Passion and Purpose will always trump Nerves!

I guess I used to be like most people and absolutely hated public speaking.  When I was very young, like primary school age, I always did well at the speeches, spelling competitions and public reading.  However as I became an adolescent and a teenager I grew more aware of what other people thought of me, and hence embarrassed when speaking in public.  I was a dancer for over 20 years and could perform and on stage, baring my soul through movement in front of hundreds of people, and on TV, but speaking was totally different.  

 

When I got married at 30, my then husband and I started our self-defense business.  We'd both had very violent upbringings, and wanted to help prevent violence against women and men.  But given my history of sexual assault I was particularly passionate about preventing violence against women, especially sexual and domestic violence, both of which I've experienced first-hand. And also to help those who have already been through it to rebuild their lives, start to move on, and make damn sure it never happened again! 

 

Because I was so knowledgeable about the subject and passionate about making a difference, I found myself teaching eight and nine hour seminars to groups of over 40 women, police officers, martial artists, schools, corporates, even armed offenders squads!  I'm not going to lie, during the drive to the venue and first five minutes of speaking, I was always nervous.  But once I realised that the women I was speaking to were real people, with real pasts, real fears and they were looking to me for help, it became not about me, and to feel nervous and self interested was a selfish thing.  

 

Women are lied to daily, told "don't fight back, it will only make him angry", "hold keys between your fingers", "scream fire", "learn a martial art", "rapists are the strangers in dark alley, not your boss, boyfriend, uncle...." and so much more b*llshit (sorry, I'm very passionate) and dispelling the myths and teaching the reality was so important to me. I had a passion and a purpose and I wanted to give life saving information and skills to these people.  

 

I guess what I'm trying to say is that if you have a purpose and a passion for what you're talking about and you really want to get that information across to people, the nerves will fade into oblivion. I wrote a book, had articles published and appeared on TV, but there's nothing more effective than the spoken word. In person demonstrations and public speaking was imperative to fulfil my purpose in life. 

 

Thanks for reading. 

 

A short sample video if you're interested....

 

 

 

 

 

And then there were three.............

I think you'll both agree that our team has certainly had it's share of difficulties and frustrations.  The fact that we have dwindled from a team of five to three is certainly a testament to that! 

 

I know hindsight is always 20:20, but looking back I feel that our biggest mistake was listening to one team member's request to not meet via Skype or talk on the phone.  As you know she wanted everything to be done via Facebook messaging.  Therefore that all communication was done via the written word, which meant that neither body language nor tonality was able to be expressed.  The words we use are only a small part of communication.  Messages were often misunderstood and that got people’s backs up. This also meant that we had no team meeting or minutes.  I'm not blaming her at all, we are all equally to blame for not pushing for a better communication method. 

 

I think I understand her reasons.  She said from the very first blog that she didn't enjoy verbal communication and found it difficult to hold conversations and almost impossible to make eye contact.  I feel for her, but unfortunately we allowed the requests of one person to affect the whole team.  This is a communications paper after all, and I think working on your weaknesses is one of the most important parts of learning!  Personally I believe if we hadn’t listened to that person, and had been having regular phone calls or Skype calls, our communication would have been much better.  It would have also helped her get out of her comfort zone and she may have still be with us.   

 

Despite these issues, and others our team faced (maybe the number 13 is unlucky after all!), I think we managed to get through to this point without too much stress.  Our report is looking good will be submitted tomorrow. 

Well done team 13!

 

Research into Medical Marijuana

An article in "Science News" 

  

I had originally started writing my blog this week about my Belbin team role - oh my goodness I am totally a completer/finisher, and an implementer to a lesser extent.  But then I thought, what would be more interesting to my audience?  So I decided to share something I read in Science News which I found interesting, and also pertinent to our current "ethics" focus.  (And I like to be somewhat controversial 😉). 

 

The article "Promise and perils of marijuana deserve more scientific scrutiny" talks about a report released this Thursday in Washington DC discussing research on the medical effects of cannabis and it's products on various aspects of human health.  Following the study the researchers call for further research, however the predicament raised in this report is very topical given our recent discussions on ethics in science. 

 

The fact that cannabis has a federal classification as a Schedule 1 drug in America (crazy really when you look at the other drugs in schedule 1 which I would certainly think are a lot more dangerous, for example heroin, MDMA and GHB) means it is difficult for researchers to legally obtain the drug to continue studies. 

 

I’ve always been a supporter of the legalisation of medical marijuana in New Zealand, so to me this seems strange given that over half of the states of America allow the medical use of the drug, and recreational use if even legal in some of those states. 

   

There are clearly some benefits to the use of medical cannabis which have already been proven and documented.  So ethically I would think one would be able to argue that the potential benefits for the proverbial "many" would certainly outweigh the legalities of researchers being granted access to the drug.  Testing the drug on people who are already using it, in my mind, would alos abate the ethical question over the testing on human subjects. 

 

If you are interested in reading the article, here is the link (https://www.sciencenews.org/article/promise-and-perils-marijuana-deserve-more-scientific-scrutiny).   

 

Remember, scientific writing is only worthwhile if it is read! 

 

Enjoy! 

Athena

"Speaking for those without a voice"

Thoughts about ethics and science – why does it matter? 

  

Watching one of the week four videos, I was left thinking about the scientific ethics of testing on animals.  In particular around respect for subjects and moral theory. 

  

Most mentally well people would agree that it would be immoral to abuse or intentionally hurt animals, so it must follow that they agree that animals hold some level of moral status.  Then why do they not have the same moral status as humans? Why should we not hold the same respect for these subjects as we do to humans?    

Don't even get me started on the issue of informed consent!!!!! 😠 

  

Even from a utilitarian perspective of "the greatest good for the greatest number" it doesn't make sense unless we choose not to count the animals in that "number".  Why not?  Why wouldn't we?  What gives us the right to think that the life of a non human animal is worth less than that of a human?  We are all sentient beings with feelings.  I guess most people would argue that the harm inflicted on animals through testing of diseases and drugs and medicines which could help humans who are suffering is worth it.  That the lives of millions of rabbits and mice and dogs over countless years are worth the chance of finding a cure for cancer. 

  

So where do we draw the line?  How ethical is it to cause skin burns, lesions, cancers, pain and suffering and long drawn out death to defenceless animals just, for example, to enable women to have a lipstick that she doesn’t need to reapply during her shopping days and long ”ladies lunches”?!?!?!? 

Sorry, you can tell I’m a bit passionate about this topic.  I’d welcome everyone else’s two cents. 

Animal lover