Adding a signature to an e-petition or sharing a post to support a cause on Facebook has become second nature to us, and they fill our news feeds. The internet and social media has made it incredibly easy to create a noise.
But does the sharing and e-signing actually make a difference? Was activism more effective in ‘simpler times’? Google something like the anti-conscription rallies in Melbourne during World War I, or the petition by women wanting the right to vote. This was activism on a scale we don’t see any more, and yet we’re more aware and there’s no shortage of people. So has social media made our activism lazier? Were we simply more bored ‘back in the day’ and staged large protests? Is social media both the best thing and the worst thing when it comes to effective activism?

Why, in 2015, is the catholic church still not taking action against priests/bishops in positions of power who abuse children? A lot of it is getting swept under the rug. Is it to save face in light of declining religious beliefs amongst the public?

Children belong with their parents and we must always have screening of refugees. This has a potential for another ‘stolen generation’

There is nothing more vile or polarising than an online conversation thread about feminism.

When I was a teenager I read something wonderful and it stayed with me, the author’s name however did not. The internet attributes this vacant place in my brain to Rebecca West.

“I myself have never been able to find out precisely what feminism is: I only know that people call me a feminist whenever I express sentiments that differentiate me from a doormat.”

Because this is the area of the ‘refugee debate’ that I don’t understand – why some people feel that they have a birthright to safety, and those born in other countries don’t.

I am quite interested in the metaphysics of physics and in particular time.

Because it’s universal.

Genuine problem that needs solving/debate/discussion.

It is such a hard and risky job. Only love can’t justify accepting going through this hardship.

I am perturbed by the conflicting stories around whether Harper Lee actually consented to publication. And that plays with a bigger question in my mind about artist’s legacies and what happens to their unpublished or unreleased work posthumously.

We love dogs for their loyalty, fluffiness and ability to connect, yet we also know that pigs are extremely intelligent, sociable and physically huggable. How can we hug one and eat another? Why is it that some animals are friends and others food?