Bike fans, there’s a new bike mag out and it’s called Treadlie. It’s very cute and is on sale now in newsagents.

It’s got a guide to building your own fixie, and features hot bike looks and other hot bike bits and pieces. Oh, and my beautiful single-speed gets its own spread. If you’re keen to enter the world of SS’s and fixies, here’s a good launch pad.

And if you subscribe now you go in the draw to win that very sweet Gazelle Toer below.

I wrote about giving this week. So, then, the very committed Julie Cowdroy, an activist and academic and ambassador for Opportunity International Australia and the Global Poverty Project alerted me to a post she’s just put up ABC’s The Drum about how to give goats for Christmas.

Or, more to the point, how to give a charity gift, instead of something consumerable. She kindly offered to provide a bit of a guide to the gifting charities she rates… handy for any of you out there who Just Can’t Face Buying Crap In A Mall this Christmas. Or Have Left Shopping To The Last Minute. Or who Want to Care More.

I’ve also posted her ABC piece below.

1. OPPORTUNITY INTERNATIONAL AUSTRALIA
Buffaloan: $50
Help sustain the source of livelihood for a poor entrepreneur in India by investing in the buffaloan. For just $50, you can feed this valuable creature for a month, keeping a buffalo full, healthy and ready to produce the milk that provides a regular income for a number of the rural poor in India.

Peas on Earth: $96
This gift helps entrepreneurs in Indonesia plough through poverty, allowing them to start a small vegetable farm – be it cabbage or carrots, beans or broccoli. Once it’s harvest season, they can collect their crop and sell the fresh produce at their own market stall for a profit, using the money to provide the basics for their families. Makes you wonder about money not growing on trees…

This is worth a read: Jaclyn Friedman v Naomi Wolf, feminists debate the Assange rape allegations, on Democracy Now. The preamble transcript gives a good overview of the facts, if you’re a little in the dark still (and confirms no charges have been pressed, they’re allegations only).

Jaclyn Friedman argues the sexual assault allegations shouldn’t be dismissed just because they’re politically motivated, while Naomi Wolf says by going after Assange, the state is not embracing feminism, it’s “pimping” it. Friedmans says:

Rape is a very serious crime, and it’s also one of the most underreported crimes across the globe. And one of the reasons is because every time the issue comes up in the media, people come out of the woodwork to blame the victims and to minimize the crime. And unfortunately, when we see someone who is a progressive hero, like Assange is, those critics, those people who are doing that minimization and that victim blaming often come from the left, as well as the right. And we’ve seen that across the board. Unfortunately, with—Naomi Wolf has participated in that, as well as Michael Moore, Keith Olbermann, Glenn Beck—of course, plenty of people on the right are participating, as well.

Wolf rebukes by pointing out that there was consent from the two Swedish women. But also that the allegations will never get off the ground:

So, because I take rape seriously, because I’m aware that in 23 years, you know, in Sweden, which has been criticized by Amnesty International for disregarding rape, for letting rapists go free, because you have a better chance in Sweden, if you’re a rape victim, of, you know, dying in an accident or getting breast cancer than having a serious rape allegation prosecuted or getting any kind of legal hearing, according to Amnesty International’s report “Case Closed”—it’s because of that that I know that these charges are utterly, utterly atypically handled. In 23 years, I’ve never seen any man in any situation this ambiguous, involving this much consent, have any kind of legal process whatsoever.

I think they both miss a point. And it’s one a lot of people are scared to say. And that is that these charges ruin it for women with what I consider far more authentic and serious charges to lay. Rape cases can’t afford to be treated with rolls of eyes around the world. Sad. But true. It’s unfortunate this case has been knotted up in the broader political issues. Wolf’s argument speaks to this. But weirdly she doesn’t quite say it as such.

What do you think?