Showing posts with label health. Show all posts
Showing posts with label health. Show all posts

Tuesday, September 2, 2014

Lynas gets full operating licence before TOL expiry date!

By Eileen Ng. Published by The Malaysian Insider on 2 September 2014.
The Lynas rare-earth refinery in Gebeng, Pahang has been granted a Full Operating Stage Licence (FOSL), days before its two-year Temporary Operating Licence (TOL) expires midnight today.
The Atomic Energy Licensing Board (AELB) director-general Hamrah Mohd Ali said the board met on August 21 and agreed to issue a two-year FOSL to Australian rare earth miner and producer Lynas after it fulfilled all the conditions set.
"They have complied with all the conditions set by us during the TOL stage and that is why the licence was issued," he told The Malaysian Insider when contacted today.
He said this included having a permanent disposal facility, a condition set by the TOL, which Lynas detractors had accused the Australian company of failing to comply with.
To this Hamrah said: "We work based on science and facts, not hearsay. They have submitted all the relevant documents to the board which showed they have complied with the conditions set and that is why we granted the licence to them."
Hamrah said the board could issue FOSL of between one and three years but he could not explain why Lynas was given a two-year licence.
"It is up to the board to decide on the tenure of the licences. Lynas is one of the 2,000 plants in Malaysia where we issue licences but the company can renew their licence after the two years has lapsed," he said.
The Australian mining company chose Malaysia for its operations following generous incentives including pioneer status and a 12-year tax holiday. It employs some 300 personnel in its Kuantan facility.
Despite strong protest from environmentalists, in September 2012, the AELB granted Lynas (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd a TOL for a two-year period ending on September 2, 2014.
In December last year, the board said Lynas had submitted last July the results of its research on recycling its waste for commercial purposes.
However, it said further study was needed on the findings.
The main concern over the rare-earth processing plant was contamination of the coastal environment and the adverse health impact which could result from the mismanagement of radioactive waste streams.
This fear stemmed from the experience in the 1980s at Mitsubishi Chemical’s Asian Rare Earth plant in Bukit Merah, Ipoh, which was shut down more than two decades ago and linked to cases of leukaemia because of radioactive exposure, some of which were fatal.
The board had on several occasions assured residents that it was monitoring the operations of the Lynas plant around the clock and said it had found radiation levels onsite and offsite to be within acceptable limits.
Link: http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/lynas-gets-full-operating-licence-before-tol-expiry-date

Thursday, February 27, 2014

The Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement: It is as clear as mud


By Joseph Sipalan. Published by The Malay Mail Online on 27 February 2014.

Representatives from the 12 Pacific Rim nations involved in the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPPA) left Singapore yesterday with little to show for four days’ worth of intense negotiations.

The BBC’s headline yesterday screamed, “No deal”, despite earlier optimism — particularly from the United States — of possible progress ahead of President Barack Obama’s scheduled visit to Asia in April.

The 12 prospective TPPA members, however, said in a joint statement that they had made “further strides towards a final agreement.”

“While some issues remain, we have charted a path forward to resolve them in the context of a comprehensive and balanced outcome,” read the statement, cited by Singapore-based broadcaster Channel News Asia.

Try reading the quote again. Make any sense?

If it does not, then you are probably as clueless about the TPPA as the half billion people living in Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, the United States and Vietnam — whose governments are engaged in the 12-way talks.

And with details of the controversial free trade pact hidden in the murk of a so-called confidentiality clause imposed by the United States, what could we possibly glean from such cryptic communications?

1. It is as clear as mud

Under the United States-initiated TPPA, prospective member nations hold joint negotiations to flesh out general policy, but the United States also holds parallel bilateral talks with each of the other 11 nations, all hush-hush.

Unlike the pending Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) deal with the European Union (EU) — which bares every single detail to every EU citizen — that right to information has been taken out of the TPPA negotiations.

How will this deal pan out? Your guess is as good as anyone’s.

2. There is no end in sight

Sure, they have set a deadline to finalise the agreement by year end. They said the same thing before heading into the previous round of negotiations — incidentally also hosted by Singapore — last December.

There are simply too many competing interests to expect any quick resolution to disputes over who should make concessions and for which industries.

For example, Japan will not budge on its robust domestic agriculture industry and Malaysia is adamant on keeping its affirmative action policies.

Which brings us to ...

3. How far can Malaysia counter pressure from the United States?

Sadly, not all nations are equal.

No matter how good its negotiators, Malaysia is up against arguably the world’s most powerful nation.

As much as Malaysia wants to exclude from the deal areas concerning Bumiputera issues, government procurement and state-owned enterprises among other things, going at it alone against the United States may not be the most effective strategy.

You can try convincing a bully twice your size that he gains no benefit from punching you in the face, but chances are the bully knows he holds the advantage and lands one on your kisser anyway.

With four out of the 12 negotiating parties coming from ASEAN, it is curious why they are not making a joint stand.

Indonesia opted out of the TPPA over concerns that any deal would undermine its affirmative action policies. Why not Malaysia?

The United States insists that there is more good to be gained from being part of the TPPA, but why did they not then try and convince all 10 ASEAN members to band together to even out the odds?

But then again, maybe ASEAN nations did try to present a united front. We do not know. Darn that confidentiality clause.

Wednesday, October 23, 2013

Bagaimana pula dengan hak-hak Masyarakat Pribumi Bukan-Islam?


Malaysia telah mengambil langkah untuk melindungi hak masyarakat pribumi ketika ia menuju ke arah kemajuan untuk menjadi negara berpendapatan tinggi menjelang 2020.

Kuasa Usaha Perwakilan Tetap Malaysia di Pertubuhan Bangsa-bangsa Bersatu (PBB) Raja Reza Raja Zaib Shah berkata pembuat dasar Malaysia memainkan tanggungjawab untuk mengiktiraf dan menangani keperluan semua lapisan masyarakat termasuk kira-kira 150,000 masyarakat pribumi.


"Ke arah memastikan hak Orang Asli dan lain-lain masyarakat pribumi kekal didukung dan dilindungi, kerajaan berterusan mengambil langkah memperluas keperluan makanan, perlindungan, kesihatan, pendidikan dan pekerjaan mereka," katanya.

Beliau berkata demikian dalam kenyataan mengenai Item Agenda 66: Hak Masyarakat Pribumi pada Jawatankuasa Ketiga Sesi ke-68 Perhimpunan Agung PBB di New York pada Isnin.

Raja Reza berkata Malaysia terus komited untuk memperkukuh keberkesanan pihak berkuasa berkaitan seperti Jabatan Pembangunan Orang Asli selain pegawai negeri dan daerah yang bertanggungjawab kepada kebajikan dan kemajuan masyarakat ini.

Dalam kenyataan berasingan pada Jawatankuasa Kedua perhimpunan agung itu, beliau berkata Malaysia akan terus berkongsi pengalaman terutama dalam bidang menghapuskan kemiskinan dan membina keupayaan dengan negara kurang membangun di peringkat serantau dan antarabangsa.


Lebih ramai tok batin dan ketua kampung Orang Asli akan dihantar mengerjakan ibadah haji menerusi Program Khas Haji tajaan Yayasan 1Malaysia Development Berhad (Yayasan 1MDB) pada masa akan datang.

Setiausaha Politik kepada Perdana Menteri yang juga pengerusi jawatankuasa itu, Datuk Jailani Ngah berkata untuk tahun depan, dijangka 30 orang akan dibawa mengerjakan ibadah itu berbanding hanya lima orang tahun ini...

Sebanyak 800 orang terdiri daripada imam, ketua kampung dan pengerusi jawatankuasa kemajuan dan keselamatan kampung (JKKK) menunaikan haji menerusi bawah program itu tahun ini. Kumpulan kedua dijangka tiba Sabtu ini.

Pautan: http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/244614

The Orang Asli community in the Peninsula will not stand to benefit from any affirmative action plans for the Bumiputeras unless concrete policies are put in place to first address their basic demands. 

In fact, Orang Asli activist Tijah Yok Chopil said some 180,000 Orang Asli,  from about 852 villages, may very well "fall victim" to lucrative incentives given out through the latest Bumiputera Economic Empowerment Plan.

"The government says it is giving out millions of ringgit in tenders and contracts to the Bumiputera developers. Part of these contracts will involve developing land for commercial purposes. 

"But when it comes to land development projects, the Orang Asli often become the victim as the status of their native customary land [tanah adat] is not recognised by the government," said Tijah, who founded the Village Network of Peninsular Malaysia Orang Asli as a non-governmental organisation to champion causes affecting her community.

"We are demanding for recognition of our customary lands because it forms the basis of Orang Asli's survival as a community," said Tijah when met by theantdaily.

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak had last month unveiled the Bumiputera Economic Empowerment Plan, reportedly worth almost RM30 billion, which aims to reduce inequality of income not only between Bumiputeras and non-Bumiputeras, but also among Bumiputeras themselves.

"I cannot see how the Orang Asli can benefit from these projects, tenders and contracts when the government can't even adequately resolve our most basic demands," said Tijah...

The plight of the Orang Asli community will once again be brought to global attention at the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) Universal Periodic Review, scheduled to be held at its headquarters in Geneva from Oct 21 to Nov 1...

The Village Network recommendations are recorded in one out of 28 stakeholders’ reports submitted to the UNHRC on Malaysia and endorsed by a coalition of 54 Malaysian NGOs that came together as Comango. A separate detailed report was also submitted to the UNHRC on behalf of the Society for Threatened Peoples. 

Among others, it stated that the Orang Asli face severe marginalisation and discrimination in socio-economic opportunities, as well as displacement and eviction from their ancestral lands. It also stated that 76.9 % of the Orang Asli are living under the poverty line while 35.2 % live in extreme poverty, a sad fact considering the millions in allocations which have been channelled through the country's annual budget.

Read more here:

Sunday, November 25, 2012

Green Walk ends near Dataran amid blockade



By Leven Woon. Published by Free Malaysia Today on 25 November 2012.

Thousands of Green Walk marchers today gathered along Jalan Raja after their route to Dataran Merdeka were blocked off by the authorities. The marchers then decided to sit down by the road, facing a police barricade that stopped them from entering Dataran Merdeka which has been cordoned off since yesterday.

The police have also informed the marchers that no action would be taken as long as the police barricade remained unbreached. At the same time, the marchers also formed a volunteer team to form a human chain to keep the other marchers from breaching the police barricade. The marchers were been joined by some Pakatan leaders.

Earlier, the organisers said the marchers had gathered at the Sentul market at about 1pm today before embarking on the last leg of the 300km march from Kuantan which started 13 days ago. The march started on Nov 12 by Himpunan Hijau chairman Wong Tack to campaign against the controversial Lynas rare earth plant in Gebeng as well as to highlight other environmental issues.

The crowd later broke into jubilation when Wong Tack arrived at the scene at 5.30pm. “The people have risen, the choice is in our hand,” he said while addressing the crowd. He said the marchers travelled through 15 townships during their trek, in which he saw more and more people coming forward to “defend the future of the country”. “We are not the last generation of this country, we will take responsibility, we will make the country better,” he told the cheering crowd.

The crowd, which at one point rose to about 10,000, then dispersed soon after, leaving only about 300 marchers behind as at 6pm... These marchers are planning to follow through with their original plan of camping at Dataran Merdeka for the night. Wong Tack said the marchers would follow instructions from the authorities but would not disperse.

“Tonight I decided to set foot here, I will talk to the nature. Tomorrow I’ll be here to witness the sunlight,” he said. However, Wong’s energetic speech was followed by Dang Wangi police chief Zainuddin Ahmad’s announcement that Wong would be investigated under Section 9(5)  of the Peaceful Assembly Act 2012.

He said Wong as the organiser has failed to apply for an assembly permit as required under Section 9(1) of the same act. Additionally, the Kuala Lumpur City Hall (DBKL) also said that the marchers were prohibited to step into Dataran Merdeka because it was undergoing renovation.

In reply, Wong argued that he was not the organiser of the march because “everyone came on their own initiative”. He also mocked the authorities for their “hospitality”. “Along the way, every schools, businesses, villages and mosques opened their doors for us. But now that we have arrived at Dataran, after 55 years of independence, we are not allowed to set foot inside and rest,” he said.

Wong also urged everyone to gather at the spot tomorrow for the “People’s Assembly” to decide the next move. Traffic along Jalan Raja too returned to normal at about 6.30pm.

Meanwhile, Deputy Inspector-General of Police Khalid Abu Bakar said the group had breached the Peaceful Assembly Act 2011 as it was a street gathering and some of the participants have brought their children along. There were also no presence of police water cannon trucks or the Federal Reserve Units at Dataran Merdeka today.

Link: 

Thursday, September 6, 2012

Miner Lynas gets Malaysia rare earths plant approval



Australian miner Lynas on Wednesday said it had secured a temporary operating licence for its delayed $800 million rare earths facility in Malaysia and will begin production in October. Receipt of the temporary licence will enable Lynas to commence the transport of rare earths concentrate and prepare for the first feed to kiln, which is expected in October, the firm said in a statement.

The plant in eastern Pahang state has been dogged by protests from environmentalists and residents over concerns of radiation for the past two years and they have threatened to organise a blockade of the refinery. It has also become a political issue in Prime Minister Najib Razak's home state ahead of elections that must be held by the middle of next year.

"Like everyone at Lynas, I am eagerly anticipating the safe commencement of operations at the LAMP (Lynas Advanced Materials Plant) and being able to supply our customers with product," executive chairman Nicholas Curtis said. The Lynas plant was ready to begin operations nine months ago but production was delayed due to strong public opposition with legal challenges by residents still pending.

Local MP and senior opposition figure Fuziah Salleh, who has driven the anti-Lynas movement, told AFP the move by the government showed complete contempt for the courts. "Even though it is not illegal, it is completely unethical as they are jumping the gun," she said.

Andansura Rabu, who leads the Stop Lynas Coalition of residents, said he was shocked by the decision given the next court date is on Monday. "We are thinking of that and will call a meeting on what to do next," he told AFP when asked if they would follow up threats of blockading the plant.

The refinery is set to become one of the few sites outside China to process rare earths -- metals used in high-tech equipment ranging from missiles to mobile phones. Malaysia's Atomic Energy Licensing Board granted the temporary licence for the plant to begin operations for an initial two-year period under strict safety requirements.

Related reports:
http://www.malaysia-chronicle.com/index.php?option=com_k2&view=item&id=39225:big-trouble-for-bn-anti-lynas-groups-to-blockade-kuantan-port-pursue-injunction&Itemid=2

Anti-Lynas groups and critics rallied together to strongly condemn Prime Minister Najib Razak's government for giving a temporary operating licence to the Australian miner, allowing it to begin its rare earth refinery operations by October this year.

"Issuance of TOL showed complete disrespect to the decision of the court by the Minister. It looks like BN doesn't want to learn and Najib's 'People First' pledge is just lip service," PKR MP for Kuantan Fuziah Salleh told Malaysia Chronicle.

"Just days ago in Raub, also his home state mind you, 15,000 people came together to protest cyanide gold mining. But BN is still deaf and blind to the people's wishes. It still wants to pretend it is correct and everyone else in the nation is wrong."

In an immediate response, environmental action group Himpunan Hijau responded by vowing to blockade Kuantan Port if Lynas starts to ship ores into the country for processing at the controversial Lynas Advanced Materials Plant (Lamp) in Gebeng, Pahang.

“I will guarantee that their ore shipments will not slip past our blockade. We will mount the biggest civil disobedience event ever seen in the country and get all the groups together. The port of Kuantan will not be operational as long as the ore is there,” said Himpunan Hijau chairperson Wong Tack...

Meanwhile, the Save Malaysia Stop Lynas (SMSL) promised it would continue to seek an injunction to freeze the TOL issued earlier by this week by

http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/nation/2012/09/05/lynas-gets-temporary-operating-licence/
The plant is considered important to efforts to break China’s grip on rare earths that are used in products ranging from smartphones to hybrid cars. In an immediate reaction, Kuantan MP and vocal opponent of the Lynas project Fuziah Salleh questioned the timing of AELB’s decision to issue the TOL to Lynas. She said that AELB should have waited first for the hearing of a related matter filed by concerned residents in the court. “The MOSTI minister whose decision is being challenged and is the basis for the judicial review should know better than to agree on the issuance of the TOL to Lynas,” she said in a statement.

http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/opinion/article/preventing-the-next-lynas-or-raub-mine
Development that happens without consultation is oppressive to communities. Discovering one fine day that there is highway about to plough its way through your house is upsetting.

Having your development project picketed, protested and pilloried in public is also a weight on developers. But that’s what happens when you don’t consult sufficiently with local people. That’s what happens when you think it is sufficient to secure “buy-in” at the political level in order to carry out your project.

Free, prior and informed consent (FPIC) is an approach outlined in international human rights law and declarations. It essentially upholds the right for project-affected peoples to be consulted by, and to negotiate with, project developers on the impact of a project on their community. Greater weight should be accorded to a community’s right to say “No” to a project.

At its heart is the idea that the pre-existing moral and property rights of residents should balance the privileges granted to the yet-to-be-constructed property of a private developer.

Instituting such rights within the EQA, or within an equivalent law, will not mean the end of development in Malaysia. It will mean that development planning will not be something that can simply be imposed from “on high”, rather it must be negotiated with affected peoples.

Implementing these two reforms would go far in improving the integrity and credibility of the EIA process and preventing, or at least reducing, instances where development projects are “sprung” on communities, which leads to campaigns, lawsuits and political problems.

Communities can feel much more secure in their rights to property, health, and a clean environment.

Developers should have greater confidence that their projects can proceed without significant interruption, delay or reputation problems following adequate consultation.

Friday, July 20, 2012

Marriage for the 99%: Seeing Family as a Social Justice Issue


Marriage for the 99%: Seeing Family as a Social Justice Issue
How research demonstrates that marital status can predict a person's socioeconomic status.
By Glenn T. Stanton. Published by Christianity Today on 13 July 2012.

Bill Galston, a senior fellow at Brookings who served as President Clinton's domestic policy advisor, has explained that an American today must only do three things to avoid living in poverty: graduate from high school, marry before having a child, and have children after age 20. Only 8 percent of people who do these three things are poor, while a stunning 79 percent who fail to meet these expectations live in poverty.


Charles Murray of the American Enterprise Institute makes important observations of how marital status is related to poverty in his important new book, Coming Apart: The State of White America, 1960–2010. In 1960, the poorly and moderately educated were only 10 percent less likely to be married than the 94 percent of college-educated Americans who were married. The comparison between the two groups largely held until 1978. Today, these two groups are separated by a 35 percent margin. According to a recent report from the Brookings Institute, the strong rate of marriage among the highly-educated, top-earning Americans has largely held constant and even seems to be increasing. But the bad news is that marriage is sinking dramatically among low and middle-class Americans, down from 84 percent to a minority of 48 percent today—a dramatic decline over the last 40 years, and no indicators hint at a slowing pace. The stark trend line leads Murray to lament, "Marriage has become the fault line dividing America's classes."
In some ways, the concern about marriage and class mobility is not new at all. In 1965, a young Daniel Patrick Moynihan passionately warned his boss, President Lyndon Johnson, and our nation that the new landmark 1964 Civil Rights Act was not likely to be fully successful because the African American family was dangerously fragile and continuing to weaken. On the first page of his infamous report—which was one of the first shots fired in the modern culture war over the family—Moynihan warned of the consequences stemming from the persistent "crumbling" of the African American family: "So long as this situation persists, the cycle of poverty and disadvantage will continue to repeat itself" among African Americans.
The problem has persisted: the percentage of all married women in the U.S. is 50 percent (53 percent for white women), but is a tragically low 29 percent for African American women. The wide disparity led to culturally soul-searching books such as Stanford professor Ralph Richard Banks's Is Marriage for White People?, in which he contends that marriage recovery is essential for the socio-economic well-being of African Americans. A larger question could be, "Is marriage for rich people?"
Marriage is not just a personal, sentimental institution, giving couples something to feel good about at each year's anniversary. The scholars at the National Marriage Project working from the University of Virginia offer dramatic evidence in their recent report (page 78) that marriage is a "wealth-generating institution."
All other things being equal, the never-married are 75 percent less wealthy than their continuously married peers. And two people are not necessarily wealthier than one. Cohabitors generally are 58 percent lower in financial wealth than those who are married. And those who divorce and never remarry have a 72 percent lower amount in wealth. The National Marriage Project suggests that those with better financial prospects are not necessarily more likely to marry, but the "institution of marriage itself provides a wealth-generation bonus."
Nobel-winning economist George Akerlof has explained the pro-social influence of marriage upon men and fathers. "Married men are more attached to the labor force, they have less substance abuse, they commit less crime, are less likely to become the victims of crime, have better health, and are less accident prone," he said in a prestigious lecture. He found cohabitation was incapable of providing these benefits, he said, because, "men settle down when they get married and if they fail to get married, they fail to settle down."
And settled-down men work more, earn more, save more, and spend more money on their families than on themselves. Married men are also dramatically less likely to abuse their wives and children than men of any other relational status. Marriage boosts the well-being of women as well in nearly every important measure of well-being.
The evidence is impossible to ignore or explain away. Marriage drives well-being and upward mobility. The absence of marriage drives it down. Any smart poverty alleviation program cannot ignore this.
And for Christians, the research enriches our reading of two of God's earliest and most profound statements about humanity and marriage. First, "It is not good for the man to be alone." Second, "That is why a man leaves his father and mother and is united to his wife." As we are created as an icon of the Trinitarian God in the world, we're made deeply and mysteriously for one another. And just as Jesus yearns deeply for his bride, it is very natural and deep in our wiring for us to yearn for a spouse. It is in our God-imaging nature to do so. No wonder marriage boosts our well-being in such important and diverse ways.  
Such a truth is so evident that even some sociologists grasp it. 
Will the church?
Read more here: http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2012/julyweb-only/seeing-family-as-a-social-justice-issue.html?paging=off

Wednesday, June 20, 2012

Selling Sex Short: The Pornographic and Sexological Construction of Women’s Sexuality in the West



http://feministsforchoice.com/feminist-conversations-meagan-tyler.htm Published by Feminists for Choice on 18 June 2012. By Hennie.
Feminist Conversations is a regular feature at Feminists for Choice, in which we spotlight activists. After reading Meagan Tyler’s book Selling Sex Short: The Pornographic and Sexological Construction of Women’s Sexuality in the West, and not being able to put it down, I had to ask her a few questions. 
You have written extensively about pornography, the sex industry, and the construction of women’s sexuality. How did this interest come about?
Looking back now, it seems rather an odd thing to have chosen to research! What really got me interested was teaching in high-schools in my home town of Melbourne. Most schools in Australia have uniforms and on the few “free dress” days a year, students often want to wear their most coveted pieces of clothing. All the way back in 2004, I noticed a growing number of 12 and 13 year old girls wearing Playboy branded t-shirts, which seemed like a new phenomenon. I wanted to know about the marketing operations that were going on with companies like Playboy and if they were consciously “mainstreaming” their brands. So I went back to uni to do a PhD.

What was your motivation for writing Selling Sex Short?  

The book came out of my PhD research. When I started looking at the mainstreaming of pornography, or what some scholars refer to as “pornographication” or “pornification” of popular culture, it became clear that you can’t look at these pop culture trends without looking at the pornography industry itself. I hadn’t bargained on this when I started and didn’t really know what to expect when my research led me to actually having to look at how elements of the porn industry operate.

A lot of other academics have undertaken content analyses of pornography (i.e. to find out what is in mainstream porn, e.g. what kind of acts, violence, engagement with the camera / other actors etc.) so I needed to do something different. What interested me was what those within the industry actually say about how and why porn is produced, which is what led me to analyse Adult Video News, a porn industry based magazine aimed at producers, directors, distributors and vendors. In intra-industry forums people are often very open and forthright about the problems and harms that they believed are associated with the production of pornography. That, to me, was fascinating, and occasionally, quite disturbing. But it is important that we understand pornographic content in the context of its production. How the porn industry markets its products, for example, gives us important information about how the industry wants itself to be seen and what those within the industry believe consumers want to see and buy.
The other half of the book is really about sex therapy. I had done some previous research on the supposed “epidemic” of female sexual dysfunction (FSD), which was largely “discovered” after Viagra hit the market. In countries like Australia, the US and the UK, some medical experts were claiming that almost half of all women were suffering from some form of FSD. I wanted to find out how the sex therapy industry was marketing its treatments for this form of dysfunction and what larger cultural changes were occurring to create such popular interest in a medicalised understanding of sexuality.
In the end, I wanted to know what kind of sex these two industries were promoting. The trend towards pornographication and the trend towards the medicalisation of women’s sexuality post-Viagra were both noticeable cultural shifts occurring in roughly the same time period but I had no sense of if they were connected or if they related to each other at all. I was quite surprised to find that there were both theoretical and material connections between the two. I had no idea before starting my research, for example, that some therapists recommend pornography to patients as a template to follow for their own sex lives or that a number of porn stars have produced their own sex advice literature.
The book really came about because I didn’t want the debates about these issues to be limited to academia. We need to be having much more informed public discussions about sexuality and inequality.
The book is written from a feminist perspective (especially so radical feminism), what does feminism mean to you?
Yes, the book certainly draws on radical feminist writing and theorising, which is quite unusual these days. So much so, I am often required to dispel myths about radical feminism and feminism in general before even beginning to speak about my research. It is quite bizarre being accused of being a prude or being “anti-sex” when you spend your professional life researching, writing and talking about sex and sexual pleasure!

One of the most important elements of feminism is an understanding that sexuality is socially constructed. That is, sexuality is not purely an issue of biology. How we understand and experience sexuality is heavily contingent upon the cultural and historical circumstances in which we live. This perspective is not unique to feminism, but it is a very important element of all forms of feminism.
So when we talk about inequality between men and women, for example, a social constructionist approach forces us to recognise that this is not an innate or pre-determined situation. This is a situation that can, and should, be challenged.
But challenging inequality is, unfortunately, not enough. There are real material barriers relating to overcoming disadvantage associated with gender, class, race and ethnicity, disability and sexuality (to name but a few). And this is why claims that individuals can simply be “empowered” to overcome disadvantage rings a bit hollow. If we do not recognise that there are often structural and institutional barriers to equality then we tend to blame people for their own circumstances.
To bring about real change, we need social movements. And that is what, to me, feminism is at its heart: a social movement for equality and women’s civil rights.
What are the main points you would like readers to know about the book, but also about pornography and sexology?
The overarching theme of the book is really that sex is a social act. Our conceptions of what sex is, and what is should be, are framed by cultural expectations and norms. The porn industry and sex therapy are both important players in forming these expectations and norms in the West today. So it is important that we question the glamourised version of porn that is (carefully) presented to us in many pop culture representations and that we also question the over-simplified and medicalised version of sexuality presented to us by many so-called “sex experts”. The book shows that the concepts of what “good sex” is in both porn and sexology (the “science of sex”) actually have a lot in common, in particular, the idea that women’s sexuality is largely there to service men’s needs. Hardly a great vision for women’s sexual pleasure!

Ultimately, we need to start imagining versions of sexuality we would like to see and this is how I end the book. There aren’t any grand solutions presented, I just hope it opens up some new conversations.
You discuss the influence of the sex industry and sexology on women’s sexuality and the notion that these industries promote harm, objectification and the sexual servicing of men by women. For those who have not read the book, could you offer a short explanation?
I argue that the dominant model of sexuality promoted to women in both pornography and in sexology / sex therapy has a lot in common with systems of prostitution. That is, it is assumed that women should be constantly sexually available and that women’s role is primarily having to sexually service men. In this model it is not a woman’s sexual pleasure that defines whether or not sex is “good sex” but rather whether or not she has performed to the expectations of an (assumed) male lover.

That this model of sex, focused on men’s sexual pleasure, is a hallmark of how the porn industry constructs “good sex” is probably not surprising.  What was surprising, to me at least, was that these same assumptions about what women are “really for” can be found in academic and popular sexology. There are concepts such as “receptivity”, for example, which suggest normal and healthy women should be “highly receptive” to sexual advances from a male partner and that women should have sex when they don’t want to in order to please angry or irritable partners. This vision of sex presented to women is quite bleak, and in many instances, tends to justify men’s sexual coercion.
A model of sex which promotes the idea that women should acquiesce to unwanted sexual advances because they are there simply to please men is seriously harmful, not only to individual women’s interests, but to women as a group. It also sounds like something from a century ago! Instead of telling women to “Lie back and think of England” we tell them to watch porn or take a variety of pills, patches and creams.
When you are not busy lecturing, writing and doing research, what do you do to unwind?
Nothing very glamorous – I’m not sure how I survived before the advent of DVDs and Wii. Curling up in front of the TV with a blanket and a cuppa helps keep me sane and I like to kid myself that being good at tennis on the Wii means I could have been a Wimbledon champion if only I hadn’t spent all my time reading books.

Dr Meagan Tyler is a lecturer in sociology at Victoria University, Australia. She tweets @DrMeaganTyler.

Tuesday, June 7, 2011

What are sexually transmitted diseases (STDs)?




Extracted from MedicineNet.com

There really is no such thing as "safe" sex. The only truly effective way to prevent STDs is abstinence. Sex in the context of a monogamous relationship wherein neither party is infected with a STD also is considered "safe." Most people think that kissing is a safe activity. Unfortunately, syphilis, herpes, and other infections can be contracted through this relatively simple and apparently harmless act. All other forms of sexual contact carry some risk. Condoms are commonly thought to protect against STDs. Condoms are useful in decreasing the spread of certain infections, such as chlamydia and gonorrhea; however, they do not fully protect against other infections such as genital herpes, genital warts, syphilis, and HIV. Prevention of the spread of STDs is dependent upon the counseling of at-risk individuals and the early diagnosis and treatment of infections.

Monday, July 12, 2010

Don't Go To China For Organ Transplants



Published by Free Malaysia Today, 12 July 2010. By Teoh El Sen.

SUBANG JAYA: Malaysians who go to China for organ transplant risk contracting serious diseases, says a World Health Organisation (WHO) expert.

Dr Francis Delmonico, a WHO adviser, said some Malaysians who had gone abroad for organ transplants had returned home with diseases like TB, hepatitis and HIV.

According to a report by the Malaysian Dialysis and Transplant Registry, some 60% of Malaysians have gone overseas for transplants in the past nine years (2000-2009), with 856 seeking treatment in China alone.

Speaking at a forum on "Organ Trafficking and Transplant Tourism -- the need for regulatory and legislative control" held here last Friday, Delmonico advised Malaysians not go to China.

"We do not know where they get the organs. But in most cases, the organs are taken from executed prisoners. And we know that when patients go there and ask for a donor, the authorities would just say, 'we need a B-blood type execution' and it's done and some middlemen get the money," said Delmonico, who is also the director of medical afffairs and president-elect of the Transplantation Society.

"People need to know that those who went abroad for organ transplants have become ill on returning home. Besides, nobody is keeping tabs on how these transplants are done after the money has been paid. This is a fact. They (medical authorities) don't care and there are no guarantees," he added.

He said the commercialisation of organs – buying and selling of organs – is known to occur in countries such as China, Pakistan, India, the Philippines and Egypt.

“This is unethical and should not be sanctioned,” he added.

Delmonico also urged the Malaysian government to draw up new laws to combat organ trafficking and at the same time boost the efficiency of the local transplant agency.

Condemning reports of kidnappings and other forms of coercion to harvest human organs, he said that it was often the rich who would travel abroad to purchase organs from the poor.

“This is also a form of exploitation,” he said.

Be tough on middlemen

Malaysian Society of Transplantation president Dr Harjit Singh agreed, saying: "We must be aware that this (kidnappings) is happening."


"We need laws in place to safeguard the interest of our citizens and to prevent organ trafficking from reaching our shores,” Harjit said.

He added that organ transplants in Malaysia are governed by the Human Tissues Act 1974, which needs to be amended or replaced with a new Act.

Former Bar Council president Ambiga Sreenevasan, who was also present, said Malaysia needs to be "tough on the middlemen" by enacting news laws or amending existing ones such as the Anti-Trafficking in Persons Act 2007.

She said the country should have comprehensive programmes to address poverty so that Malaysia would not become a target for the organ black market.

Ministry of Health official Dr Azmie Shapie said the ministry is trying to strengthen its capacity to provide transplants but the main challenge is getting more organs.

"If we do not address this, then other issues will crop up. Our people who go to other countries for tranplants could contract hepatitis B, HIV, and so one. We cannot condone it," said Azmie.

National Transplant Resource Centre chief national transplant coordinator Dr Lela Yasmin Mansor told FMT that organ trafficking is now decreasing as countries are becoming more aware of the problem.

"In line with the Declaration of Istanbul on Organ Trafficking and Transplant Tourism we adopted last year, we must have laws to prosecute those who traffick.

“Right now, the Ministry of Health has a set of policies against the buying and selling of organs but there is no provision to penalise those who do it."

Lela added that in addition to more public willingness to donate, the transplant agency also needs funding for more doctors, nurses and logistics.

About 60,000 transplants are taking place worldwide each year, and one in 10 are done illegally. In Malaysia, some 10,000 patients are waiting in line for organs such as kidneys, livers, hearts and lungs.