Saturday, May 30, 2009

"I do not believe that standing up for the rights of a sister to speak without being attacked, is an attack"

And neither do I.

Allecto has declared she will not publish any more of my comments on her thread about my Sheila Jeffreys bag post. Her choice, of course. I have posted one more comment, which she has every right not to publish, but I'll stick it here:

Her final comment:

Yes, you are right. I should have called it woman-hatred rather than ridiculousness. No, I do not believe that standing up for the rights of a sister to speak without being attacked, is an attack.

Sheila does not speak on behalf of, or for, women in prostitution. Rebecca made it clear in her comment that she speaks for herself. Sheila speaks as a woman against the sex industry, which is an industry that ALL women have a stake in bringing to an end. From everything that I’ve read, from the conversations that I’ve had, from the speeches that I’ve heard, Sheila Jeffreys is a woman who cares deeply about the rights of women being harmed in the sex industry. She is one of the few women who has the courage to say that women’s bodies are not for sale and that message benefits all women. She believes that women have a fundamental right not to be prostituted, not to be bought by men like so much meat, not to have their Selves defined as ‘whore’, or reduced to ‘cunt’. It does not surprise me that there are many women who are not able to respect the integrity of their Selfhood, the integrity of their bodies, when so much around us tells us that we are ‘cunt’ that we are ‘whore’. It does not surprise me that there are many women who are unable to hear what feminists like Sheila have to say when being against prostitution is called “sex-negative”. When women who are bought by men as sex call themselves ’sex workers’. As if there is any logic in that. As if sex is a job. It is saddening but not surprising.

Anyway, I think we’ve both had our say. I am not interested in continuing this conversation.


And mine:

I am a sex worker. I respect the integrity of my body. Those two statements are not in opposition to each other.

I would appreciate it if you would publish one more comment, as I thought I had said this here but had actually said it in the comment thread at my own blog: I do believe that Sheila Jeffreys genuinely believes she has the best interests of women (or at least some of them) at heart.


And I'd just thanked everyone for being civil to me...

To run through it quickly:


  • I certainly believe that every woman has the right not to be prostituted. I just also believe that person has the right to set the terms of any sexual contact they have, including exchanging sexual contact for money, favours, goods or services. Moreover, I believe fervently that every person has the right to not be criminalised or discriminated against because of the terms they set for consensual sexual behaviour.

  • I, and many other sex workers, have a great deal of respect for the integrity of our selves. This is not compromised by engaging in sex work, or in any other kind of consensual sexual behaviour.

  • I, and many other sex workers, have a great deal of respect for the integrity of our bodies. This is also not compromised by engaging in sex work, or in any other kind of consensual sexual behaviour.

  • I have not said, and do not believe, that being against sex work makes one "sex negative". The fact that some people who are against sex work ARE sex negative does not change this. Correlation, maybe, not causation.

  • I can hear just fine what Sheila Jeffreys has to say. I disagree with it.

  • There's not much I can say to "as if sex is a job". Clearly sex can be a job (or more accurately, jobs can involve sex) because as sex workers have been saying for quite some time now, sex work is work. If people choose to continue refusing to let us define our own lives and label ourselves with our terms, there isn't really much to be added. I think there's a certain level of woman-hatred in refusing to let women define themselves and their lives because their experiences don't mesh with your politics.



For clarification. And I'm out.

Call to activism: Disability parking permit criteria to change

CALL TO ACTIVISM - Many people with disabilities to be excluded from accessible parking under proposed scheme

If you're Australian, please follow that link, read Lauredhel's post, and write the appropriate emails and letters. It's really important. A whole bunch of people who are reliant on their disability parking permits are about to be excluded from the new national criteria. This would certainly have left me without a permit in the two years I needed one, and it will affect a lot of people who have physical disabilities and fit the current criteria.c

International Whore's Day, by Fuck Politeness.

While it seems a little odd to be bouncing back and forth the links to each other's blogs, Fuck Politeness has a fantastic post on International Whore's Day from an ally's perspective. Go read.

Sheila Jeffreys and accessories, again.

As brought to my attention by Anthony in comments and Caroline here, it seems that certain segments of the feminist blogosphere have objected to my post on the "Sheila Ain't My Sister" bags that were jumped on by Aussie sex workers at an Australian sex workers event last year, and my comments on Jeffreys herself. Thanks for the heads up, guys, I had no idea!

I believe Allecto started here, referring to my post as "ridiculousness" and objecting to the "silencing" of Sheila Jeffreys. I'm not quite sure what silencing she's referring to, as I certainly haven't made any attempts to shut Jeffreys down. I, and many other Aussie sex workers, would like it if she'd leave us alone and go back to speaking on behalf of people who actually want her to speak on their behalf, but I am sadly very aware of the fact that my only tactic of "relying on logic and human decency to convince her" is doomed to fail. Still, there's nothing else in my arsenal. I can't silence anyone.

In comments on that thread, v says this:

Sheila is my sister.

Did i missed hexys coronation? The one where she became the official spokesperson of all sex workers everywhere?

No? I didnt think so.


... which I found as surprising as the "silencing" accusation. Unlike Jeffreys, I haven't attempted to speak on behalf of all sex workers everywhere. If you re-read my post, you'll see I was reporting on an event, and on my observation of the excitement surrounding that bag from a group of mostly women, all of whom were sex workers. I'm certainly not surprised that this has been completely ignored by Allecto and the others who have jumped aboard, but it angers me. I'm fucking sick of sex workers being considered the least important voices in discussions about sex workers, and especially in discussions about sex workers that inform policy. Therein lies my objection to Sheila Jeffreys work on sex work.

The comment I left at Allecto's reads thus:

Hi, all. Just got pointed over here by another blogger. Didn’t realise this was going on.

I’m quite genuinely glad you’ve all gained so much from Jeffrey’s writings, and feel a bond of sisterhood with her. Seriously.

But Australian sex workers have demonstrated that we don’t. And my post, in this context, wasn’t about you lot, or about any other group of women or feminists. It was about Australian sex workers, and our anger at Jeffreys’ attempts to speak for us and inform policy that actively hurts us.

I have no objection to your show of solidarity, save for that it seems to have missed the point of the “ridiculousness” it claims to respond to.


... and I stand by that. Those who have discussed the matter with me (or, ya know, bothered to read this blog) know that my stance on feminism is that it must represent all women, and that there must be a space within it for women of all types. I don't generally buy into the "doin feminism rong" memes that fly around this online world of ours.

However, just as women must be the primary voices in feminism and women's issues, sex workers must be the primary voices in sex workers rights, and in sex worker issues and legislation. It's as simple as that. If you're promoting the words of a non-sex worker whose work is constantly objected to by sex workers across this country (indeed, around the world) over the words and preferences of those actual sex workers, then yes, you are doing it wrong.

The Anti Porn Feminists blog has gotten involved in the party, and I found Jennifer Drew's comment quite telling:

Nothing new about demonising yet another radical feminist simply because she dares to speak the truth and challenge pseudo feminists and the sex industry. For centuries women who have dared to speak the truth and challenge male supremacy have been demonised.

Remember the witch hunts – because this too was all about men and their supporters using claims that certain women and girls were witches in order to steal their few possessions, property or simply just to silence them.

Another point of view would be that because Sheila Jeffreys is widely respected – yes widely respected not disrespected – this threatens male supremacists and their followers.

Sheila Jeffreys has experienced these attacks before as did Kate Millett and not of course not forgetting the late Andrea Dworkin. Catherine MacKinnon too has been subjected to virulent women-hating attacks, but male supremacists and their supporters were not able to silence them. Additionally, there are many, many radical feminists who are routinely subjected to vicious misogynistic attacks and the reason is always because women who dare to speak the truth threaten male supremacists.

Which is why there continues to be a war on women and sustained attempts to silence our voices. Control is never 100% total because the oppressed can never be totally silenced, as soon as one voice is silenced another one appears. So the war continues.


My response to that:

Jennifer Drew: It’s really not about men, the majority of the sex workers at that sex worker only conference were women. Why do you perceive sex workers distancing themselves from someone who claims to represent them but does not to be an “attack”?


And that really sums it up. The constant refrain in these posts of "support of male supremacy", "anti-womanhood" and the "demonising" of Jeffreys once more highlights that these people simply cannot see sex workers standing up for our rights and ourselves as an inherently feminist action, as an act of rebellion by women against people who ignore our protests when they speak for us. We are again erased, presented as pawns of heterosexual men when the reality is that few if any had anything to do with the event in question, or with the construction of those bags. Sex workers expressing their views and claiming to be the authority on our own lives and occupations? Nah. Instead we're referred to as a "pro-prostitution lobby" and "supporters of male supremacy". Fucking disgusting.

Witchy, at least has the decency to acknowledge us as feminist women. It's sad that that's the only positive I can find in all of this, but thanks.

I'll summarise this post in two simple sentences: Saying "She doesn't speak for us" is not slander, or a "personal attack", or "mental violence", or anything else. If you're convinced those words ARE slanderous, then I think you need to look at why you think this woman's credibility depends on her being seen as such an authoritative voice that she SHOULD speak on behalf of a group of people she doesn't belong to.

EDITED TO ADD: And... whoa. Seems I missed one.

Sheila Jeffreys is my hero, at The Longest War.

I'm going to quote this one in its entirety. It's just too offensive to NOT quote.

Found this online today in the category of so-called sex-positive feminist women (aka sex workers and the faux sexually liberated) misusing Professor Sheila Jeffreys as their target in fighting against others who are true feminists opposed to men sexually exploiting women (image of "Sheila ain't my sister" bag)

Just like peace at any price, sex at any price cannot be good. In the longest war, pitting one group of women against another has been an effective divide-and-conquer strategy, aided by much media manipulation. The anti-Sheila blogger indicates that she keeps adjusting her medication (which would necessarily affect her consciousness). Psych-drugs and shrinks as a weapon of mass deception against women in man’s longest war, yes, oh, yes, but that would be another post.

The contrasting, true-to-freedom image is this one posted by Allecto at Gorgon Poisons (image of "Sheila is my sister" graphic)

Sex on men’s terms, devastating to women because there’s a real (if undeclared) war going on. To end man’s war against womankind may take men not just doing laundry and ending non-sexual violence, but practicing celibacy as a commitment to not exploiting women. Real celibacy, not what Catholic priests pretend to do. Unless men wise up and take better action, Mother Nature might just wipe men out and leave women with procreative parthenogenesis. Life will go on, with or without men.

I’m proposing celibacy for bi and het-sex men (any men born as men interested in sexual relations with women) as the ground of being to expand male consciousness as a pathway toward real peace. Celibacy for this group of people would mean that no woman would be sexually exploited by any xy-chromosome humanoid while a lasting peace is sought through heightened awareness for all. Peace at any price? No. But peace may come if we can see the chronic global misogyny without denial, and break free from male-dominant global culture. Sheila Jeffreys is my hero.


Jeebus. Where to start? The standard "faux feminists vs REALLY TRUE feminists" false binary is taken to a new level when the author flatly states that "sex workers" as a class fit into "so called feminists", and are of course presented as actively opposed to the REALLY TRUE feminists. I, the "anti-Sheila blogger", have accusations of false consciousness levelled at me again, this time because I take psychiatric medication. Nice little touch, that, minimising someone's words because of their disability.

That's some extremely messed up shit. Uh, those who object to my original post and want to claim sisterhood with Sheila Jeffreys? Can you please take this one as well?

Thursday, May 28, 2009

Epic stupid slightly lessened in NT

Hooray! NT Mothers Against Mandatory Reporting, and the medical/legal fraternities succeed in getting the NT government to back down slightly on the under age sex legislation!

I tried to blog on just how shit those legal changes were, but my brain just couldn't cope. I ended up flailing and typing shit like "HOW CAN IT NOT BE INCREDIBLY OBVIOUS HOW SHIT AND STUPID THIS IS??" which, while an accurate assessment, is not exactly deep and thoughtful blogging.

International Whore's Day Red Umbrella March, June 2nd

Wanna hear a really lovely story?

June 2nd, 1975. Lyon, France. A bunch of sex workers occupied a church in an act of protest against discrimination and failure by police to investigate or prosecute crimes against them. The cops responded by threatening to take their children away if they did not vacate the church.

Once this threat was uttered, the situation changed dramatically. Non sex working women from the town were shocked from their complacency, and joined the sex workers in the church, rendering the police unable to tell who was and wasn't a sex worker. Bit of an "I am Spartacus" moment, that.

International Whore's Day is held every June 2nd, to commemorate this action. It is considered to be one of the formative moments of what we now know as the sex worker's rights movement. This year, Scarlet Alliance is holding a Red Umbrella protest march.

Sex workers at the Sydney demonstration will be wearing red and carrying red umbrellas in solidarity with sex workers around the world & to fight discrimination.

Meet Outside Parliament House, Sydney
Wear Red, Bring a Red Umbrella
THIS Tuesday 2nd June, 12:30pm


Sex workers are demanding protection under anti-discrimination and equal opportunity laws in response to unfair bias from financial institutions, lenders, Local Councils and in advertising. Supporters are invited to join us.


Come along and join us in the spirit of that first demonstration. It's a lot harder to discriminate against sex workers when supporters stand up against stigma with us.

I'm trying to get a few hours off work that day, but I may not be able to. I'd feel a lot better if I knew I'd sent a few supportive bodies along :)

Happy Reconciliation Week! Have a land grab.

Just when you thought the Australian Federal Government couldn't get any more contemptuous of Indigenous Australians and our rights, wants and needs, this comes along:

Jenny Macklin, Federal Indigenous Affairs Minister, announced that compulsory acquisitions of Alice Springs town camps. The act itself is enraging but unsurprising, as the Northern Territory Intervention has been understood by Indigenous people to be a land grab since its early days, but the timing is particularly despicable.

The announcement was made yesterday... on the first day of Reconciliation Week.

What a kick in the guts for those who have believed this government's promises about Reconciliation to be genuine.

Firefly has a round up of links on the issue.

In other "great start to Reconciliation week" news, Mackline also announced that compulsory income management for Indigenous Australians in the Northern Territory will not be at odds with the re-instated Racial Discrimination Act. For those who are unaware, the Intervention was only possible because the RDA was suspended for a period of time. Now that it's being reinstated, the government's position is that income management has been "helpful" to Indigenous people, and hence does not conflict with the RDA.

I would submit that this is a pretty big indicator the RDA itself needs to be amended.

ETA: Protest on June 20th, the two year anniversary of the Northern Territory Intervention.

Friday, May 22, 2009

SEX WORKERS TO OPEN NEW ORGANISATION IN QUEENSLAND

Reposted on request:

Queensland Health is planning to fund health services sex workers –
what do YOU want to do with the money?

Queensland workers have not been adequately represented since the
demise of SQWISI, and the new group - United Sex Workers Queensland -
will fill that gap. United Sex Workers will be managed and staffed by
past and present sex workers to deliver education and support on
sexual health and other issues relevant to sex workers. It will be
open by summer 2009. The time has come to have your say!

We are inviting ALL Queensland sex workers to tell us what you want
and need at consultation meetings in North and South Queensland. These
meetings will be a forum for all workers and former workers to meet
and decide how their organisation will be run and what services will
be provided.

Regional planning days are being held in:

Townsville (June 1) and Brisbane (June 30).

To RSVP for the North Queensland meeting contact Jackie at USNQ on 4724 4853

** please distribute to sex worker communities **

More info on the Brisbane event at the Crimson Coalition blog.

Tuesday, May 19, 2009

Mental illness, medication, and the spiralling cost of being well

The occasional debate about non-neurotypicality/madness/mental illness and autonomy/non-forced medication compliance pops up in the little slice of the blogosphere I have time to pay attention to. Often, it's very detached and academic. The people who have not personally been through the psychiatric system, or who have only had to dip a toe or two into it, tend to argue with extremes: either the psychotic mental patient who is a danger to themselves and others, or the victim of the psychiatric system who is tied to a bench and jabbed full of god-knows-what by men in white jackets. Even those of us who have spent year after exhausting year navigating that system tend to fall into the trap of utilising these extremes, when our own perspectives and experience fail to win anyone over.

Those who argue against patient autonomy, in my experience, fit into two camps: those who don't realise that that is what they're actually doing when they argue against the right of a person with mental illness to refuse medication and treatment, and those who quite simply think that people with mental illness have sacrificed their right to autonomy through illness (and as often tacked to the end, "through no fault of their own"). Whilst both of these camps can include people who have either experienced some degree of mental illness themselves or who have seen loved ones battle with internal demons, it is those to whom these debates are purely theoretical who are the targets of this post.

I realise that at first glance, the issue of whether or not people with serious mental illness should "be able" to reject medication can seem like a bit of a no brainer. The medication makes you better, right? Mental illness is a pile of no fun, that can seriously fuck you up or even kill you, right? And no one wants to see a loved one go through the hell that mental illness can be, or the multitude of spin-off horrors that it can prompt. But even for those of us who are compliant, who have had good luck with medication and who choose to continue taking it, there can be spiralling costs that can seem to outweigh the benefits. For some, those costs may simply be greater than what they perceive the benefits to be, particularly if they have not found "the right" medication for them... or if it doesn't exist.

But! I've gotten sidetracked. I didn't start this post to lecture anyone, or to crack open arguments that have been closed. I started it to show you something.



Apologies for the shitty camera phone photo

That's a day in the life of medication, hexy-wise. Some of them I take in the morning, some at night, some throughout the day. The pile is actually a fair bit smaller than it's been at various other times, as I no longer need to take a mood stabiliser. (A shame, they're purple and really would have jazzed up the pic)

So, what's in the daily cocktail for hexy?

The little blue one? The contraceptive pill. Not really all that significant to this discussion, although one of it's many purposes is controlling the PMS-related mood triggers that can destabilise me monthly.

The green capsule? My latest antidepressant. "Latest" may seem an odd word to use there, but I'll give you a little history.

I've been on almost every SSRI on the Australian market, and a few non-SSRI antidepressants. Some have worked, some haven't. Those that worked, I've tended to grow immune to in a short time, necessitating withdrawal from them and starting again on a new and untested one. Thus far, the list looks something like this:

Zoloft: On it for six months. Might as well have been popping tic tacs. No effect, symptoms continued to escalate whilst taking the drug.
Avanza: Minimal effects. Dosage increased to maximum, then I was taken off it. Symptoms continued to escalate whilst taking the drug.
Effexor: This one worked for about a year. However, my tolerance to it escalated astronomically, requiring a dosage increase every four weeks until I was eventually taking the maximum dose. I then had to come off it... and can assure everyone that Effexor's dreadful reputation as the most horrible antidepressant to withdraw from is well deserved. It also made me jittery and clenchy, and I was more prone to manic episodes whilst on it.
Cipramil: Took a total of one pill. It sent me into a two-day long psychotic episode so severe that no one could get near enough to sedate me. Didn't bother trying a second dose.
Aropax: Worked briefly, but I was needing to increase my dose every four weeks. It also made me jittery and clenchy to the point where I ended up with aching muscles. Weaned off it after less than a year.
Edronax: Increased aggression to dangerous levels. I actually yelled at the children of some random woman in the supermarket. I nearly punched a woman in a bottle-o for the great crime of walking past me, and vomited from pure rage once. My pshrink didn't argue when I said I needed to stop taking it.
Luvox: Ah, Luvox. A SNRI. The closest I have to a success story. It controlled my depressive symptoms for nigh on four years, with a few dosage increases. Unfortunately, this year my brain finally figured out how to get around it, requiring me to abruptly withdraw from it and go on to the one I'm on now. I was in a pretty bad stated during the withdrawal, requiring time off work and some vigilant people around me.
Cymbalta: Current medication. Not yet at completely functional dose, but certainly doing something. Time will tell. I'm hopeful, as it's also an SNRI.

That might be all of them. I suspect there's a couple more, but my memory has failed me. Most of those medications within four years, though? With the associated side effects, withdrawal periods, and periods of completely uncontrolled depression when they didn't work, or when I had to come off them, or when I was waiting (and praying, and trying to hold on) for a new one to kick in and start doing its thing? Not a great deal of fun, and not exactly high-functioning hexy.

The thing is, this is not exactly an unusual experience for someone with severe depression, particularly when it's part of a complex diagnosis. The four years of being unable to work or take care of myself because nothing was working, the unmanageable side effects ranging from real, physical pain to periods of screaming-at-the-sky level crazy to mania and psychosis, the odds of the medication making my symptoms worse, the brief spots of relief punctuated by the news that my brain had "done that thing again!" and that I'd have to go through drug withdrawal whilst being monitored as a high-risk suicide threat? That's all part and parcel of what "taking your medication" can mean when talking about psychiatric medicine and mental illness.

Moving on. The two big matching white ones are my antipsychotic. In one sense, I'm extremely lucky: the first antipsychotic I was trialled on began to work, and has worked ever since. I've been on it for seven years now. The dosage has been adjusted up, then down, then up again, then down again, and will probably need to go up and down a few more times in future. That medication is the one that plays the biggest role in keeping me functional. It controls my schizoid symptoms quite well, excepting when I'm sent into a schizoid state by a manic or depressive episode. It makes me sleep, which is vital to me functioning comfortably AND to me participating in a world set up around schedules and business hours. It's got a bad side, though. It slows down my thinking, squashes my creativity, and prevents me from playing music or engaging with mathematics the way I used to. It's also caused me some physical problems, and those problems are my biggest argument against mandatory medication.

You see those other pills, that I haven't mentioned yet? The little yellow oval one, the little round white one, and the three medium sized white ones? Those are all medications I take to deal with permanent and potentially debilitating side effects and secondary conditions produced by my antipsychotic. They are all to treat serious conditions that I only have because of that compliance, because I've been dutifully taking my crazy-meds every day for the last seven years.

The little yellow one was the first to be added. It's to treat the reflux I now have to deal with. Taking medication every night for five years (at the time it was prescribed) had damaged the sphincter at the top of my stomach and increased the acidity of my stomach itself. The pain when the reflux flared up was indescribable. It sounds silly to say that for someone so common and simple as reflux, but it is honestly the greatest pain I can remember enduring. I would end up curled up in the foetal position, clutching at my swollen abdomen, bawling my eyes out, and completely unable to tell why I was hurting. Until the docs figured it out, I was forced to limit my food intake to those few, bland foods that didn't set it off... and then even those stopped working. Still, it's fairly simple: as long as I keep taking the pills, my stomach behaves itself aside from the occasional flareup. That's a model I'm already used to.

The three white ones were added recently. They're diaformin, which is a treatment for insulin resistance and type 2 diabetes. These do run in one side of my family, but no-one in my family can remember anyone ever developing diabetes before the age of fifty. Type 2 diabetes, though, is a common long term side effect of my antipsychotic. Thanks to taking that drug, and needing to continue to take it, I now have insulin resistance, and am lining up to deal with full blown diabetes far earlier than I should have to worry about it. The insulin resistance made me gain a lot of weight, and has changed my weight distribution to the point where my body is an entirely different shape to what I'm used to. Vanity aside, this has ramifications for my work. It has also increased the concentration difficulties I already have, and that are already exacerbated by the medications themselves. It means that I can't eat high-carb meals, ever, because I pass out immediately after eating them. I've had to leave parties because I've been literally about to fall asleep at the table after eating a burrito, or some yum cha. On top of all that, it increased my depressive symptoms, something that's extremely dangerous for someone with my diagnosis.

That leaves the little white one. That's the newest, added a little over a month ago, and the jury is still out on whether it needs to be joined by another little white pill. It's a synthetic thyroid hormone, and it's been added because over the past year, my antipsychotic has succeeded in causing hypothyroidism. It's stopping my thyroid gland from doing what it's supposed to do. This is adding to the weight gain, lethargy and cognitive issues, as well as contributing to depression. My hair has thinned, and my capacity to handle being cold has diminished. I don't know yet if the dosage needs to be increased to reach an effective level, but I'm yet to notice any change other than a slightly increased heart rate.

I will be on these three additional medications, and possibly the same antipsychotic, for the rest of my life. It's only been seven years, and I'm already dealing with a fairly heavy batch of "long term" side effects. I can't even begin to speculate about what state my body is going to be in after fifteen years on the drug, or twenty.

It's also worth noting that, significantly for people with disabilities, none of these medications are free. I'm lucky enough to live in Australia, and while the PBS isn't perfect, it does mean that I don't pay more than $38 for any of my medications. However, $38 per medication, per month, does add up, and each additional medication I need to add stretches my budget a little further. I'm up to six. The diabetic drug and the stomach angst drug are slightly cheaper than the others, but they also don't last a full month. I'm shelling out over $200 a month on medication, and I don't earn enough for that to not be an issue. Yes, it's cheaper if you're on a disability or sickness payment (between $4 and $8 a prescription) but believe me when I say that the provisos put in place by Centrelink for those benefits are fucking difficult to stick to when you're struggling with mental illness. Especially if you don't have a friend, spouse, carer or family member helping out.

On top of my medication costs, I now have regular massive dental bills to pay... and that is not covered by Medicare. How is the dentist relevant? Well, despite having excellent teeth that never even needed a filling until I was 19, they've been rotting out of my head in recent years. My antipsychotic reduces my saliva production, and it turns out that saliva is pretty important in keeping teeth healthy, functional, and not full of holes.

That's just a small sample of the issues inherent to the idea that people with mental illness should "just take their meds", or be medicated against their wishes. Psychiatric medications have improved a lot in recent years, but they're still hit and miss... and a lot of them are still as blunt as a brick in a sock. "Just take your meds" often translates into "just take that medication every day for the rest of your life, despite the massively unpleasant side effects, some of which will drastically shorten your life expectancy and require medication themselves. And that's AFTER you jump through all the hoops to find a medication that actually does something for you? Oh, and did we mention this is coming out of your paycheck? Aren't you glad you got functional enough to take that low-paying job?"

I still choose to take the medication. Many, many people with mental illness, whose allotment of extra shit is equal to or bigger than mine, do so. I've met people who can't work because they can't stop the uncontrollable drooling brought on by their antipsychotics, but who still take the antipsychotic. I've met people who, like me, have lost even the remnants of their old talents and the way they used to think... but who still take the medication. Significantly, I've met people who will declare themselves to no longer need the medication when they are manic or mad, but whose sober and rational assessment is that they do. These people often have their own procedures put in place to help them stay on the meds.

For many of us, the only encouragement we need to go through this particular hell and watch the side effects and negative consequences stack up is the promise that just maybe, these pills will stop us going through the far worse hells our brains can produce.

For others, though... sometimes the decision to opt out of the medication game is a sensible, rational and informed decision. Sometimes the benefits of the medication simply don't outweigh the costs.

The Icarus Project and me

So. This thread, on Feministe. Jill linked to an article about Mad Pride and the Icarus project, and the comment thread got a little firey. Mad Pride itself was of course questioned, and the comment thread devolved into an argument about mental patient autonomy, the right to avoid medication, and when it is "right" to override patient autonomy and mandate medication. A fair few non-neurotypical people and people with mental illness objected to the direction the thread was taking, and Jill stepped in and shut it down. Before I got there, obviously.

Natalia addressed the thread here. Some interesting thoughts were also presented here, at Directionless Bones.

I'm about to post some thoughts that came to me in the aftermath of reading that original post, but there's a need here for some history and full disclosure.

I was involved in a Sydney branch of the Icarus Project for quite some time. We ran it out of a little local queer space that, sadly, has ceased to exist in its original and beloved form. It was loosely organised... we'd have meetings and group discussion sessions when enough people were keen and capable of attending, and throw the occasional Mad Hatter's Tea Party or Mad Pride event to keep things positive if people had the spoons to co-ordinate such things. We didn't borrow much from the original Icarus group, but included some of their zines and publications in our resources. We didn't pretend to offer treatment or serious support, just a group of sympathetic people being there to listen to each other about our various lows, and willing to accept and embrace the positives and the pride.

It was, quite simply, amazing. A great group of people, and a valuable environment to have.

It died a natural death: a few people moved away, a few people got more sick and couldn't attend, or more well and didn't feel they needed to. The process was sped along slightly by some clashes between Icarus people in crisis and other users of the space. I still contributed to the blog and ran the occasional Mad Hatter's Tea Party without the intervening group discussions or meetings.

Mad Pride is still a big part of my life. I'm a lot more out about my non-neurotypicality than is probably wise in a psychophobic society that places so much emphasis on neurotypicality and arbitrary definitions of "sanity". But I had to firmly and decisively sever any connections I had to the Icarus Project a while back. Quite simply, they stepped up their position from being anti-enforced-medication to being anti-medication altogether. When a publication from Icarus arrived that not only encouraged people to stop taking their antipsychotics, but offered advice on how to do so without medical supervision or support, I knew it was time for me to have nothing more to do with them. That goes beyond embracing mental difference and Mad Pride, and lands squarely in Just Fucking Dangerous territory. And that's not something I could support.

That's me and Icarus.