For those of you who are long term readers you will know that I am all for the emergence or increase in profile for those who are more androgynous. In fact I wrote a post not that long ago about Andrej Pejic the awesome Australian model who is making androgyny mainstream in the world of modelling. He is not the only one though and others such as Justin Vivian Bond is making headway showing people that it’s not necessary to conform. You should read Justin’s description of who Mx Justin Vivian Bond is HERE

I see this as a move for people to be themselves. We each identify as male or female biologically but does that really describe who you are, I don’t think so. Is a biological description of who you are physically really serve any purpose. Think about it. You receive a survey or fill in an online membership and it asks you whether you are male or female. What purpose in this day and age does that really achieve. What difference does it make other than statistically whether you are physically male or female? I mean even in terms of marketing it doesn’t really mean anything because people these days have varied interests.

Are we getting closer to a day when that question really isn’t necessary? I hope so! If it is necessary then maybe it should be worded, what is your biological sex? Is it male, female or other? Whether people want to admit it or not there are people in the “other” group. If you are looking for useful information you really need to ask a lot more questions not only about biological identification but how you identify, whether you are gay, straight, bi etc and other more detailed questions.


As far as androgyny goes I am celebrating the increase in awareness. I think it’s great people are being allowed to be themselves. I do think when the world wants people to conform to something that they really need to ask themselves why it is necessary. I suspect most of the time it’s only for the purpose of making things simple because if anything new comes along they would have to look at all the changes (work) that would be necessary to change. Taking the easy way out is not the answer and only demonstrates laziness. 

Celebrate diversity.
On another angle, I happened to just see this TED clip. It is about gender and well worth watching. 



Lifespan of Social Networking


We all know that social networking sites are being used by more and more people. Yes, sites such as FB are currently dominating the Internet. According to some sources 50% of the US population log onto FB at least once a month, with only around 7% utilising Twitter. 

However, what is the lifespan of sites such as FB? Does it have such a large market share now that it will be around forever? Some experts suggest that it really only has between 3-5 years left before running out of steam. Others suggest it could start declining in as little as 1-2 years.

If you were to look at the interface of FB, it is really poor and with the issues around privacy it certainly has a long way to go before it gains any level of trust. It is said that the reason it has so many members is simply because it has become a place people feel they need to be in order to connect. So in respect to that momentum, they have done a good job. However if you talk to people, I am yet to hear a single person who says they trust the site.

MySpace which used to dominate the market is on the market and the rumour mill says that one of the interested parties may be Zynga. Now Zynga has been credited with a lot of the growth in FB and to some degree it is a fact. Would Zynga moving out over time from FB see a decrease in users? Maybe, maybe not.

Even though FB has such a huge audience, it probably would’nt take much for it to be obliterated. Even though it would take time, it seems that it would only take a new and innovative developer to come up with something that grabs people attention to start a battle for the top spot. It could also be as simple as natural death. What I mean is with the growing use of FB for Pages and Groups if it becomes dominated in some area it could become too busy for people. If you listen to a lot of the experts, there is a sense out there that the novelty is starting to wear off. Status updates more often then not are either becoming like pity parties or people are posting too much.

I am hearing more and more reports of employers now including in their employment contracts that employees must not have a FB profile. This seems to be a growing trend. I won’t speculate on the reason for this becoming more prominent because I haven’t heard the arguments, but it is happening.

Really this type of site is volatile and I believe if people had an alternative for connecting with others they probably would take up the option. Yes they would probably run with both for a while but eventually would migrate to just one. The future will be interesting.

Stephanie Rice


Firstly I would say, feel free to read Eddie's post about this HERE. I'll start my post with the same passage that he quoted from the Courier Mail.

A tearful Stephanie Rice has made an emotional public apology over her homophobic slur on Twitter, saying she has learnt a huge lesson.

The swimming star twice broke down in tears at a press conference she called in Sydney today as she pleaded for forgiveness over what she labelled "thoughtless and careless" comments.

Triple Olympic gold medallist Rice tweeted "Suck on that faggots!" following the Wallabies' dramatic Tri Nations weekend win over the Springboks early on Sunday.