A plateful of cookies

So Campbell Live, a post-news opinion/fluff show did an informal poll last night asking whether New Zealanders supported same sex marriage. This is relevant because yesterday the Marriage Equality act was drawn from the ballot box to be discussed and voted upon next month.
The results were a disappointing 42% in favour and 58% against. However, that was an informal poll weighted towards those who don't immediately switch channels after watching the news and who cared enough to text in. There may have been some voting no because of how TV3 used 'same sex marriage' rather than 'marriage equality'. Other polls, including a formal one, have 63% in favour, 6% undecided and 31% opposed, with the undecideds flopping one way or another if only two options are given. The TV3 interview polling also had similar numbers, although they only interviewed like sixty people.

But it was really disheartening to see those numbers. I returned to some thoughts I had previously – that for all that New Zealand loves to project this warm and welcoming, clean, green and liberal image, there are still some nasty pockets of xenophobia, sexism, classism and other types bigotry lurking in our society. It was nice to see that most of the under-30s interviewed were all 'why not?' but quite a few of the older people interviewed were "I don't like that sort of thing, it doesn't belong here" in that supercilious tone that grates on my nerves.

I also wonder if the thing that discomforts people about marriage equality, is that the 'traditional' marriage has a man owning a woman (for... most of history actually) and having power over her, and what brings them to say that 'marriage should be between a man and a woman' is that the thought of a man owning another man is bizarre and why would one man submit to another? A woman having ownership and power over another woman is just as bizarre a thought and both of these situations are as inconceivable as the idea that maybe, perhaps, both parties in a marriage should have equal power and that marriage is a mutual agreement.

I'm just rambling now, but it honestly scares that this thought process might actually be valid for some people, tucked away deep in their minds, not even conscious of how they've reached the conclusion that marriage equality is a bad thing. I have no words as to how incredibly sad that the issue may just revolve around deep-set misogyny and sexism and not religion. I can respect religion, I think people who have unshakeable faith in their chosen belief are pretty cool and that people who fight with their beliefs, e.g. Picasso, are some of the most amazing people, but it isn't churches and religious institutions who are arguing whether or not marriage equality should be a thing.
It's government. It's a law that sets out how a contract between two people exclusively (for the moment) is to be constructed and what lawful and monetary benefits and privileges are obtained as a result of that contract and partnership. It's not asking for a god's blessing over a union, it's a legal binding of two otherwise unrelated people (well, first cousins maybe, depending on local laws and no one really keeps track of second cousins let alone third cousins) done primarily out of love. If it had a different name and you could get a similar contract with your flatmate or best friend, nearly no one would complain.

Marriage used to be a mechanism to ensure that a man had a child who was his that he could pass on his land to. It's not like that any more. We have wills and other complex legal documents that mean that blood and birthright isn't how property is divided any more. Some people don't even want to pass on property. Marriage, in the 'traditional' sense between a man and a woman, is socio-legally outdated.
And yes, I do hope that with marriage equality for homosexual couples there's move toward the concept of marriage beginning to step away from the sexual/romantic concept it currently is to something much more pragmatic that allows for best friends to be labelled as next of kin or long term house mates to manage their house and finances more easily or perhaps plural marriages. But marriage equality for all gender combinations is a good start.

I've more or less just come back from watching a performance of Mozart's The Marriage of Figaro.

Oh god the lulz. We're talking crossdressing because Mozart wanted a mezzo and then CROSS CROSSDRESSING because Cherubino crossdresses in the plot. Said Cherubino is maybe something like fourteen and is hopelessly infatuated with every female he sees (but only pays attention to Susanna and Rosina/Lady Almaviva.)
Susanna is kind of awesome. Just, downright awesome. She outwits the Lord and confuses her husband (who is in turn trying to outwit the Lord Almaviva) and do I really need to say anything more.
Figaro himself was rather okay, but more because he was rather amusing and was a perfect match for Susanna than anything else. (Also, he recognises Susanna in the fourth act because of her slaps voice. This is AMAZING in opera terms but fun because it's obvious they have a Slap Slap Kiss relationship.) Figaro apparently also has a birthmark in the shape of a spatula, which I have only just learnt.

There was of course, the many humorous moments in the play (it is a comedy) but I particularly liked the moment when Marcellina and Bartolo realise they're Figaro's parents and there is a round of "She's his mother? *nod* His mother" x5 because Susanna steps in at exactly the wrong moment and there is a REASON why soap operas are called soap operas. (Knowing the meta makes it funnier.)
There was also the scene in which Rosina and Susanna attempt to dress Cherubino as a girl. Cherubino sings one of the more famous songs from the opera beforehand but as they're stripping him down... Susanna gets to sing something involving the line "Kneel down in front of me". So, funny because it's crossdressing and cross crossdressing and all the implications that stripping down a rather pretty fourteen year old to his underwear entails.
Also funny was in the last act where the Lord Almaviva was doing a very good BATMAN impression with his cloak. Though that might have been more to do with technical aspects...

The technical bits being the gorgeous stage which had lovely vertical 'rooms' that could move and rearrange, a corridor wall-like curtain which had doors in it, A CONVEYER BELT TO MOVE FURNITURE DURING ON STAGE SCENE CHANGES and Rosina's bedroom which had a window that looked like the moon and whose back doubled as the garden.
And the costumes. They had a corsetier on production staff. That should give you an idea of the visual style of the costumes. Even the men's pants and waistcoats had lacing up the back. *swoons* My father thought that keeping the late 18th century costumes was a very good idea – I agree as well, but mostly because they're so PRETTY. (Have a link to the dress rehearsal photos so you can see how awesome they are. The back-stage video is equally hilrious.)
Oh, and Cherubino wears baby blue Converse. And Lord Almaviva looks a bit like Lord Vetinari.


So, reasons to see if you are in Wellington (they had a few seats spare tonight and I think there is another day or two to go): the costumes and set are amazing. The performers are similarly amazing.
Reasons to see it in your lifetime: It's better than The Magic Flute. Seriously. Half the play is spent on switching clothes with other people and LYING, not on religious allegory. (Although you do kind of need awesome performers.) Nor is half the opera devoted to someone going mad.
The meta is fun too, especially all the tropes.

Now I wish there was an opera fandom which wasn't based on the performers.

80% or 24/30 (give or take a mark)
And the assessed items were very tasty. Although I got pinged for seasoning, yet again.

Here, have some music to celebrate.

( The Brunettes - If you Were Alien )

( Blood Red Shoes - It's Getting Boring by the Sea )

( Minuit - 25 BUCKS )

( Giana Factory - Bloody Game )

( Lucid 3 - AM Radio )

I don’t get it. I really don’t get it.

TVNZ should know the popularity of Torchwood. The Acquisitions administrator KNEW what she was getting when she made the deal.

*is absolutely boggled*

Still, I am excited. Because it’s showing again and while I doubt anything could top my love for Meat THIS'LL BE GOOD.

Surprised to find not that many angry blogs were written about it. I only found a few on NZ news sites (one where TVNZ even promised they’d put up an article when Torchwood returned) and general ‘grrr’ at TVNZ and how we should all send them TURNIPS, possibly even rotten ones, to make them stop this nonsense.
I’d rather send them some jellyfish or something else that looks appropriately alien-like.

Or perhaps everyone who would’ve written an angry blog/called them up downloaded after being fed up after waiting a year for it. And now resolutely snob TV2.
I don’t blame them.

 

I also find the lack of the season two box set on the Whitcoulls website intriguing. Slightly fishy too.

Though the season two box set doesn’t quite have the extensive extras that season one did, for which I am sad.  Extras make DVDs awesome. However, it does mean the set is 2 discs smaller and about $30 cheaper.

Need to prod the father figure about that.

 

Oh! Am I glad I delayed the posting of this. (All of the above was written yesterday and the day before.)
This morning, I got a response to my angry letter, and although it says nothing about WHY Torchwood has been given little advertising material, it does say they hope to run immediately into season three.

( The response )

Isn’t that awesome? You get points for trying TVNZ. You get points for trying.

Okay, so everyone in New Zealand now knows about the tuis in Inglewood who sing the Pizza Hutt jingle.

But.... it only sings the "oh-eight-hundred" part right before going onto the eight (not eighty) before pausing and going horribly off tune on the "THReeeeE!!"

Here's the link (with link to audio clip) for you to see what I mean: http://www.stuff.co.nz/4817679a4560.html

Crossposted this like crazy, as it's something I think most people I know would be interested in. (It's about education)