemed so beautiful in their relaxed and comfortable poses. Perhaps they would wish for (if you asked them) washboard abs or a perky bottom, or simply for the return of taut, youthful skin - but if they felt inadequate in any way, it wasn't immediately visible to me.

Inadequacy is a theme that I've been noticing in beauty marketing. The ploy goes: 'you are so pretty! except this one little thing' - and then of course the product that is just what you need gets introduced. I used to go to a spa across the street for facials and it always surprised me that the women who worked there found fault with so many things on my face. Then I realized that they had to because otherwise I would not feel inclined to purchase their services/wares. It's like a doctor trying to make you believe that you are ill. Except there are objective indicators of health. I remember the women at the spa I used to frequent telling me that I have all these skin problems, and their shock and horror when I said 'Thanks! But I think I look pretty good. So I'll not be buying these.'

I'm not arguing that I (or anyone else) look perfect, though I have to admit that as a young healthy female, I feel fairly good about my looks on most days. Either way, I don't think looking less than perfect on some days detract from my confidence. On the whole I believe that my attractiveness and sex-appeal are linked to things other than appearances alone (not such a radical notion, though not one which the fashion and beauty industry, nor mainstream media, is keen to promote). What are these other things? Well, confidence, for one; at least, confidence and comfort with oneself is something I find attractive in others.

This doesn't mean that I don't consume beauty products or buy fancy clothes (mea culpa), and it certainly doesn't mean that I don't want to be more beautiful than I already am (or believe myself to be). I would be happier though, if I felt that I was being encouraged to be confident & content with my own notions of beauty, rather than feeling as though my opinions are being co-opted and coerced. I'd be happier if the beauty that I saw at the onsen, without social pressure and commercial packaging, devoid of extraneous elements, were were pervasive.

I guess what I'm trying to get across is that we don't need cosmetics or fancy clothes to be beautiful. Again, not a radical notion - but also not one which is often affirmed (based on my own observations) in the society in which I live.

Really?

I think that our perceptions of gender are very socially conditioned.

Tonight at dinner the waitress told me that she thought I was a boy. I wanted to say "is it because Taiwanese boys are so effeminate?" Either that or take a leaf out of my family friend's book and say "瞎了你的狗眼". But I just smiled and walked away. My mother said "This goes to show that a girl should be pretty." I replied "Taiwanese people basically judge your sex by hair length" - because when I had long hair, this was never an issue. My mom still didn't think this was a case of gender stereotyping. My conclusion: "fuck that."

Too radical? Perhaps. But I'm fed up. If you look beyond very superficial attributes (make-up or not, hair length, style of clothing and footwear), it's pretty easy to tell that I am not a boy (no Adam's apple, no facial hair, voice is not deep enough).

Though the way I dress is often considered androgynous even in the West, I still hate the idea that girls should look a certain way, i.e. pretty. Says who? Fuck that.

I am a girl. I've never had trouble finding myself a man. I can be pretty, and I can be ugly. I can be gentle, or I can be strong. I can be demure, or I can be out-going. Because I am a multi-faceted human-being, not a fashion spread mirage. So please don't tell me how I ought to go about being a girl.

I'm not angered by one person's mistake. Rather, I am voicing a complaint on behalf of all those who do not naturally conform to the 'ideal' as formulated by society and media. This is also why I refrained from rudeness to the waitress; after all we are all products of our environment. Yet I also believe that we are not condemned to only be shaped by society without the right to mold it in return. This is why I find it important to speak my mind on such issues.

我覺得我們對性別(gender)的印象受社會的影響很大。

昨天一個人在長庚附近一個人隨便吃飯。餐廳小姐說『我以為你是男生！』。我衝動的想回她『是不是因為台灣的男生都太娘了？』，甚至『瞎了你的狗眼』。但是我沒有，只有笑笑的走出去。我媽說『啊, 這告訴我們, 一個好好的女生, 要弄成漂亮的女生樣』。我說『基本上台灣人只認長髮與短髮而已』因為我從前頭髮長的時候從來沒有這個問題。她仍然覺得這不是性別刻板印象 (gender stereotype) 的問題。我的結論：『fuck that』。

太偏激了嗎？可能吧，但是我受夠了。只要看透了一些非常表面的東西（畫不畫裝，頭髮多長，穿不穿女性化的衣服與鞋子），就可以知道我不可能是男生（沒有喉結，沒有鬍鬚，說話聲音不夠低）。

雖然我的打扮就算在國外也可以算是中性，但是我痛恨有人覺得『女生』就是應該把自己弄成某個樣子，就是應該『漂亮』。誰說女生就是要漂亮？FUCK THAT.

我是女生。我從來沒有找不到男人的問題。我可以要漂亮，也可以要醜，可以要溫柔，也可以要強壯，可以要涵蓄，也可以要自信 - 因為我是個有層次的活人，不是時尚雜誌裡的假象。所以請妳別來告訴我怎麼當女生。

我並不是為了一個人的判斷錯誤而生氣，而是為了媒體與社會將女性塑造成一個死板『理想型』而為所以有天生就不是那個『理想型』的女生打抱不平。這也是我沒有當場跟那位小姐翻臉的原因，畢竟我們都是社會環境的產物。但是我不認為我們只有被社會塑造的份，而沒有反過來塑造社會的權力，所以對我來說發表自己的意見是有這個涵意的。

Paragons of Beauty

Since I moved back to Taiwan I've been bombarded by images of "正妹" (hot chicks) and I have to say that I'm heartily sick of it. Sure, they are good looking girls - but not only do they all look the same, but they also seem to embody some kind of feminine ideal which focuses on almost exclusively on the diminutive (sweetness and childishness are the two themes I most often observe).

Growing up I have always been told that I am not feminine enough and that if I didn't conform to stereotypes of femininity, no one would want to marry me. I think I can now safely say that if the choice was to be single forever, or marry the kind of man that could only have that kind of woman, I would just turn lesbian.

What happened to affirming the qualities that we have as individuals, and making girls feel that they are worthwhile for who they are rather than encouraging them to bend themselves over backwards to conform to some kind of doll-like ideal? It's sick.

Another thing I absolutely cannot stand is the unspoken attitude that while it is ok to be beautiful, it's not ok to flaunt the fact, and it is even less ok to think or say that you are sexy. I remember my aunts lamenting that although my figure looks good from the back (I have a very nice ass, and I do say so myself), I am a bit "飛機場" in the front (literally - airport landing strip for breasts - i.e. flat-chested, for those of you who are not of a pictorial mindset). I laughed and told them that I think I look good enough. They looked scandalized. I realize that even in the west there is a notion of feminine modesty. But I still find that the line here is drawn much to tautly to close the women in. Work your ass off to be beautiful, it says - and then don't be full of pride and revel in your beauty - instead, do your best to act aloof, because we prefer modest women. I also find that instead of a sisterhood of encouragement (the 'you go-girl' attitude), most women I have met here tend to be more forthrightly critical of my appearance in a way that I would find rude by western standards. It's almost as though they are themselves drawing that modesty line around ourselves and tightening the reins. Why?

While it's not ok for women to flaunt their attractiveness or glory in it (except in a very innocent, child-like way, which seems to betoken 'Am I not pleasing to you?' rather than 'I love myself and my body, because I think I look good'), what gets me most is that men and male-oriented media (women as well, sometimes) freely use the phrase 童顏巨乳 - literally translates to 'Massive Mammaries, Child-like Visage.' Yes, that's right folks - you heard me. Whenever I mention this term to Taiwanese people and propose its counterpart, i.e. 'Massive Phallus, Child-like Visage,' people are absolutely horrified.

I rest my case.

The True Size of Africa (and ensuing thoughts)

[by Kenneth Field via Yfrog]

I have a talent of reading too much into things - my reaction to 'The True Size of Africa' map is no exception. I will freely admit that geography was never my strongest area (pun fully intended) of knowledge, but more than anything else I was taken by the (intentional or unintentional) implications of an altered perspective.

I posted this on my Facebook and there were two responses (verbatim as follows).

1. Steve: I noticed Taiwan is part of China.
2. Chelsea: I don't understand the point of this map@@ just to show how big Africa is? (bigger than China + America + some other western countries) Don't we all know that Africa is big?

I responded to Chelsea as follows (with edits):

I think it's about addressing a power-balance through altered perspective.

There's a term called 'Eurocentric' which applied mostly to the Western world - but we can add China and the US to it also. It means that one (whether China/USA/Europe etc.) often assumes that it is the centre of the world (and big and mighty and important) in its own narratives (as in narratives of any type including news reports, movies, as well as novels etc).

In fact, think of how China is 中國 - the middle country (i.e., the centre of power rather than the periphery), and a lot of China's attitude (past and present) demonstrates of this conviction. Furthermore, projections of maps often play into this self-aggrandizing narrative. For instance, Europe is traditionally centered on a map because cartography started to develop in the age of mercantilism/imperialist expansion in Europe.

To visually see all these 'important' countries surrounded and dwarfed by Africa (which in terms of development and power, is peripheral and diminutive in comparison to the countries placed in its boundaries in this map) carries a kind of visual punch. Of course Africa being the site of so much imperialist conquest (consequently its modern fragmentation and woes) makes this all the more poignant. (That said perhaps considering 'Africa' as a continent again is a Eurocentric perspective a la 'Heart of Darkness' - but that's another kettle of fish).

Taiwan has always been on the periphery of power; especially in the modern day, being engaged in a uneasy relationship with the Centre-Country (中國/China), we are perhaps more keenly aware of our own position as marginal. This is one speculation as to why this map would be less visually powerful from a Taiwanese perspective - what do you think?

Another possibility is that Taiwan's excellent education has made you very geographically informed (indeed, there is nothing special about this map - from a purely factual consideration).

I guess what I'm trying to say is that what matters here is not WHAT is being represented, but HOW it's being represented that matters.

To Steve I replied: Sadness. OTHER than that it's a cool map. Needless to say I am for Taiwanese independence. I tweeted to Mr. Fields: Love the map but is sad to see Taiwan presented as a part of China :(. This morning I found his reply: thanks. map doesn't distinguish PRC/ROC to avoid dispute RT @pseudoangela: Love map but sad to see Taiwan presented as part of China :(

I can understand Mr. Field's desire to 'avoid dispute,' which I interpret as wishing to remain neutral on the subject. However, if Taiwan is represented as a part of China, then surely neutrality is lost because it suggests that there is unity? There doesn't seem to be a way around taking sides on the PRC/ROC (One China vs. China and Taiwan) issue in terms of map-making. Unless Taiwan is shaded in grey and labelled 'Sovereignty in Dispute'?

...If I can slack off at work more later today I may come back to this. In the meantime comments are welcome.

p.s. however much I may read into the implications of this map, I just wanted to point out that the image does specifically state that it was created to combat 'immapancy - that is insufficient geographical knowledge,' i.e. ME - and I am grateful for this interesting means of remedy.

All but one

"If all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind."

- John Stuart Mill

The Tin Eye (reverse image search)

Been meaning to show you one of the cool things I came across the other day via Dan (head geek of GeekHouse). Clarice posted this image on Fb, and wondered if anyone knew where the source image came from:

My first guess was Brueghel because the style looked similar. I thought it might have been a detail from one of his more complex paintings. I quickly did a Google image search of Brueghel and browsed his paintings but it felt like looking for a needle in a haystack. I popped onto gchat and asked Dan if such a thing as a reverse image search engine exists. Why yes, he said, and pointed me to the Tin Eye.

Within a second of plugging in this album cover, the Tin Eye had correctly identified that it is in fact The Concert in an Egg by Hieronymus Bosch - and it managed to do this despite the fact that the album cover is cropped and confused with the addition of text overlay.

Cool, huh?

I think Tin Eye can also be used for source attribution. I read a lot of blogs and often see images reposted by bloggers. Some bloggers point to a source (frequently a line specifying 'via' or 'reposted from') but these 'sources' often then point to other 'sources'. It's very difficult to find out who originally owned these images. The Tin Eye can be useful in this instance because I could just plug the image in and see what it comes up with. Today I experimented with this image:

Unfortunately this didn't work as well as I had hoped. It turned up 40 results and by just looking at the web addresses I couldn't tell which ones might be the original source. So still a little bit of looking for a needle in a haystack, but it does sometimes manage to track down the origin site. Eventually I did a Google search with 'what the fuck have you done installation.' Turns out someone else had been asking the same question and according to the comment section of his post, the installation is by one Philippe Lhomme, and photographed by Michael Roulier.

It took a little bit of detective work to find this out - especially on Roulier's portfolio site, scrolling through many many photographs to come upon the right one.

Ideally images would always come tagged with its point of origin but this is sadly not the case right now. I often drag images I like on to my desktop and save them in my digital 'scrapbook' but to be honest, I have no idea where any of them come from, or who authored them.

I do find it interesting that people have a sense of the importance of attribution on the internet via links to one another (retweet, repost, etc.) - though this is of course several hundred steps short of the rigour with which print media practises attribution. I am interested to see how these conventions will play out, i.e. whether internet attribution will take on a specific format, if technological intervention will make it easier (images which are auto-tagged every time it's copied or linked, for instance), and of course, how our conception of originality and intellectual property will continue to evolve.

Legalize

I am, amongst my acquaintances, one of the few non-users of recreational drugs who fully supports legalization. I suppose this can be taken several ways. One is to say that I am non-biased, i.e. my support of legalization derives not from personal interest but from rational consideration. A second way to look at it is that I have no first-hand knowledge of drugs and therefore should not comment. To this my response would be: how many supporters of criminalization have first-hand knowledge of drugs?

In any case, this leads to interesting debates.

Appeals

So I listen to two podcasts regularly and both are really truly wonderful. They are well written, full of mind-bogglingly fascinating content, and totally free of charge. But actually they are not free of charge - every episode comes with appeals to listeners to donate to the podcast. To be honest I really, really like this system. I'm the kind of person who (if I really enjoy a service) would be willing to pay for it. I donated a tenner to Wikipedia, and I'm going to put a few more websites on my donations list (need to get my new credit card first): Radiolab, This American Life, and also Transmission (a Mac torrent client).

This reminds me very much of my street-performer friends and their often practised 'hat-lines,' i.e. the bit where, just before the finale of their act, they tell you that this is what they do for a living, and if you've just enjoyed a good show for nothing, well, how's about digging deep in your pockets to help support the person who's just swallowed knives, juggled battle-axes, or walked on a bed of nails for you?

When this honour system of financial contributions work, it's a very wonderful thing. Perhaps these radio stations and freeware developers should watch more street-shows and learn from the masters of of hat-lines whose sweat soaked toppers have the magical ability to turn your money into their money.

I leave you with this video for the German band Einstürzende Neubauten... a VERY good appeal video. As the band leader sagely points out: 'Did you ever consider subscribing?... and maybe if you did consider maybe you'd want to consider again and maybe you'll really do it this time. You won't get the record otherwise.'

Terry Pratchett: my case for a euthanasia tribunal

From G2 Magazine (of The Guardian).

What Beijing Fears Most

From the NYR Blog: What Beijing Fears Most.

TTC, why do you hate me?

my bladder is conspiring against me with the TTC. If a street-car breaks down, that's when I really need to pee.

Five King to Broadview street-cars passed me by. I started to feel like I kind of need to pee. Also noticed a lot of cabs going past on Queen - obviously cabbies knew there was a breakdown. Even more ominous than lots of empty cabbies cruising for fares = abundance of occupied cabbies racing past. After half an hour's waiting I got on a Greenwood street-car. I said, 'where are all the other Queen cars that go further?' and the driver refused to take me me seriously. He insisted that A. I haven't been waiting 25 mins, and B. there is no breakdown.

To me this implied that he thinks A. I can't tell time by my watch or B. I can't see street-cars. This also told me that cabbies know things about TTC's status that TTC conductors obviously DON'T.

At the next stop I was vindicated by other freezing cold and unhappy customers, inquiring after Queen street-cars that go further than Greenwood. One of them said to us there's been a breakdown but that was more than half an hour ago. Buses were promised and have yet to materialize. Apparently many people knew about this breakdown, see? Just not the TTC people.

We got dropped off at Connaught. We agreed that the TTC is probably run by apes. We then agreed that this is an insult to ape intelligence.

A car arrived. The conductor was replaced at Connaught by another conductor. They spent a few moments exchanging this info: there's been a breakdown; this is not the street-car you were expecting; look for a street-car with the number xxx and I will give you your transfers.

This then told me that: A. CABBIES KNOW WHAT THE DEAL IS BEFORE TTC EMPLOYEES DO. B. TTC EMPLOYEES HAVE NO BETTERS MEANS OF COMMUNICATION THAN DRIVING SOMEWHERE AND SPREADING THE NEWS IN PERSON.

It seems that the TTC exists in an alternate universe where technology has yet to move to a stage of information/communication proliferation.

Apparently TTC employees don't have telephones - mobile or otherwise. Perhaps they prefer pigeon post? Apparently it's ok to just take your time and let the news travel on a delayed schedule rather than to call someone at Connaught and say 'Look, there's been like, a major breakdown. Maybe you should get into a street-car, fire up the old girl, and be the hero of the day from Connaught to Long Branch.'

Or, dare I suggest something even more obvious? Ring up one of the drivers on the King to Broadview street-car on his mobile phone, and suggest: 'How's about going East on Queen on the spur of a moment eh? Live dangerously, and save our customers from freezing to death trying to get home. How's that for shaking up the old routine?'

But no, that would have been far too obvious.

And all this time waiting and stamping my feet and having my intelligence insulted by conductors - I really had to pee. Most uncomfortable.

Sinead's Hand

Please stop doing this, BBC.

Just idly watching BBC news, and I know it's late at night (11 pm) but that's no reason for the quality of journalism to take a nose dive. Item about Michael Jackson supposedly having had a heart attack - ok, fine, I give you that lots of people care about Michael Jackson.

But when the announcer started talking about how according to a fan website Michael Jackson has died, and that this piece of information cannot be confirmed, it hacked me off.

I thought it was specifically the property of Taiwanese media to report hearsay which they found on some joe-blow's website, but apparently I was being unfair. The BBC seems to have jumped in on the act as well.

Why would I need journalists/journalism when all they are giving me is something they read on the internet? What the hell happened to REPORTING?

Don't get me wrong. I'm into twittering and citizen journalism and user generated content - but it's when a media channel tries to straddle that bridge that they wobble and fall into the mire.

You are not forgotten.

[via The Boston Globe]

Important things to bear in mind whilst fighting the good fight against pink robots

[via NoiseBot]