Massey University made a boob of itself last week when it posted an illustration on its website that bore a striking resemblance to a large breast.

The picture, which appeared in the banner on the top of the University’s website, depicted a young girl reading with her legs crossed. Due to the phenomenon of forced perspective and some awkward cropping however, her knee, which is a lot closer to the viewer than the rest of her body, looked a lot more like her breast.

The University was first alerted to the problem when Massey’s student association president Ben Thorpe posted a screenshot and the message “Uhhhh… boob?” on the university’s Facebook page. The post had received 126 likes when Salient went to print, and led to an entertaining interaction between Thorpe and the university.

From initially protesting “No! Leg!”, the university eventually conceded that they had lost on this issue.

“Right. We’re not saying anything further, other than this: it in no way looks like any boob, breast, etc. that ever existed… because IT IS A LEG however, the masses have spoken.”

The controversial advertisement has since been removed.

Questions–sourced from young people through social media–were put to the panel made up of Chester Borrows (National), Charles Chauvel (Labour), Metiria Turei (Green), Hone Harawira (Mana), and Asenati Lole-Taylor (New Zealand First).

Green Party co-leader Metiria Turei prompted one of the most enthusiastic responses from the audience when suggesting that society takes too narrow of a view of what a ‘justice’ system includes.

“We don’t have a justice system, we have a legal system which picks up the pieces after we fail to put what is just first,” she told the crowd.

An issue of concern which emerged in the questions was whether MPs preferred to target spending on incarceration or rehabilitation of offenders.

Panelists agreed that more focus was needed on rehabilitation, however Burrows said that in some cases it was necessary to close and replace older prisons where conditions were no longer habitable.

The audience expressed sympathy for Chauvel’s warning that by next year 25 per cent of the country’s prison system will be privately-owned.

Students generally said they were impressed with how engaged the politicians were. Some, however, were skeptical.

“I just wish the policies matched the korero,” one reflected.

Mana Party leader Hone Harawira concluded his remarks with a challenge to students.

“Do [politicians] have the courage to do anything intelligent about this? Nah we don’t! So don’t look to us, look to yourselves to force us,” he said.

More information on JustSpeak can be found at facebook.com/justspeaknz

Returns to party-hack roots, forgets to consult anyone. Except Grey Power.

The New Zealand Union of Students’ Associations has thrown their support behind the citizens initiated referendum campaign against state asset sales without consulting or informing members. Confusion has arisen after the national union presented justifications for the decisions in private correspondence that markedly differed to those aired in public.

Last Thursday NZUSA Vice-President, and Auckland University Students’ Association President Arena Williams, spoke on behalf of NZUSA at the official launch of the campaign. Along with representatives from several political parties, unions and Grey Power.

However an invitation to the event—sent out just days prior—was the first both VUWSA and Massey Wellington Students’ Association (MAWSA) had heard of NZUSA’s involvement with the campaign.

Williams was adamant that the issue had been discussed with the University Sector Council of students’ association presidents—of which she is the chair, and subsequently a member of NZUSA’s governing board. She said that involvement with the campaign was NZUSA policy, and had “been through the NZUSA policy processes.”

“We have talked about it at a Board level and at a sector council level. And it’s been NZUSA policy last year, and this year,” she said.

But neither VUWSA President Bridie Hood, or MAWSA President Ben Thorpe, who both sit on that Council, could recall the issue of state asset sales ever being discussed at a meeting. Both said that had they been asked whether NZUSA should support the referendum, they would have said no, unless students had directed them to do so. Neither thought it was justifiable for their respective associations to get involved as it was outside their scope, and that they had no stance on the matter.

“We have not received a mandate from students to support or oppose the sale of state assets, therefore VUWSA has no stance on the issue,” Hood said.

“However, VUWSA will always support students having a say in issues that affect them.”

Thorpe said they were taking a non-partisan approach to state asset sales, as he didn’t think it was appropriate for them to get involved.

“[MAWSA] tend to take a take a fairly apolitical stance on most matters, unless they do directly relate to students. So, if I was to speak on behalf of MAWSA, then I’d say that I don’t think that it is our position to take a stance on these matters at all,” Thorpe said.

Despite NZUSA’s claim it is not about outcome rather than debate and promoting student involvement in the political process, Thorpe considered supporting the referendum amounted to taking a political stance.

“It certainly expresses that NZUSA are not for these changes.”

NZUSA claimed the justification for supporting the campaign was because they saw it as a way of re-connecting young people with political processes, as they were concerned with falling levels of political participation by young people, particularly in the 2011 election.

“We want to give students a chance to get politically involved in an issue where a decision is being made now, but the consequences of which it is our generation who [are] going to have to live with,” Williams said.

However when the VUWSA and MAWSA presidents queried the justification, NZUSA informed them that the decision to support the campaign was based on the union’s longstanding policy against “privatisation”.

This is the first year of NZUSA’s new governance structure—which moved from a federation of executive members made up of all member students’ association presidents to a board which includes a couple of presidents and other sector representatives

Though the presidents Salient spoke to expressed concern at the internal process taken for NZUSA to support the referendum campaign, they both conceded it was the first year with the new structure, so may have been just an issue with untested processes.

“I think it’s quite early days in regard to this new structure, and again we’re all going through some pretty big changes… so it’s going to need to be fleshed out… it just needs more time,” Thorpe said.

“We would be concerned if it were to happen again, and have expressed concern to the board and the sector council.”

The referendum launch follows a hikoi in Wellington last Friday, which went through the CBD before descending on Parliament with a crowd of around 5,000 people. About 150 of which were part of a protest organised by We Are the University, who left Kelburn and marched down to join the hikoi.

One student who saw the merge said it was reminiscent of the momentous entrance of Gandalf and Eomer’s forces into war at the Battle of Helm’s Deep in Lord Of The Rings: The Two Towers, an entrance that lead to the eventual defeat of Saruman’s 10,000 strong army.

Flat parties are missing something. They have the awful alcohol; the top 20 tunes. But the location is depressing. You clamber inside the flat, precariously positioning yourself on the edge of the sofa. Occasionally you may awkwardly move onto the roof to bathe in the last glows of the sun but even this is deceptively awful. The roof will be painful, hot and barren. You sit there pretending to be enjoying yourself – making jokes and listening to stories when all that is on your mind is just how sore your bottom is; how you can’t wait to leave and hurry home; how the cramp in your leg would be great to stretch out but for the fact that you would then fall off the roof. It is not a good time.

I have a solution for your travails. It is a sensation, which has hit everywhere from New York to London to Berlin to Chicago. Put grass on your roof: or flowers or herbs or vegetables or a mesclun of the above. Grass roofs balance the aesthetic desires of a compact urban landscape with the need for environmental action. It is also great for parties.

Roofs until now were uninhabitable wastelands. National Geographic writer Verlyn Klinkenborg opined that “the urban roofscape is a little like hell—a lifeless place of bituminous surfaces, violent temperature contrasts, bitter winds, and an antipathy to water.” We have for generations sought to beautify our buildings and spaces – decorating, designing, colouring, yet until now, the roof, as an area of use rather than shelter has escaped our keen architectural eyes.

Grass roofs are flat and equipped with a special waterproof membrane that protects the house from the thick, insulating layer of soil, compost and grass. Using wild flower or grass acts an important filter for the water it traps. It reduces the need for inefficient and expensive storm water runoff systems. The grass and flowers absorb and store water whilst letting some off, now filtered and fresh to use again. It insulates houses. A thick layer of soil keeps heat in your house far better than any corrugated iron.

Wellington is lucky to have many large open spaces. However, in an ever expanding and populating world, cities are becoming denser – more compact; neighbours are through the wall rather than over the fence. Making use of the space above our heads is just commonsense. It is a place to relax, read, drink and languish.

Roofs are also now being used as vegetable gardens. The locavore revolution has facilitated both boutique restaurants and even larger scale operations to flourish on city roofs. Zibbibo restaurant in Wellington grows herbs and salad leaves in recycled dishwashers racks on the roof–only accessible through a hatch at the top of the ceiling.

In most countries the green roof revolution has grown organically. However, in some nations, such as Switzerland, where building regulation even picks your wallpaper, grass roofs are compulsory on any new flat roof. It has made for remarkable urban scenes and a lot more angled roofs.

Wellington architect John Mills suggested that grass roofs may be more difficult to construct in earthquake-prone Wellington, with earthquake regulation compliance becoming increasingly onerous. Having your garden fall on top of you would not be ideal. That problem may mean compulsory grass roofs for Wellington would not be the best of government decisions, but it remains an attractive choice for those looking to make better use of available space in an environmentally beneficial way.

Grass roof make for a more livable urban landscape, with environmental kudos to match. Make your parties cooler: force your landlord to grass your roof. ▲

Affiliating with an environmental group is a declaration of your beliefs. Be it whaling, climate change, or the ecosystem, there are no shortages of environmental issues, and luckily, New Zealand has stepped up to the challenge of mobilising for action. Salient feature writer Fairooz Samy gives you the low-down.

Generation Zero:

GZ is an organization of young people that are concerned about the effects of climate change. They aim to raise awareness about our country’s lack of plans to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and the government’s current policies which encourage fossil fuel development. Unsatisfied with the emissions trading scheme, they call for a plan to achieve zero net emissions in NZ before 2050, a legislative timetable to achieve it. It differs from other groups in that it views climate change as not only an environmental issue but also a human rights, economic, resource supply, and moral issue. They frame it as an “inter-generational issue” that deserves “inter-generational justice”, and point out the unfairness of our current generation inheriting an ecologically damaged planet. GZ has a plan of attack that takes in to account the importance of legal change.

They’ve been having an impact on politicians and regional councils, seeking to work with the system to introduce viable policies that are both environmentally necessary and realistically applicable. This year, they’ve made submissions to local councils across the country, involving detailed recommendations on how they can re-prioritise transport spending to “combat climate change and oil dependency”. However, they know it won’t happen overnight, stressing the “incremental” nature of policy change.

Before the last election, GZ interviewed over 100 politicians about their political stances on climate change. They posted the resulting interviews on their website (which had thousands of hits) and created an accompanying viral video that parodied the popular board game ‘Guess Who?’. Additionally, they ran ‘Climate Conversations’ which are educational presentations that spread the message about the importance of making climate change a priority issue in political discourse. The conversations attracted over 1000 young New Zealanders. GZ also aims to introduce long-term cultural change. Says external relations coordinator Lance Cash, GZ is working to “shift assumptions about what is possible on tackling climate change and creating a zero carbon Aotearoa”. Last March, they organised a flash mob on Cuba Street to raise awareness about the impact of rising sea levels. Currently, they’re running a collaborative research project called ‘Zero Carbon Pathways’. Their management is efficient and dedicated, while their information is soundly-sourced, and presented in an easy-to-understand way. They regularly update their Facebook, Youtube, and Twitter accounts, which keeps their presence visible and broadcasts their many activities.

Verdict: A knowledgeable and competent group with a plan of action and political savvy. Join if you want to make a difference and spruce up your CV.

Greenpeace:

Thanks to the Rainbow Warrior tragedy and the Mutton Birds’ single ‘Anchor Me’, Greenpeace is a fairly well-known organisation in Aotearoa. However, the misconceptions about its radical environmentalism haven’t dissipated. While Greenpeace’s core issues continue to be opposition to whaling, genetic engineering, and nuclear energy, it has an active base in NZ. When the Government proposed plans to mine conservation land, Greenpeace, along with other watchdogs, launched a campaign to prevent it. Greenpeace also protested Fonterra’s model of industrialised dairying and its use of palm kernel for cattle feed. Furthermore, they lobbied the Government to support a plan to save Pacific tuna stocks when they were being rapidly overfished.

On their radar this year is the issue of NZ becoming a prospect for deep sea drilling and the government’s possible plans to invite large oil companies to drill off our coasts. As an established international organization, Greenpeace is a smoothly coordinated and serious about its aims. While they may come on strong for the casual environment lover, their website offers a plethora of advice about ways to help the environment, and information about the issues.

Verdict: Since it’s not a student-based organization, you’ll have to be clued up and ready to commit. But nothing says ‘Greenie’ like Greenpeace.

Greens@Vic:

The Green Party–and their youth wing at VUW–are a staple of the NZ environmental scene. Greens@Vic co-convenor Harriet Farquhar is eager to reassure interested students of the collaborative nature of the environmental community: “the best thing is you don’t need to pick between the wealth of groups! The Green Party are always working in collaboration with other environmental groups and you totally can too!”. She did mention that the Greens offer a holistic view. “We are part of a global political movement, and environmental concern informs all of our ideals. Our vision for New Zealand is one on which is underpinned by ecological wisdom”.

In the lead up to the election, Greens@Vic came out in force to support the Greens’ electoral campaign in Wellington, door-knocking, delivering pamphlets, and getting the Green message into the populace. And their efforts paid off—the Green Party has never been so popular. According to Farquhar, Greens@Vic’s driving goal is to “continue to foster a community of like-minded people passionate about Green issues”. This they achieve with plenty of social events like beach camps, quizzes, and drink nights.

Despite their environmental reputation, the Greens also emphasize the importance of social issues, and many of their policies feature leftist stances, with plans to end child poverty in NZ by 2014 and the rebuilding of Christchurch as major points of interest. Over the coming months, they’ll be collecting signatures for the nation-wide ‘Keep our Assets’ petition and striving for student fares on public transport. On the ecological side, the clean-up of rivers and lakes is a high priority, as is the conservation of NZ’s unique flora and fauna. Members have the added advantage of easily accessible MPs. Fan favourite Gareth Hughes has made appearances at student-led protests, alongside co-leaders Metiria Turei and Russel Norman. Despite lacking their own website and channels of communication, Greens@Vic work better as a grassroots unit, engaging with interested students through meetings, demonstrations, and social events.

Verdict: Friendly and passionate, Greens@Vic live and breathe all things environment. You’ll need to make the political commitment, but if you’re an ardent eco-lefty this is the group for you.

Society for Conservation Biology:

The SCB is an international organization dedicated to probing the issues around the maintenance, loss, and restoration of biological diversity. The VUW chapter began on Salamanca Road in 2010 and is affiliated with Forest and Bird and the WCC. Their projects include Kumutoto restoration, where volunteers work in tandem with a WCC ranger to set up transect lines, bird and invertebrate counts, planting, and weed control. Since 2011, SCB has been operating alongside Forest and Bird to monitor a stretch of land on Island Bay. This also involves monitoring the penguins settled there and carrying out such duties as trapping, planting, and checking on the nests. Training is provided, and the SCB involves a dedicated team that take their responsibilities seriously. Recently, they completed a project with the Wellington Bird Rehabilitation Trust, feeding and caring for hundreds of fairy prions that washed ashore during a storm. The SCB is extremely hands-on, focusing less on political awareness and more on physically tending to the environment.

Verdict: A solid group, SCB is making positive changes in the Wellington area. Ideal for those willing to roll up their sleeves and get back to nature. ▲

Generation Zero:
Website: generationzero.org.nz
Meetings: Tuesdays, 5.30pm in SU216 below the Hunter Lounge. 

Greenpeace:
Website: greenpeace.org/new-zealand

Greens@Vic:
Meetings: Tuesdays, 1pm in SU219 below the Hunter Lounge.
Email: greens.at.vic@gmail.com.

Society for Conservation Biology:
Website: vuwscb.com
Email: Mikey Willcox at mikey.willcox@gmail.com

Imagine you are the last person on earth. There aren’t any proper animals—just a fully functioning ecosystem of trees, bacteria, and maybe some slime mould. The thought runs through your head, “why don’t I chop down the last kauri, just for fun”. If all we care about is not hurting people’s or animals’ feelings, it’s hard to say what would be wrong with bringing out the axe. But many people think it would certainly be wrong. So why should this last person protect the kauri? We might follow Ecuador’s new constitution and say nature “has the right to exist and persist”. But rights might only belong to rational actors, and tree’s ain’t actors, so they probably ain’t got rights either. Others argue that life itself, no matter how simple, has value. The problem they face is trying to explain why there is any value to living things that are just gross, like tuberculosis bacteria. An approach I like suggests that how we treat nature reflects our character. If we should want to be humble, frugal and mindful people, we shouldn’t destroy nature for no reason. But if you were consistently humble and frugal for all your life, couldn’t you reward yourself by destroying the kauri seeing as it won’t harm anyone?

Chances are you’ve heard about the 2010 Gulf of Mexico oil spill. Certainly you will be familiar with the Rena oil spill which occurred last year. However, you may not be aware of an environmental disaster which has taken place – and is taking place today – in the oil rich Niger Delta region of Nigeria. In fact, the amount of oil spilt in the Delta each year is more than that lost in the Gulf of Mexico spill.

The environmental destruction resulting from over 50 years of commercial oil extraction in this region has brought poverty, conflict and human rights violations to the local people. Oil giant Shell has been accused of allowing this disaster to happen, denying involvement and not responding effectively.

“What does this have to do with me?” you may be wondering. Here is an issue of the destruction of land and exploitation of powerless individuals at the hands of a greedy multinational corporation. Is this of any relevance to us as comparatively well-off New Zealanders living many miles distant? Should we care about using our power of free speech to campaign on behalf of the repressed? Perhaps you would say no: it isn’t relevant and I don’t care. But I appeal to all you students who feel strongly about environmental and social justice issues, to those who watched in horror the footage of oil gushing into the Gulf of Mexico, those dismayed to see a similar situation play out on our own shores – it is to you that I address this article. Please, read of the plight of the Delta and its people, and take action for positive change.

The Niger Delta is a vast and densely populated region of mangrove swamps, forests and farmland that extends 70,000kms – about half the area of the South Island – and is home to some 31 million people. A region of great natural significance, the Delta comprises the world’s third largest mangrove forest and one of its most important wetland and coastal marine ecosystems. The Niger Delta is also rich in oil. It is no coincidence that those countries with the greatest oil reserves are also among those experiencing the gravest human rights violations. Multinational oil corporations such as Shell, Eni, Chevron, Total and Exxon Mobil have been extracting the dark nectar of the Delta since 1958, and now, 54 years on, the environment has been ruined and the local people are suffering.

Driven solely by financial incentive and having no ethical or environmental regard, oil corporations exploit the land and its resources. Gas flaring pollutes the air and devastates farmland; oil spills damage agricultural land and waterways. For the local people reliant on the land and waterways for subsistence farming and fishing, the exploitation of the Delta has had dire consequences. Fish stocks have dwindled, leaving thousands unable to support themselves and their families. Soil has become infertile, so farming is impossible. The people suffer high rates of disease, both respiratory and water-borne. They have lost their jobs and their livelihoods and now face poverty, sickness, and hunger.

As the first and continuing today as the biggest oil company to operate in the region, owning around 90 fields, multinational oil giant Royal Dutch Shell bears significant responsibility for the devastation of the Delta. In particular, Shell has been charged with denying responsibility for two major oil spills in 2008 and with failing to organise clean-up operations. Caused by faults in a pipeline, these spills resulted in thousands of barrels of oil every day polluting the land and creek surrounding the town of Bodo in the Delta’s Ogoniland. The spills continued unchecked for weeks and no proper clean-up has ever taken place. After conducting significant scientific assessment, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) concluded that it will take over 25 years to rehabilitate the Ogoniland. In the meantime, the rights of the local people to good health, a healthy environment, a means to earn money and an adequate standard of living are being violated.

Desperate to maintain its image as a “responsible” company acting as a “positive force” in the Niger Delta, Shell denies responsibility for the destruction caused by the 2008 spills. It claimed only 1,640 barrels of oil were spilt, when independent assessment concluded the total was closer to 200,000 barrels. It claimed spills started on the 5th October 2008, whereas the Bodo community and Nigerian regulators confirmed a start date over a month earlier. Shell has also provided no adequate compensation to the Bodo community. Initially, it offered a meagre 50 bags of rice, beans, sugar and tomatoes – Bodo is a town of 69,000.

Shell’s historical record in the Niger Delta is similarly troubling. In the early 1990s, thousands of Ogoni people, led by activist Ken Saro-Wiwa and his organisation Movement of the Survival of the Ogoni People (MOSOP), took part in peaceful protests against Shell. In response, Shell allegedly co-operated with the Nigerian army which conducted tortures and killings of dissidents. Shell provided the army with patrol boats and ammunition, and assisted in planning raids and terror campaigns against the Ogoni people. Most significantly, Shell was implicated in the execution of Ken Saro-Wiwa and eight other prominent activists. Shell faced charges in New York, in 2009, for human rights violations but just before the start of the trial agreed to pay $15.5 million (US) in settlement of legal action.

Today, the situation in the Niger Delta has not improved. Shell concedes that oil spills in Nigeria are a “tragedy.” However, the Bodo community still awaits proper compensation and clean-up. Following recommendations from the United Nations, human rights organisation Amnesty International is insisting that Shell contribute an initial $1 billion to the clean-up of Ogoniland. Amnesty is calling on Shell to “Own Up, Pay Up and Clean Up.” Shell should be aware of its responsibility to uphold human rights, and it should establish an international fund to clean-up the Ogoniland. Amnesty is appealing to the international community to put pressure on Shell to accept these demands. As members of the public, we can sign an online petition urging Shell’s Chief Executive Officer, Peter Voser, to have his company Own Up, Pay Up and Clean Up the Delta. The petition is accessible on Amnesty’s New Zealand’s website, www.amnesty.org.nz  By signing, you are holding Shell accountable for its actions, ensuring that the human rights abuses it commits are not going unnoticed. Help support the environment and people of the Delta! ▲

AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL:

Amnesty International is a worldwide movement of more than 3 million people in 150 countries who campaign to protect human rights. Vic’s Amnesty on Campus group meets every Tuesday evening at 5pm in Room 217, Student Union Building. Feel free to join us if you’re keen to learn about and take action on human rights issues.  Email us on amnesty.at.vic@gmail.com for more info.

Sometimes it mystifies Roxy that many otherwise entirely sensible people will show no inclination to go to the doctor when something is clearly wrong with their genitalia. Pussies and dicks are not invincible, and just like any part of the body, can get diseased or suffer from unpleasant medical defects. Many of these are treatable, often in perfectly painless and cheap ways, but left alone, can cause major problems with sexual function and fertility.

Now, some readers won’t believe this letter, and while Roxy has seen a lot, she hasn’t seen this. However, reliable sources (a quick Google search) tells me that this issue is not unique. In fact, on reflection, Roxy knows of women with similar issues, and it has always been part of the argument about whether female ejaculation is real (Roxy can’t do it herself, but isn’t going to call someone who says they can a liar). So what should your man do about it?

Well, the first thing he should do is see his doctor about visiting a urologist. There are a couple of reasons why. First, this whole “pissing on/in my girlfriend” (not that’s there’s anything wrong with that!) business is clearly not your thing, so his failure to seek treatment is jeopardising your relationship. Second, this issue could wreak havoc with his fertility. Urine is not a friendly environment for little spermatozoa to do their swimmy thing, and if he cannot decouple urinating from ejaculating, he may find children off the table.

Now Roxy is not a urologist, but it seems reasonable to guess that the problem has to do with the little muscles that control whether boyfriend’s dick is in pissing mode or cumming mode. For whatever reasons, your boyfriend’s muscles aren’t 100 per cent operational. A specialist should have therapies to help address this.

In the meantime, Roxy can really only think of one solution: make boyfriend go to the bathroom before you have sex, and for now at least, consider having him not shoot into your vajayjay, unless you think you can handle the urine douche.

Now the final thing to consider is how you broach the subject with your boyfriend. Your letter implies that you have raised it with him, but I assume nothing came of it. Now is the time to be more forceful. This clearly matters to you (since you were brave enough to write in), and it should matter to him (since it concerns his health). You have an obligation to both your partner and to yourself to make a good effort of convincing him that he needs to do something about this. Remember that he’s probably embarrassed and nervous about his condition, hence why he hasn’t gone to the doctor. Don’t treat him like there’s something “wrong” with him, and don’t talk about how gross or uncomfortable it makes you feel. Instead approach it from a health and well-being perspective, offer to support him, and then apply gentle pressure until he makes the right move.

If he continues to rebuff you, well, I guess then you have to ask whether the pissing is a potential deal-breaker for your relationship. A man who refuses to seek help for an issue that makes his partner unhappy and risks his own health is not a very mature man.

Oh and, boyfriend, if you’re reading this: go to the doctor. Now. Like, right now, pick up the phone and make a booking at student health. They’ll have heard worse, believe me. At least there isn’t pus and such.

<3 Roxy

If you have issues or concerns that you wish to discuss privately and confidentially with a professional, rather than a magazine columnist, Student Counselling Service can provide a safe place to explore such aspects of your life. The service is free and confidential. Phone 04 463 5310. Email counselling-service@vuw.ac.nz. Visit Mauri Ora, Level 1, Student Union Building. 

Usually we have a good sense of whether we (as well as others) consider ourselves an extrovert or an introvert. Some individuals (known as ambiverts) have qualities of both extroversion and introversion.It’s also important to keep in mind that no one is purely an extrovert or purely an introvert, as Carl Jung once said. However, I believe it’s extremely useful for us to explore our own preferences, personality, and temperament. It’s usually thought that extroversion is ideal in our society, as extroverts are naturally good at interacting with others, whether that be with strangers or friends, are assertive, are highly social, and are risk-takers. We tend to associate extroverts with positive qualities and introverts with, well, qualities like quiet, bookish, and shy, as if they were undesirable traits.

Susan Cain, the author of Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World That Can’t Stop Talking, begs to differ. Cain is a lawyer and lecturer in the US and argues that introverts are largely undervalued in western culture and continue to be bypassed for leadership opportunities.

Cain believes we need introverts and “thinkers” for innovation, and notices that we need introverts in our culture and society. Ideally, we need more acceptance and appreciation of introvert-extrovert differences.

In counselling, it seems that students often associate introversion to being ‘socially awkward’ and believe that introvert characteristics are viewed as ‘bad’—something to change rather than something to accept. Students with these concerns often report having a difficult experience in high school, being bullied or teased.Instead of seeing ourselves negatively as ‘quiet’ or ‘shy’, we can see these qualities in a more positive way, such as: mellow, calm, laid-back, soft-spoken. And reality is that many introverts like to socialize and be around people as well! It just looks different. Normally, introverts prefer smaller scale social gatherings; for instance with a small group of friends, or one-on-one coffee meet-ups. No matter where you are on the extrovert/introvert scale, it’s good practice to ask yourself: what works for you?

Don’t force yourself to do something that’s unnatural to you. It’s important to be true to yourself, and pay attention to your strengths and creativity.

It’s okay not to like small talk!

Try to gain some awareness around your own temperament and allow yourself the environment that’s best for you to thrive and enjoy life.

If you are going to a party or larger social gathering, focus on striking up a conversation with one person at a time. And plan for some quiet time before or after the event.

If you would like to explore more about what your interface is with others and the world you could make an appointment to talk with a counsellor, contact the Counselling Service:

• Phone: 04 463 5310 
• Email: counselling-service@vuw.ac.nz 
• Visit: Reception desk, Mauri Ora, Level 1 SUB, Kelburn campus. 

DEAR NEAL, Please note our production is called “ShitShow”, not Shit Play. I have left it up to my fellow Bouffons to answer your questions. I’m sure you will find their answers insightful and inspiring. Regards, Sir Arthur Throbsbottom 

What is adaptive dramaturgy?

Tits. Tits and ass. Boobs and bumholes. But mainly tits

For that matter, what is “dramaturgy”?

See above. Also, minge.

Is this production part of your course-work/ assessment?

No we all love the shitloads of extra rehearsals and meetings we’ve had to do on top of our other University work. This is purely so we have no chance at a social life or leading a happy existence.

Why did you choose Ubu roi? or was it chosen by the Lecturer?

Can one truly CHOOSE Ubu Roi? Or does IT choose YOU? Also, herpes.

Is this the full play or excerpts?

Excerpts of what exactly? Asian porn? Documentaries about Child Labour? Because yes. And no. And yes. And menstruation.

What is the purpose of the project?

What’s the purpose of YOUR project? Jeez.

How has the group gone about the creative process?

Mainly naked.

Why the title ShitShow?

You’re shitting me right?

Is “The Unconventionals” simply the name you have chosen for this class production?

It came to me in a dream. MacGyver flew down on the back of a golden Unicorn, wielding a life size carboard cutout of Jesus. It was at this point that I noticed my erection. I’m not sure where this is going, but to answer your question, Poo noodle.

What influences does this production draw upon?

LSD. And Shrooms. Oh, and Yummy Mummys. Audiences are so used to seeing “shocking” things in other media, how does Shit Play ensure audiences are shocked whilst actually making a statement? Here’s a picture of a bunny.

What is the statement the play makes?

If we wanted to make a statement we would have organised a press conference. Fucks sake.

Is there a place for such shock-tactics in the theatre? Or, put another way, does the theatre need to be more shocking to keep abreast of other forms of entertainment?

Everyone loves tits. Thank you for writing Breast in your question. About fucking time we got to the point.