Hide and seek

Thought I'd put the hide & seek cue in the rack but after 5 years plus away from this childhood game of obfuscation & discovery, my 13 year old son was keen for a game this afternoon at his mum's place  I was up for it so with the help of a timing device, his smart phone (for the "coming ready or not" part), we were off.  He led off with standing behind the drapes, which I gleefully pulled back to reveal him.  I went for the boo from behind a bush for my first turn & then serious attempts at not being seen commenced.  He hid in the pantry & after 20 minutes I still hadn't found him - his wait was so long he was forced to gorge himself on biscuits while he waited.  As the game unfolded I quickly realised there were many less places to hide my 110 kg, 190 cm, 56 year old self than for my son, less than half my size, to secrete himself.  I surveyed a number of places and rejected them for their likely accompaniments of bees and/or spiders, or the failure of my inner tree climbing Tarzan to come to the fore.  The game escalated slightly with his mate from over the road joining in.  I clearly remember, back in the old days, that the sought person would be sought by the others in the game and there not being one seeker seeking two others, but that's the way they wanted to play it.  Fortunately for me, this played into my hand because when they hid they were bigger & the earlier small target strategy was further compromised by the two boys being inclined to laugh as I, unbeknownst, passed close to them.  My son's mother drew the line at him wanting to hide in the boot of her car, but hidden elsewhere he artfully deployed the remote control boot release button to mock me while I scratched my head looking for my quarry, trying to work out where the boot release was being operated from.  Almost two hours later the game was over but I issued a challenge to my son saying I'd be a lot better at hiding during our next game of hide and seek played at my place, where my unrivalled local knowledge of nooks and crannies would stand me in good stead.

Team Australia

Four issues to get your head around if you are considering being on 'Team Australia'.  You need to know that:
1. 'Team Australia' members should wear blue ties when representing 'Team Australia', and the unofficial song for this is "Blue ties, nothing but blue ties do I see..." (apologies to Irving Berlin).
2. It is okay for 'Team Australia' members to shirtfront those not in 'Team Australia' for 'unTeam Australia' activities.
3. If you don't love coal, you cannot, in good conscience, be considered a member of 'Team Australia'.
4. It's okay for 'Team Australia' members to go overseas and fight an apocalyptic death cult but not okay for 'Team Australia' members to go overseas and fight an apocalyptic fatal disease.

Gambling on war

Well known on line bookmaker: As part of a service that is 2nd to none for those who love a bet, I will now be offering punters bets on wars our country is involved in.  First, that mecca of conflicts with uncertain outcomes, the Middle East, where I have framed a market for the upcoming 'A Death Cult' versus 'Team Australia'.  I grant you, there is some uncertainty about what will constitute a 'win' in this match up, but because the contest involves 'A Death Cult', for this introductory betting on war offer, I will pay out on any death cult that comes up against 'Team Australia'.  If the Kurds make territorial advances or if Kurdistan receives recognition as a State, I will pay a place dividend for those who have backed 'Team Australia'each way.  If a new axis of evil is identified, with 'A Death Cult' forming an alliance with a rogue state, no matter how shifting that alliance, I will pay place backers of 'A Death Cult' a dividend better than any TAB or online bookmaker framing a market on international conflicts.  Should a leader of a country that is a friend of 'Team Australia' declare 'Mission Accomplished' the free world will be a freer place and all win bets on 'Team Australia' will be paid, even if there is a protest.  If Iraq or Syria falls & 'A Death Cult' forms a caliphate, then if you've backed 'A Death Cult' consider yourself a winner.  Finally, we have our special bets.  Should the 'Team Australia' forces be farewelled by a tearful Senator Sarah Hansen-Young, the first 15 punters wagering on this contest will receive twice their initial stake back, no matter what the outcome of the conflict.  Also, remember, my special offer of a bonus $250 free bet if this is your first bet with me.  And as always, gamble responsibly.

Clutching at straws

Labor hasn't been a bad government but they are on the nose with the electorate.  The last time they were on the nose with the electorate was 1996 and in the last week of that campaign, in desperation, they made some inaccurate claims about future Howard government cuts.  From memory this involved Treasurer Ralph Willis being duped by letter supposedly written by Jeff Kennett that supposedly outlined planned cuts to be made by John Howard, but which was in fact a forgery.  It seems that now, with less than two weeks to go before the election, and being in a similarly parlous position, they've gilded the lily again, this time trying to question Opposition costing figures, but the bureaucracy has called them out.  As a Labor supporter and voter, I would have hoped they'd remember the mistake they made late in the 1996 campaign, when they overplayed their hand.  Admittedly they were going to be beaten then, but that monumental gaffe cost them seats.  Subsequently they just lost the 1998 election, which might have had a different result if they hadn't had so many seats they needed to win, after the 1996 landslide.  Labor, when losing power, federally, remind me of the gambler who, having had a bad day on the punt, increases his/her stake as the last race of the day beckons (the 'get out stakes' it is known as) to recover their losses, but they only end up in a worse losing position than would otherwise have been the case.

Search for meaning

I saw something recently that initially encapsulated the tendency to angst, the obsessional wondering about what is coming next, or to put it another way, the yearning clamor, concomitant with modern day life.

This visual perceptual prompt asked me something of a general nature, but before I could try and find a response to its inquiry, I believed I needed to work out more precisely what was being sought by this query.  I pondered this interrogative device.  It seemed to be putting me on the spot and leading me to plot a path to the heart of the matter.  It was an uncertainty that highlighted an imperative for certitude or at least demanded a way forward.  How it went about seeking a purposeful, knowing reaction from me was confronting.  It was insistent that now was the time for finding the truth; it was a declaration that there was an information void that needed to be filled with something meaningful.

I looked down and peered intently at it.  As I stared harder, it gradually dawned on me that the answer was staring me in the face.  This poser was not only the interviewer: it went beyond tentative suggestions, past a firming up of hypotheses, to a declaration of verisimilitude.  I realized I had found a meaning in my life!  I had seen and absorbed the full impact of a thick human hair in the shape of a question mark, a profound piece of punctuation, alone upon a toilet seat.  

Tattoos, cosmetic procedures and varicose veins

When I was in my youth (1970s), tattoos were largely taboo.  The two most commonly specified criteria in personal advertisements were "good sense of humour" and "no tattoos" .  I haven't read personal ads recently, but I wouldn't be surprised if "needs to have tattoos" was a requirement people asked for, or at least something that, once introductions were out of the way, gave you some sort of advantage in the mating game.

I guess you can never say never, but I'm highly unlikely ever to get a tattoo - I can't even bring myself to to draw on my skin with permanent marker.

In Darwin recently, I noticed lots of people had tattoos   My travelling companions said this apparent abundance of tattoos was because of the heat: people were wearing fewer clothes, so more flesh was on show with its attendant body art.  But I reckon there were still more tattoos on more people, in this tropical outpost, than is the norm.  Of course the prevalence of 'tatts' in the Top End could be because there are more young people up there than 'down south' and that particular demographic is prone to dabble in the permanent daub.  Unfortunately the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) doesn't collect data about such things.  Despite the lack of ABS data, it can be said, unequivocally, there are more tattoos nowadays than back in the 1970s.

On a slightly different tack, but still in the realm of bodily modification, again when I was in my youth, I remember older people talking about women of middle and old age having their veins done.  This involved the removal from legs of varicose veins, which were deemed unsightly.  I don't know much about current varicose vein removal rates; it's not mentioned much nowadays.  I would guess it's done at the same rate that it was done years ago - again no ABS data.  But as a phenomena, it seems to have receded from view.  I suspect that other cosmetic practices have overtaken it in prominence.  Things like getting botox and having your breasts done or even rhinoplasty.  I've even heard of people having their eyebrow hair permanently removed and then getting eyebrow lines tattooed to their forehead, as a form of cosmetic enhancement.  What I can be sure of though (no need for verification by the ABS) is back when I was young and also nowadays, no one is getting tattoos on their legs of varicose veins.

County seats, state capitols & quirky diocessan boundaries & child abuse

I have wondered why in the majority of USA States, the State capitol is not the largest city.  Examining the maps of the States may help explain this.  In nearly all instances, the State capitol is reasonably central, close to the middle of the State.  Similarly, when you look at US Counties, the County seat seems invariably to be centrally located within the County in question.  I guess this centrality allows governance to be geographically applied in a more equitable and even handed fashion, with less likelihood of places within a State or County being ignored.  All this is supposition and I've done no research to back up my hunches.

I then thought of Catholic dioceses in my home State of Victoria.  When I grew up, Bendigo was the head office of the Diocese of Sandhurst, and it extended as far as Wodonga, almost 300 kms away.  However, back then, a place like Inglewood, only 40 odd kms away from Bendigo, was in a different diocese, and was part of the Ballarat diocese.  As it happened, over the years, Inglewood had a succession of child molesting priests.  It was relatively 'far flung' from Ballarat, seemingly away from their attention.  I  wonder if there was a greater preponderance of child abuse that took place in parishes like Inglewood, relatively far removed from their centre of clerical governance.  I think it will be worthwhile for the upcoming Royal Commission to investigate this.