A review by stefhyena
Moral Panic 101: Equality, Acceptance and the Safe Schools Scandal by Benjamin Law
4.0
Both the essay itself and the correspondence was vital reading and surprisingly easy to read. I hope people won't be put off by how academic the word "essay" sounds, this is simply written an account of how the "safe schools" programme has unfolded and been supported, attacked and withdrawn from in turn, some of the reasons for that and a little bit about the various personalities involved as well as some interviews with actual queer (including trans) teenagers which significantly those wasting most words writing about the program (or their misconceptions of it) nearly always neglect to do.
The correspondence was about Anna Krien's book The Long Goodbye and there was a good range of writers who did not all say the same thing (for all that I personally could have done without the pompous and bullying tones of Matt Canavan who contradicted himself throughout his rant which was riddled with out of date or just bad "facts"). I am glad he was included (and Krien's reply to him) if only for the value of having a dissenting voice on a much debated issue. The pro-nuclear stuff I will have to learn more about, for all that I don't like the idea at all. I want to know more about current technologies in renewables, because I felt that a couple of writers were underestimating them but I need the figures to back me up (or I need to rethink).
It was very disappointing that out of nine writers featured, seven were male. There are still not enough women's voices in the public arena, being given a platform to speak on contested issues such as these. Most of the writers were high enough quality (Canavan being the exception), however it would be good if they looked for a balance of female writers of the same calibre. I guess when I look at other issues of QE I will see whether this was just a one off, or whether it is an area they need to work on.
The correspondence was about Anna Krien's book The Long Goodbye and there was a good range of writers who did not all say the same thing (for all that I personally could have done without the pompous and bullying tones of Matt Canavan who contradicted himself throughout his rant which was riddled with out of date or just bad "facts"). I am glad he was included (and Krien's reply to him) if only for the value of having a dissenting voice on a much debated issue. The pro-nuclear stuff I will have to learn more about, for all that I don't like the idea at all. I want to know more about current technologies in renewables, because I felt that a couple of writers were underestimating them but I need the figures to back me up (or I need to rethink).
It was very disappointing that out of nine writers featured, seven were male. There are still not enough women's voices in the public arena, being given a platform to speak on contested issues such as these. Most of the writers were high enough quality (Canavan being the exception), however it would be good if they looked for a balance of female writers of the same calibre. I guess when I look at other issues of QE I will see whether this was just a one off, or whether it is an area they need to work on.