![](/static/253f0d9b/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://aussie.zone/pictrs/image/7f3e194c-89d7-4b60-a6d6-4bd4f14fa575.jpeg)
I’d love to get prints from the artist to hang on my wall.
I’d love to get prints from the artist to hang on my wall.
Right. I see it similar to flavours. What if regulation stipulated that you needed to have food that everyone could eat? Nothing spicy. Must have meat options at veg restaurants etc. just so that no one would be discriminated against when they went out to eat. You’d miss out on different cultures, opportunities for innovation etc. Variety would die.
So, for context, I’m from Australia and familiar with the exact museum in this article. This museum is known for putting forward very provocative art. For example, there is a wall of plaster mould vaginas and they have a soap in the shape of a vagina called ‘Cunt on a rope’. Last time I was there, they had violent and sexual imagery (with warnings outside the entry). This exhibit is par for the course for MONA. The owner is rich enough to drag the court case to the highest level but the intent has been achieved. It got people talking.
I would consider water fountains to be part of public infrastructure and essential, and therefore doesn’t fit into the model that I’m putting forward.
I’m not proposing that essential things like roads, water etc. are segregated but, rather, private businesses can choose how they operate. The risk is public backlash and hurting the bottom line and other businesses can choose to be open and accepting.
For example, queer bars vs het bars. It’s not segregated per se, but a business can choose how they want to operate to draw in the customers they want.
Infrastructure is, and should be, government run so that wouldn’t work with the model I’m proposing.
But the idea is that everyone can open their own and run it by the rules they want. If you or a group don’t like how one thing is run, there is freedom to open up the same thing but make it open for all. This museum is a private one, rather than run by the government, and therefore they can do what they like. The government ones should be open to all because they are elected by the public.
I’m not at all in favour of forcing everyone to comply to uniformity for the sake of inclusivity but I’m all for ensuring that there are spaces available that are inclusive and that there’s freedom to operate how you like, provided that it doesn’t hurt anyone.
I’m all for segregation spaces as long as essential spaces are open to all such as hospitals, parks etc. There are women only gyms where I am and I used to go to them because I felt safer and more comfortable.
I’m late to this conversation but I’ve gone 5 rounds of IVF and it’s cost us most of our savings. IVF didn’t work for us and we’re looking at egg donors. Did you know it’s illegal to pay someone or receive money for being a surrogate or egg donor? We’re having to look overseas because hardly anyone here will do it for free (understandably).
Clearly, the government isn’t interested in anything remotely related to female health.
My vote is for “Yes” by A.B. Original, DJ Total Eclipse and Marlon.
The lyric “I never swore allegiance to the crown” sends chills down my spine.
I wear a capelet in winter and it doesn’t work well with my backpack. I suppose I could design a front wearing pack to carry my laptop.
I think (or hope) most of us know that nuclear is no longer an option for us in Australia and that there are many more sustainable ways to generate energy here.