https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023_FIFA_Women's_World_Cup

starts this Thursday, July 20th, and runs for the next month.

here is a schedule that will automatically convert match times to your local timezone:

https://www.espn.com/soccer/schedule/_/date/20230720/league/fifa.wwc

I'd be interested in hearing from anyone who lives in Australia or NZ. what have the preparations been like? are you planning on attending any matches?

or, anyone who is travelling from other countries to attend - what has your experience been like?

I'll be watching on YouTube TV. it's one of the more expensive streaming options (currently 73 USD/mo) but I've used it for men's and women's world cups since 2018 (as well as several years of live & time-shifted American football). they've had one glitch in all that time, during a 2018 semi-final match, but otherwise it's been damn near perfect. I'd definitely recommend it if you can afford it.

please limit discussion of other streaming options to legal ones only - linking to pirate streams could get Tildes and Deimos into copyright trouble.

like probably a lot of people, I'll be time-shifting matches because I'm on the US west coast and many will be inconveniently timed (but you better believe I'll be awake at 3am on Sunday Aug 20th for the final)

to avoid spoiling matches for people who haven't seen them yet, please use <details> tags:

<details>
<summary>spoilers for Foo vs Bar match</summary>

wow I can't believe so-and-so scored 15 goals

</details>

turns into:

For non-Australians: This is Australian television's Night of Nights, equivalent to the USA's Emmy Awards or the UK's BAFTA Awards.

• The "Popular" awards are voted on by the general public.

• The "Outstanding" awards are voted on by members of the Australian TV industry.

Gold Logie (Popular)

• Sonia Kruger

Silver Logies (Popular)

• Sam Neill

• Kitty Flanagan

Silver Logies (Outstanding)

• Patrick Brammall

• Harriet Dyer

The full results: https://www.nowtolove.com.au/celebrity/tv/logies-winners-2023-78374

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1048984322000583

Abstract

We submitted over 12,000 job applications, to over 4,000 job advertisements, to investigate hiring discrimination against six ethnic groups for leadership positions.

For leadership positions, applicants with English names received 26.8% of positive responses for their job applications, while applicants with non-English names received 11.3% of positive responses. This means ethnic minorities received 57.4% fewer positive responses than applicants with English names for leadership positions despite identical resumes.

For non-leadership positions, applicants with English names received 21.2% of positive responses for their job applications, while applicants with non-English names received 11.6% of positive responses. This means ethnic minorities received 45.3% fewer positive responses for non-leadership positions despite identical resumes.

Ethnic discrimination for leadership positions was even more pronounced when the advertised job required customer contact.

• ‘Taking a leaf out of Trumpism’: Yumi Stynes on the ‘misguided’ backlash to sex book

The book has been criticised by campaigners including Rachael Wong, the chief executive of Women’s Forum Australia, an organisation critical of pro-trans activism. Speaking to 2GB’s Ben Fordham on Tuesday, Wong called it a “graphic sex guide for children”, adding that she felt “physically ill at the thought of children reading it”. Other conservative media figures have amplified the criticism.

“This book was a response to genuine questions asked by adolescents to [magazine column] ‘Dolly Doctor’ for more than 20 years. [Dr Melissa Kang, one of the co-writers], was exposed to what kids were too ashamed to ask anyone else.”

• Big W has withdrawn Welcome to Sex from its stores to protect staff – but teen sex education can keep young people safe

Critics have taken particular issue with small sections of the book that address inclusive sexual practices beyond penetrative sex, including “fingering”, “oral sex”, “scissoring”, and “anal sex”.

They are also critical of the inclusion of what they term “gender ideology”. Others are accusing the authors of “grooming” children – a term that is increasingly misused.

• 'I make no apologies': Yumi Stynes responds to Welcome to Sex critics

The backlash has been so intense Big W stopped selling the book in-store after staff members were abused, although the retailer has defended it and it remains available online.

"I've seen people saying to me 'I want to kill you' or 'You should die'," Stynes told SBS News.

ABC news article: Voice to Parliament referendum pamphlets for Yes and No camps published by AEC

On the Australian Electoral Commission's website:

• The case for voting Yes

• The case for voting No

The Sydney Morning Herald / The Age newspapers have provided annotated versions of each pamphlet:

• The Yes pamphlet annotated: 14 things you should know

• 17 things you need to know about the No pamphlet

As has been observed in those annotation pages, there is no legal requirement for either of these pamphlets to be truthful or factual, and there is no obligation for the AEC to fact-check them (in fact, the AEC is legally restrained from commenting on those pamphlets in any way - its role is restricted to disseminating those pamphlets, because it must stay neutral).

Royal Commission into the Robodebt Scheme

https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Tabled_Documents/2743

Some summary quotes:

From the Preface:

It is remarkable how little interest there seems to have been in ensuring the Scheme’s legality, how rushed its implementation was, how little thought was given to how it would affect welfare recipients and the lengths to which public servants were prepared to go to oblige ministers on a quest for savings. Truly dismaying was the revelation of dishonesty and collusion to prevent the Scheme’s lack of legal foundation coming to light. Equally disheartening was the ineffectiveness of what one might consider institutional checks and balances – the Commonwealth Ombudsman’s Office, the Office of Legal Services Coordination, the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner and the Administrative Appeals Tribunal – in presenting any hindrance to the Scheme’s continuance.

From the Conclusion:

The report paints a picture of how the Robodebt Scheme (the Scheme) was put together on an illconceived, embryonic idea and rushed to Cabinet. If ever there were a case of giving an unproportion’d thought his act, this was it.

The application of [public interest] immunity has also limited the Commission’s ability to reveal the entirety of the documentation concerning how the original proposal which became Robodebt, was passed and what was put to Cabinet thereafter. The salient points have been able to be made, but large parts of the relevant ministerial briefs, materials put before Cabinet and Cabinet minutes themselves have not been able to be revealed.

One of the questions in the Terms of Reference is when the Australian Government knew or ought to have known that debts were not, or may not have been, validly raised. [...] Some DHS senior executives always had that knowledge; some DSS senior executives must have suspected it, at least by 2016. As to members of the Government, one Minister, Mr Morrison, took the proposal to Cabinet, knowing that it involved income averaging and that his own Department had indicated that it would require legislative change, but on the basis of the contrary indication in the NPP checklist, proceeded without enquiring as to how the change had come about.

And... this ticking time-bomb from the covering letter:

I have provided to you an additional chapter of the report which has not been included in the bound report and is sealed. It recommends the referral of individuals for civil action or criminal prosecution. I recommend that this additional chapter remain sealed and not be tabled with the rest of the report so as not to prejudice the conduct of any future civil action or criminal prosecution.

Some news articles:

• Robodebt royal commission findings revealed, individuals referred for criminal prosecution

• ‘Dishonesty and collusion’: Robo-debt report recommends criminal and civil prosecutions

• Robodebt royal commission final report: key findings on Scott Morrison, Stuart Robert and Kathryn Campbell

• Royal commission into robodebt scheme ‘recommends referrals of individuals for civil and criminal prosecution’