I just had a tweet of mine, regarding Nick Griffin appearing in Question Time, quoted by the CNN on “International Desk”.
Typically, I missed it, and there are so far no posted vids or transcripts. But it happened, and I have a few million viewers who saw it happen and was told by a CNN anchor.
So that goes onto the CV I guess…
Over 130 bloggere oppfordret partiene generelt og regjeringen spesielt om å ta stilling til EUs datalagringsdirektiv, og si et klart og tydelig nei til at direktivet skal bli norsk lov. I tillegg ble partiene oppfordret til å si ja til om nødvendig å bruke reservasjonsretten i EØS-avtalen for å stanse direktivet.
Av stortingspartiene har Venstre og SV programfestet å bruke reservasjonsretten mot direktivet. FrP og SP har landsstyrevedtak om det samme. KrF er mot direktivet, men vil se konsekvensene av å bruke reservasjonsretten. Høyre er ikke villig til å bruke retten, mens Ap ikke har tatt stilling til direktivet ennå.
En rekke partier utenfor Stortinget, organisasjoner og enkeltpersoner har tatt klart og tydelig stilling mot at direktivet blir en del av norsk lov, og oppfordrer regjeringen til ikke å ta direktivet inn i norsk lov. Siden januar 2008 har det eksistert ulike former for opprop, epostaksjoner, Facebook-grupper som alle er motstanderen av datalagringsdirektivet.
I juni 2008 sa to av våre fremste jurister på europarett Finn Arnesen & Fredrik Sejersted ved senter for europarett, UIO, i en betenkning bestilt av IKT-Norge at det ved bruk av reservasjonsrett materielt sett synes å være svært beskjedne deler av EØS-avtalens Vedlegg IX som vil bli direkte ”berørt”. Samtidig sa regjeringens egen personvernkommisjon at de ikke kunne støtte en innføring av direktivet fordi grunnlaget for innføring av direktivet ikke er tilstrekkelig dokumentert.
Gjennom bloggstafetten tidligere i år og Borgerinitativet nå forener vi kreftene for å stå sterkere sammen. Vi synliggjør en uvanlig bred politisk allianse for personvern og mot datalagringsdirektivet. Alliansen strekker seg inn i regjeringspartiene.
Datalagringsdirektivet er et angrep på den retten hver og en av oss har til å beskytte vårt privatliv. Personvernet innebærer en rett til å være i fred fra andre, men også en rett til å ha kontroll over opplysninger om seg selv, særlig opplysninger som oppleves som personlige. Etter EMK artikkel 8 er personvern ansett som en menneskerettighet.
Med en mulig norsk implementering av Datalagringsdirektivet (direktiv 2006/24/EF), som pålegger tele- og nettselskap å lagre trafikkdata om borgernes elektroniske kommunikasjon (e-post, sms, telefon, internett) i inntil to år, vil nordmenns personvern bli krenket på det groveste.
Datalagringsdirektivet ble vedtatt av EU 15.mars 2006, men fremdeles har den norske regjeringen ikke offisielt tatt stilling til om direktivet skal gjøre til norsk lov eller ikke. Gjennom EØS-avtalen har Norge en reservasjonsrett. Denne har aldri før blitt brukt, men så har man heller aldri stått overfor et direktiv som representerer en så stor trussel mot demokratiets grunnleggende verdier som det datalagringsdirektivet gjør.
I februar iår ble det klart at EU-direktivet må innføres, efter at EU-domstolen avsa dom i saken Irland hadde anlagt mot EU-kommisjonen.
Vi som publiserer dette oppropet slutter oss til “Borgerinitiativet mot EUs datalagringsdirektiv”, og er enige i oppfordringen om å be be Ap, SV og SP gjennom regjeringsforhandlingene si et klart og tydelig nei til at EUs datalagringsdirektiv skal bli en del av norsk lov.
Dette verk av Per Aage Pleym Christensen, Lars-Henrik Paarup Michelsen, Carl Christian Grøndahl og Knut Johannessen er lisensiert under enCreative CommonsNavngivelse-Ingen Bearbeidelse 3.0 Norge lisens.
The youth of today:
“The children now love luxury. They have bad manners, contempt for
authority, they show disrespect to their elders…. They no longer
rise when elders enter the room. They contradict their parents,
chatter before company, gobble up dainties at the table, cross their
legs, and are tyrants over their teachers.”
“The young people of today think of nothing but themselves. They have
no reverence for parents or old age. They are impatient of all
restraint. They talk as if they alone knew everything and what passes
for wisdom with us is foolishness with them. As for girls, they are
forward, immodest and unwomanly in speech, behaviour and dress.”
Quote: Well, both are commonly attributed to Socrates.
Some things never change.
This is the response I, and all other signatories to a petition, got from Number 10.
Thank you for signing this petition. The Prime Minister has written a
response. Please read below.
Prime Minister: 2009 has been a year of deep reflection – a chance for
Britain, as a nation, to commemorate the profound debts we owe to those who
came before. A unique combination of anniversaries and events have stirred
in us that sense of pride and gratitude which characterise the British
experience. Earlier this year I stood with Presidents Sarkozy and Obama to
honour the service and the sacrifice of the heroes who stormed the beaches
of Normandy 65 years ago. And just last week, we marked the 70 years which
have passed since the British government declared its willingness to take
up arms against Fascism and declared the outbreak of World War Two. So I am
both pleased and proud that, thanks to a coalition of computer scientists,
historians and LGBT activists, we have this year a chance to mark and
celebrate another contribution to Britain’s fight against the darkness of
dictatorship; that of code-breaker Alan Turing.
Turing was a quite brilliant mathematician, most famous for his work on
breaking the German Enigma codes. It is no exaggeration to say that,
without his outstanding contribution, the history of World War Two could
well have been very different. He truly was one of those individuals we can
point to whose unique contribution helped to turn the tide of war. The debt
of gratitude he is owed makes it all the more horrifying, therefore, that
he was treated so inhumanely. In 1952, he was convicted of ‘gross
indecency’ – in effect, tried for being gay. His sentence – and he
was faced with the miserable choice of this or prison – was chemical
castration by a series of injections of female hormones. He took his own
life just two years later.
Thousands of people have come together to demand justice for Alan Turing
and recognition of the appalling way he was treated. While Turing was dealt
with under the law of the time and we can’t put the clock back, his
treatment was of course utterly unfair and I am pleased to have the chance
to say how deeply sorry I and we all are for what happened to him. Alan and
the many thousands of other gay men who were convicted as he was convicted
under homophobic laws were treated terribly. Over the years millions more
lived in fear of conviction.
I am proud that those days are gone and that in the last 12 years this
government has done so much to make life fairer and more equal for our LGBT
community. This recognition of Alan’s status as one of Britain’s most
famous victims of homophobia is another step towards equality and long
overdue.
But even more than that, Alan deserves recognition for his contribution to
humankind. For those of us born after 1945, into a Europe which is united,
democratic and at peace, it is hard to imagine that our continent was once
the theatre of mankind’s darkest hour. It is difficult to believe that in
living memory, people could become so consumed by hate – by
anti-Semitism, by homophobia, by xenophobia and other murderous prejudices
– that the gas chambers and crematoria became a piece of the European
landscape as surely as the galleries and universities and concert halls
which had marked out the European civilisation for hundreds of years. It is
thanks to men and women who were totally committed to fighting fascism,
people like Alan Turing, that the horrors of the Holocaust and of total war
are part of Europe’s history and not Europe’s present.
So on behalf of the British government, and all those who live freely
thanks to Alan’s work I am very proud to say: we’re sorry, you deserved
so much better.
Gordon Brown
For those of you innocent of the fashions in alternative lifestyles, polyamory is the practice of being in love with, and having committing relationships with, more than one person. It differs from open relationships in that there is more than just sex involved.
I don’t get it. Well, that is not strictly speaking true. I do get it. Who doesn’t at some point think about having your cake, eating it, and then get cuddled by it afterwards? Twice? Having one cake that likes foreign movies and one cake that likes long walks also seems tempting as an idea. Not to mention the savings one can make by living in a household of more than two adults who all have an income.
I still don’t get it. Perhaps because I am the jealous sort, and the fact that I get to have more than one pie to eat means that all those pies get to eat other pies too. And they will. Even putting aside my own rather childish lack of understanding of “sharing” (I had many sisters, it gave me a good sense of “mine” and “yours”), I have issues understanding.. well.. Logistics.
Polyamory seems totally impractical. From a calendar-management point of view. And from an organisational structure point of view. How do you actually organise the relationship-map? And how do you keep up. It seems like a year 2000 dot.com business nightmare with steady promotions, branching, people being made redundant..
And that might be it. Polyamorous relationships are good training for a position of HR manager or veryverybusy PA.
And it makes hilarious short films. (NSFW)
Dette er ikke en balansert bloggpost.
Ja, jeg vet kontantstøtta er fantastisk for mange av dere, jeg vet ikke alle som tar den er fiender av feminismen, jeg vet dere kjenner noen som har hatt godt nytte av den, og jeg er fremdeles imot den som konsept. Ikke fordi jeg er imot ditt personlige valg, er en sinna feminist, vil ta fra deg barna, mener du er en gammelmodig og tafatt person som ikke kan klare deg i arbeidslivet. Valget er ditt og jeg legger meg ikke opp i det, eller dømmer deg ut i fra det. Dette er en post som ikke handler om deg eller ditt valg, men om trender og samfunnet.
Kontantstøtten er dyr for samfunnet. Her er hvorfor:
Fattigdomsbekjempelse: I Norge er et flertall av barn som lever i fattigdom i et hushold uten arbeid. Dette er temmelig unikt i et europeisk perspektiv (Dog, Sverige har tilnærmet null barnefattigdom) og viser at Norsk lønnsnivå er godt nok, selv for lave inntekter. Den BESTE forsikring mot fattigdom er et hushold med to inntekter. Kontantstøtten gjør det mindre attraktivt å ta lavbetalte jobber som kan føre til en karriære enn å være hjemme. Barnefattigdom fortsetter selv om barna begynner på skolen!
Livsløpshensyn: Kvinner som er hjemme (Og ja, jeg vet det finnes hjemmeværende menn også, det samme gjelder for dem, men jeg generaliserer ut i fra hvem som for det meste tar bleieskiftet) mister karriæreutvikling, pensjonsopptjenelse, sparepenger, etc. Og blir skilt. Kvinner får hovedomsorg for barn etter skilsmisse. Og de lever lengre enn sine ektemenn (Både fordi de er fem til 10 år yngre, og fordi de ikke dør før 8 år etter dem). Kontantstøtten gjør en trend for kvinner etter skilsmisse og i alderdommen værre enn den er.
Pedagogikk og likhetsarbeid: Ja, barn har godt av ett pedagogisk barnehagetilbud. Nei, det er ikke kontroversiellt annet enn ideologisk selv om man kan argumentere for at folk benytter seg av det mest av oppbevaringshensyn. (Dette er grunnen til Head Start og Sure Start-programmene i både USA og UK) Barn av høyt utdannede foreldre er MER sannsynlig at benytter seg av et slikt tilbud heller enn besteforeldre eller andre løsninger. Og barnehagetilbud gir et bedre grunnlag for å starte skolen. Jeg skal ikke dra den leksa om at innvandrerfamilier må lære ungene sine Norsk, fordi det er ett feigt argument som dyttes foran det virkelige argumentet: Barn av familier med lav sosioøkonomisk status får bedre utdannings-resultater om de har hatt ett pedagogisk barnehagetilbud.
Barnefattigdom: For å sitere min foreleser i familie-policy – “Det finnes kun ett land med tilnærmet lik null barnefattigdom, og det er Sverige. Sverige har ikke en barnefattigdoms-policy, de har en ‘Working Mother Policy’. ” Barn som mottar kontantstøtte er overrepresentert på FAFO sin statistikk over fattige barn. Hvilket vil si at enten er det fattige som velger å ta imot kontantstøtte (og som vi så over er ikke det det beste..), eller så gjør kontantstøtten deg fattig. Ingen av alternativene er særs gode.
Kontantstøtten er dyrere enn barnehageplasser: Ikke i rene utbetalinger. Det er sant nok. Men i tapt skatt, tapt karriæreutvikling og tapt økonomisk aktivitet er den altså det. Jeg vet at det er litt slemt å se på kvinner kun som arbeidere og potensielle skatteytere, men slik har menn blitt sett i alle år, og her må man ha litt likhet og sånn. Den eneste sparingen man får av kontantstøtten er barnehageutbetalingene, og muligens litt mindre fravær fra den arbeidende parten. Også at man slipper betale så mye pensjon etter hvert da… Og nei, vi har ikke en fallende fødselsrate som må hjelpes på med fransk-style pro-natalisme. Norske kvinner har tatt igjen sine mødre når det gjelder føding.
Nei, jeg er ikke objektiv. Jeg vet det er fordeler for mange personlig. Når det er snakk om penger som gis ut kan det liksom ikke unngås at mange synes det er bra. Jeg vet mange misliker tanken på barnehager fra ung alder. Og jeg vet det er et SÅRT tema når noen våger å si at å ta kontantstøtten og å være hjemme med barna er et FEIL valg, fordi for deg var det så veldig rett. Det er ikke DEG jeg prøver å treffe med denne posten. Det er ikke valget å gi barna dine tiden din jeg er imot. Enhver som kritiserer kontantstøtten blir beskyldt for å kritisere andres foreldrekjærlighet. Og det er ikke det jeg vil. (Dessuten er det et argument som lukter lang vei av frynsete debatt-teknikk.)
Men når politikere sier “Som vi mener har valgt feil” om folk som velger å være hjemme, ikke ta det personlig. Ta det som en ærlig mening fra noen som har som oppgave å spare samfunnet penger og negative ringvirkninger. Det er ikke deg personlig som angripes. Det er en ordning som styrker negative tendenser (Som allerede finnes) i fattigdomsbekjempelse som angripes.
Jeg har en innrømmelse å komme med.
Jeg var i ett mindre heldig forhold.
Det var ikke det at jeg ble slått eller noe, ikke det, men det var noe guffent over det hele. Det startet med en vill kink-forelskelse da jeg var 17 i en 26-åring. Noe som i og for seg burde være en varsellampe. Men jeg var oppvakt, sterk, og fant ingen på min egen alder interessante i det hele tatt. Så det var jo greit.
Men så begynte det å gå litt ille. Noen varselsignaler til skrekk og advarsel:
1. Du får kjeft for å ha gått opp i vekt.
2. Mannen raser som en storm over egen mindreverdighet for å deretter grine over ditto men beskylde deg.
3. Du har ikke penger til å dra, fordi du er blitt overtalt til å betale for noen store greier/åpne konto sammen.
4. Mer enn en håndfull venner av deg er merkelig bekymret over at du drar hjem fra byen tidlig eller sier du ikke kan dra ut.
5. Du begynner å underrapportere dine egne bedrifter/mål du har oppnådd for å ikke skade maskuliniteten hans
6. Du endrer kles-stil til noe du ikke liker
7. Du spiller dum i sosiale sammenhenger
Og i ettertid: Du innrømmer ikke til noen hva slags forhold du var i, fordi du skammer deg litt over å ha vært så DUM, du som er så smart, sterk, vakker, dyktig, og opplyst.
Men det er ikke bare deg. Det er meg og. Og andre.
Ikke akkurat voldelig… men… Stakkarslig og stakkarslig-gjørende.
So I went on a bus. And accidentally went ahead of an elderly gentleman.
I said accidentally, because that was what it was. The bus-stop was full of people, I had forgotten my glasses, and I was late for something. This man then started to yell at me. This is fair enough, I did after-all cut in before him. I said something apologetic, told him I hadn’t seen him, and let him move in ahead of me. But he continued to yell.
Apparently i am personally responsible for all that is wrong with the youth of today with their bad manners, teen pregnancy, drinking, skiving, and lack of respect for the elderly.
Wait a sec… Respect for the elderly? This man was in no way old enough to have fended off the nazis singlehandedly, had a far as I was aware not himself produced any of my textbooks, was from his vocabulary not much to look up to in the form of intellectual capacity, had just said that I was going to get drunk and then pregnant ENTIRELY based on my age and an accidental queue-jump, and he demanded respect. Not as a human being, but as a member of a group(Of which there are some members have the greatest respect, but that is by the by), and that his belonging to this group gave him the right to publicly insult members of another group. Due to a hierarchy of status and inherent worth between them.
No matter which groups are considered more or less worth others, and no matter how old the person having these opinions are, I have very little respect for that sort of thinking.
Of course, I could have confronted him with these opinions and drawn lined between his group-hierarchy way of thinking to far less pleasant systems of discrimination, and thus challenged his world-view, perhaps brought a new perspective to him, or have his opinions explained clearer, put in a context…
Some would say that this would be cruel to an old man who is set in his ways and who will never change his ways of thinking. Or in other words that his opinions are of little importance since he is going to die soon anyway, so we might as well humour him. That would be respectful to the elderly.
So I showed him that respect.
I have all respect for recruitment consultants. I have in fact more than once thought I should become an IT recruiter, a career a good match for my technical flair, my relationship management abilities, and general ego. However that industry seems to be in a bit of a dry spot when it comes to starting level jobs, so I have turned my eye to other jobs matching my skills.
The perfect job was advertised. I applied to it. I got called in for interviews, so far so good.
Being no fool and having a mortgage to pay, I also applied for a job at an old employer of mine doing multilingual tech support. I enjoyed this job previously, and the company is rather ok to its employers. Laid back, free coffee, no ridiculous quotas for numbers of calls, and last job I had there I enjoyed and only left to get more experience elsewhere.
So I had 2 job-applications at the same time going on, both for companies I like, both jobs that I would like doing and be amazing at, and both of them through recruitment agents. The difference between the two was like night and day. The one representing me for one job I wrote a linkedin recommendation for before I even got my second interview:
“As a recruitment consultant, Martin is professional and friendly. In dealing with him I was always kept in the loop of developments in my application, and any worries I had were eased by Martin’s good sense of humour. Unlike many recruitment consultants, Martin did not leave the impression that I was a commodity, and care was taken to ensure that I would enjoy my new role, as well as being suited to it. The impression was that I had him working for me and my best interest, as opposed to being pushed through to secure a quick sale. I would highly recommend applying to jobs advertised through Martin.”
Other reccomendations of Martin from people he had got jobs were on much the same theme.
Ok, so one of the recruitment consultants rocked. That is all very nice. But one didn’t. Not wanting to be mean I will not mention names, but rather refer to her as Miss Pushypants. Miss Pushypants works for a large recruitment consultancy where I think she does mostly call-centre recruitment. I am not sure if it the low status of callcentre work, the low pay of it, or the incentive-structure at the consultancy which is to blame, but Miss Pushypants was rude. Very rude.
It started at the first interview I had with her. I ran after work from one side of Edinburgh to the other in 25 minutes. I brought sensible shoes. Then we had a chat, and all was well. Except when I was given advice on how to pass a competency-interview. I had passed one before at the exact same company. But a little help is always nice, and being a bit too patronising when explaining the STAR-system could maybe be explained by her average candidate not having done one before. But then it came: “It is smart wear, I know you are allowed to wear what you want in the scottish government but you can’t wear that.” Yes, I was explained what to wear to an interview as a 23yearold with a degree and had my runningshoes criticised after I had made time for meeting her before end of play on a very short notice.
And I was offered an interview. Unsurprisingly. I am the only Scandinavian in the village, and when I last did that job I did it very well. In preparation of applications being successful, I had arranged two days off. This was not good enough for Miss Pushypants. Miss Pushypants wanted me to have an interview ASAP. But that is not what she said: What she said was “That is not acceptable for the company”. So I tried to arrange a meeting very early or very late. My core hours at the Scottish Government were 10 to 4, and working around that should not have been a problem. When I protested that I did have a real job and daily duties, Miss Pushypants made some stuff up about the person who would interview me not being too happy, and that they all work shifts (true, but not relevant), and that any postponing would be very unfortunate. Yes. That is right. The Recruitment Consultant made the following impression of their client to a potential employee:
“They are an inflexible corporate deathmachine, and you are just another cog to them, they care little about your life, job, or you in general, and they want this to be as fast as possible to get it over with.” -which, as mentioned earlier, they are not. Having seen their recruitment from the other side, I also know they take great care in choosing who they hire, and that they don’t have such a draconic worktime-policy at all.
I went to the interview. It was chilled, relaxed, an old colleague of mine was unsuspectedly there, gave me a hug, and an endorsement. I showed the interviewer my old six-month review to back my claims up. I took a technical test, sat in on a conversation or two, and went home. It was all good. I was offered the job. I had told my interviewer that I had another application in the pipes and that I would have to give it a few days before I accepted. He thanked me for my honesty, and said it was naturally completely ok. He was not “very unhappy” about me stalling.
Over the next few days Miss Pushypants was checking up on me regularly. This is her job and completely ok. I used having another offer in order to try to speed the other job application up, and it worked. I expected a final reply this Friday or Monday, but no luck. So I stalled Miss Pushypants. Kept her updated. And so on. As far as I am concerned, I was applying for a permanent job, a job I was going to have for at least a year, and with several options, I owed it to both myself and all the possible employers to not jump on the first offer.
Miss Pushypants got more and more impatient, and by now it was fairly clear that it was her. All her. Which is good, because if I hadn’t known better, I would have believed in the corporate deathmachine. And not have wanted to work there anymore.
On day six, I was told the following: “You can’t go on like this Oda.” The tone was as patronisisng as ever, and made even me (a sworn scandinavian when it comes to not using any titles) want to tell her that it is Miss Rygh to her, thankyewverymuch.
Today I was told my other job would still be a week or two. Giving me a few options:
1. Accept the job from Miss Pushypants and drop out of the other job
2. Accept the job from Miss Pushypants, not sign anything, and stay in the competition
3. Accept the job from Miss Pushypants, keep the other option, and then quit after a few weeks.
4. Drop out of the Miss Pushypants job.
Option 1 would make me miss out on the dreamjob. Option 2 and 3 would be dishonest, and I don’t want to arrive, take the training, and then leave without having done much work. It also looks horrible on a CV. What was left was to take the chance and drop out of the Miss Pushypants job.
So I phoned her and said as much. And I was given a hiding. A real verbal shower of rude, patronising, and displeased tones. “You can’t ever do this again, if we work with you again you will have to accept within a day or two, this is completely unacceptable, I have a service to run”.
This made me happy that I had turned the job down. I will happily not get paid for a couple of weeks to rob Miss Pushypants of her commission (Clearly her motivation for doing the job fast, cheap, and poorly). How anyone with manners like that can maintain accounts is beyond me. How she can maintain customer service accounts even more so.
More to the point WHAT was unacceptable? Taking my time deciding about a permanent job? Having more than one offer? NOT just accepting the job and then quit three weeks later? Of course the last option would leave you with commission…
My suspicion is this: The difference in levels of service was in direct proportion to the pay and status of the jobs. The Callcentre Job was treated as if I should be happy to have an offer all, that I was a faceless, skill-less moron who needed guided through every step, and paternalistically corrected when I was misbehaving, like an errant child.
So, Miss Pushypants from Search Consultancy in Edinburgh, you are right. This is not acceptable, and it won’t happen again. Because I will use someone else. And tell the company you were representing to use someone else as well. And tell any Scandinavians I come across to avoid your company and any company you work for like the plague.
I know you have a service to run. I know being pushy is your job. I appreciate the search for the quick and easy sale. But you are losing your client and your employer a good reputation by treating adults with such bad manners you made me happy about losing a job offer, even if I didn’t have a better option, just to spite you. It felt kinda good. And it is Miss Rygh to you.
This is in praise of farm work.
When I was little in school, I was smart. REALLY smart. Far too smart. I read ten years above my age. I had general knowledge way above most adults in primary. I spoke english. I was SMART.
I never had to work for a thing in my life. Ever.
In order to shut me up, my teacher gave me books and allowed me to read in class. I essentially had dispensation from education. Because I already knew it. This did wonders for my ego, and wrecked my self-discipline.
If it hadn’t been for farm-work. I was raised on a farm that had grain, two large houses on it, and my best friend was a son of a farmer. I was taken to farms to see where milk came from. Before I was 10, I could identify inflamed teats from the milk produced, knew how to clean the milkingmachine, and knew how you bred animals to get a better cow.
Farmwork you cannot get out of just be being clever. The cows need feeding, every morning. The Hay needs to get in before the rain comes. If you ever wanted to feel the chill to your bones, the fear for your own life, work on a farm when the feed is to be taken in, and remember that your ancestors lived to have you because they survived a winter. Many winters.
Reading Hamsun’s Growth of the soil makes you get a vague idea. But only when your hands are bleeding from lifting hayballs onto a tractor after dark.. Because it might rain tomorrow… Because without hay there is no lifestock through winter… Without living things, you will starve…
Farmwork taught me to work. I painted houses, I mowed lawns, I kept chickens and sold their eggs, me and my pal had projects making us fairly rich, as I recall.
It was honest work. It was life-important work. It was work you could not avoid, not be too smart to do, not skive away from. And without it throughout my upbringing, I would have ended up in a bad place.
This is to honest work. A day of labour. The reward of cold water at the end of it. The five minute break between planting trees where tea happens. The realisation that you are working for something greater than yourself, for food or the forest, or animals. The exhaustion that makes sleep so welcoming at nine in the evening. Real work. Honest work.
Blood, sweat, and laughter.