overview for bignose

1 in 3 men report using intimate partner violence. Here’s how we can better protect women – and help men in c/australia@aussie.zone

[–] bignose@aussie.zone 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

No. That is one question they ask. It is not how they define intimate partner violence.

The definition they use is right there in the report:

What is intimate partner violence? In this research, we adopt the definition of intimate partner violence set out in the National Plan as:

Any behaviour within an intimate relationship (including current or past marriages, domestic partnerships or dates) that causes physical, sexual or psychological harm ... Intimate partner violence can occur outside of a domestic setting, such as in public, and between 2 people that do not live together. (DSS, 2022, p 37)

So if the behaviour does not (my emphasis) “cause physical, sexual or psychological harm”, it does not match their definition of intimate partner violence.

356

Whatever you decide to name 'em (aussie.zone)

submitted 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) by bignose@aussie.zone to c/ausmemes@aussie.zone

31 comments fedilink

Aldi alternatives in c/ama@aussie.zone

[–] bignose@aussie.zone 2 points 3 weeks ago

A good local baker, especially one that will make a decent sourdough, is a must wherever we live.

1

Not Makers: The unjust poverty and unearned wealth of colonialism (www.oxfam.org)

submitted 4 months ago by bignose@aussie.zone to c/RTFA@aussie.zone

0 comments fedilink

Our latest annual inequality report, “Takers Not Makers” explores how most billionaire wealth is taken, not earned - with 60% coming from either inheritance, cronyism or monopoly power. Furthermore, our deeply unequal world remains colonial in many ways. There is a long history of colonial domination which has largely benefited the richest people. This system still extracts wealth from the Global South to the super-rich 1% in the Global North at a rate of $30million an hour. This must be reversed.

To contribute to meaningful systemic change, governments must:

Radically reduce inequality – setting global and national goals to do so.
Repair the wounds of historical colonialism through apology and reparations
End systems of modern-day colonialism.
Tax the richest to end extreme wealth.
Promote South-South cooperation and solidarity.
End ongoing formal colonialism in all forms.

32

Repair, replace, refund, cancel: Problem with a product or service you bought (www.accc.gov.au)

submitted 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) by bignose@aussie.zone to c/australia@aussie.zone

8 comments fedilink

We accept reports where people consider a business is doing something they shouldn’t. We use the reports to inform our education, compliance and enforcement work.

When a business sells a product or service that doesn’t meet basic rights, known as consumer guarantees, it must offer the consumer a solution.
Businesses must not tell consumers to take the problem to the manufacturer or importer.
When a product has a major problem, consumers can choose between a refund or replacement.
When a service has a major problem, consumers have a right to alter their agreement with the service provider.
Businesses must fix a minor problem with a product or service by at least giving a free repair.

Google will rename Gulf of Mexico following Donald Trump declaration in c/worldnews@aussie.zone

[–] bignose@aussie.zone 2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

So their announcement seems to be saying they'll follow what the national government officially calls the feature:

In an X post on Monday, Google said its Maps service would reflect the change once it is officially updated in the US Geographic Names System. The change will be visible to Google Maps users in the US, but it will remain listed as Gulf of Mexico for those accessing the platform from Mexico. Outside of the two countries, users will see both names.

And, yeah. What is the alternative policy from Google that we're proposing? That Google should be sovereign in itself, declare they'll name it whatever seems right to Google, and not defer to the government appointed names for things? Based on what, exactly?

I want Google subject to official government policy, and not to ignore it. I want Google Maps to follow the official name when, for example, Ayer's Rock is now officially called Uluru.

This specific government policy (that the Gulf of Mexico be changed to the "Gulf of America") is stupid and jingoistic. But is the answer to that, we want corporations empowered to ignore government policy?

If the government of the day orders that Uluru is now called "Aussie Stone", and Google announces they'll update maps to follow the change of official name? My objection is not that Google follows the official name; it's that the government of the day is wrong and needs to be ousted.