Creative artistic response

Creative artistic response
This is wonderful. A woman who often gets ridiculed turns her wit and creativity on those who scorn her.

“For about a year, I’d been taking pictures of strangers’ reactions to me in public for a series I called “Wait Watchers.” I was interested in capturing something I already knew firsthand: If the large women in historical art pieces were walking around today, they would be scorned and ridiculed.

So I found a crowded crosswalk farther down La Rambla, used my rangefinder camera to set the exposure and focus of where I would stand, and handed the camera to my assistant. I bought a cup of gelato and began eating it. I’ve learned I get more successful reactions if I am “doing” something.

In my peripheral vision, I saw a teen girl waiting for the signal to cross the street. As I stood there, eating my ice cream, I heard a repetitive “SLAP, SLAP, SLAP” of a hand on skin. I signaled to my assistant to shoot. It was only when I returned home to Memphis and got the film developed that I realized the sound was the girl hitting her belly as she watched me eat. She did this over and over. I have five frames of her with various facial expressions. I called the resulting image “Gelato.”

“I do not know what the strangers are thinking when they look at me.  But there is a Henri Cartier-Bresson moment when my action aligns with the composition, the shutter and their gaze that has a critical or questioning element.  Even though they are in front of a camera, they feel they have anonymity because they are crossing behind me.

And I don’t get hurt when I look at the images. I feel like I am reversing the gaze back on to them to reveal their gaze. I’m fine with who I am and don’t need anyone’s approval to live my life. I only get angry when I hear someone comment about my weight and the image does not reflect the criticism. That’s frustrating: when I didn’t get the shot.”

Pictures of people who mock me

Super for some

Super for some

Important GetUp campaign. Obscene that 1/3 of all tax concession goes to the richest people while the bottom rung gets nothing. Not fair at all.

“We know that nine percent of our pay gets put into superannuation each fortnight.

It’s money set aside for us to live on in our retirement. The government makes a contribution too.

Usually the most beneifts go to those with the least, when it comes to super, it’s different. It’s only super for some.

The richest ten percent of people get fifteen billion in deductions, while the poorest ten percent receive nothing. It’s a recipe for inequality.

The way that the government contributes to some people’s superannuation is by letting them pay less tax. This is called tax concessions, and this year they cost around thirty billion per year.

The treasury predicts that by 2015, they will cost us forty-five billion per year.

So, what would you do if you had forty-five billion dollars to distribute? Divide it up evenly so that everyone retires happy? Sorry, not in the land of the fair
go.Give more to those who have the least? Or would you give the largest slice to those with the most?

One third of that forty-five billion will be handed to the wealthiest ten percent. By 2015, these handouts to the richest will cost you fifteen billion a year.

While zero – that’s right, nothing – goes to the poorest ten percent.

In, fact the top ten percent of people get more than the bottom sixty-nine percent of wage earners.

Is it a fair go to give Australian’s wealthiest people an extra fifteen billion per year when they already have more than enough? That money could be used to help the poorest in their retirement or infrastructure, education, health;
anything our community needs.

But as it is now, super is only super for some.”