# data[].attributes.body
Howson, Alexandra (2013) Chapter 5, ‘Regulating the Body’, in The Body in Society: An Introduction, 2nd Edition. Polity Press. 150-169

Schilling, Chris. (2012) Chapter 4, ‘The Socially Constructed Body’, in The Body and Social Theory. Sage, London. 75-102

# data[].attributes.headline
Get moving, this is no place to laze about

# data[].attributes.subject
Get moving, this is no place to laze about

# data[].attributes.body
Upon arriving to Brisbane after living in The Netherlands and Germany for five years, I was really struck by how differently public parks were being used by people in Australia compared to these countries. From my observation of parks in Europe the main activities that seemed to be taking place were leisure related - picnics with friends, casual ball games, strolling around the parklands. By contrast my local parks in Brisbane (see image below) are populated mainly by people doing some kind of physical training - alone or in a group. When searching for a picnic spot or place to dwell quietly by myself I need to negotiate people running at high speed and avoid large areas of the park being used for training circuits. My desire to relax, laze about, gaze at the clouds feels watched and mediated by intense levels of activity taking place around me. Thoughts start to enter my mind: should I be doing something more active, surely just lying here is somehow bad for my health or certainly not improving my health, am I being paranoid or are other people around me thinking I'm lazy because I'm sitting here eating chips? Probably I am paranoid, but I do feel a societal regulatory gaze watching over me, subtly directing me to do more, be more self-disciplined, join the rest of the people in the park on body building projects of self-improvement.

# data[].attributes.headline
My child my choice? Apparently not when it comes to immunisation.

# data[].attributes.subject
My child my choice? Apparently not when it comes to immunisation.

# data[].attributes.body
http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2015/s4216501.htm
Immunisation can be a taboo and divisive topic of conversation amongst new parents. Opinions are often highly charged with emotion and passion either for or against immunisation. On the internet one can find expert opinions about how immunisation works, why it is important, what possible conditions/illnesses it causes, why we should/not immunise our children. I, like a lot of other people I talk to are confused and don't really know who and what to believe. The debate is very heated. There is no middle ground. There is no way to obtain an objective perspective and this is because it's a very personal issue for people; to manage one's health is to consider how one's body is treated. It's not just about the science, people's beliefs and values inform their decision making. However for some people whether to immunise their children or not it is no longer a matter of personal choice.
From January 1st 2016, the Federal Government's 'No Jab, No Pay' policy came into effect. This means that people who are receiving Family Assistance payments from the government are required to have their children follow the recommended immunisation schedule or else their payments will be cut. This action has proved to be very contentious as there are extremely strong opinions held by both pro- and anti- vaccinators, as well as questions brought up around the ethics of an action which aims to regulate and control only a sector of society - those relying on financial assistance from the government - while leaving those more financially well off alone. I have decided to immunise my son. Not because I am fully satisfied or convinced by the science behind it, but because I am confused more than anything. And in times of confusion it can be reassuring to follow the herd. But I definitely resent being told it is mandatory and consider this regulation as discriminatory and intrusive. This regulatory action targets the bodily control of the population en masse and is not at all a subtle channelling of power by the government. However those out there on the frontline in the community - parents, health workers, educators etc, hold a very strong regulatory power that can both reward people for complying or judge and stigmatise people for not complying. This in my experience is just as effective in scripting people's choices as the governments' withdrawal of financial support.

# data[].attributes.headline
The power of an audience to bring about (positive) change

# data[].attributes.subject
The power of an audience to bring about (positive) change

# data[].attributes.body
http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/comedy/comedian-ray-badran-tells-audience-member-to-die-for-objecting-to-rape-joke-20150327-1m9hgb.html
Several years ago I directed and performed in a dance theatre piece in which I challenged the notion of appropriate female behaviour and appearance. In this work I yelled obscenities, I used high levels of muscular tension in my body movement, I was silly and crude. Although receiving a very positive audience response, including comments such as "interesting use of body tension - this is not often seen in female performers", two of my friends/associates then refused to talk to me (and are still not in contact). I am assuming I had offended them, or challenged their idea of appropriate display of womanliness. I will never know the reason. But it got me thinking. Is it my intention to challenge people through my art? What kind of relationship would I like with my audience? Should I mediate/censor the artwork if I think it may offend or challenge people's ideas about the world? Before this moment I had not considered the power the audience held as a regulatory gaze towards the artist and the artwork. But this is, I think, an important space to consider - the space of agency we all have in which our response to something effects the thing we are engaging with. Most often I/we talk about the regulatory gaze of society as being a negative phenomena putting limits on our self-expression, moulding us to conform to normative standards and expectations. But there is the other side to consider - when we are the ones doing the gazing, the power that we hold to initiate change and bring public awareness to a situation. An example of this was at the Melbourne Comedy Festival this year. Cecilia Devlin was an audience member of stand up comedian Ray Badran's show. In this performance he made a joke about rape. Cecilia Devlin  took offence to this joke and she slid under her table in protest and after refusing to answer his questions, told him that she "didn't find rape funny, that rape was not a punchline". Ray Badran then chose to discontinue his show, stating that "this is the worst gig I've ever done and I respect the fact that you spoke up but I think you're a piece of shit and I hope you die". Cecilia Devlin's silent protest sparked a debate to unfold around the ethics of speaking about sensitive issues such as rape - who has the right to do this and how should it be done? Perhaps this could be called the systematic surveillance of social conscience - that part of ourselves that watches how people treat each other. And this watching of each other having the power to draw out our best behaviour and call attention to our bad behaviour.

# data[].attributes.body
I was in Woolworths Supermarket recently, deciding between strawberries or chocolate as a treat when I looked up and saw this larger than life cardboard cut out of an Olympian athlete watching over me. I was confronted with an image of a perfect, well-trained body, a symbol of ultimate self-control and discipline. For moment I felt shocked and confused - how was I to make such a decision in this moment? Suddenly felt I had company, there was another voice joining the internal dialogue in my mind. It was no longer about which food to buy, but about my ability to regulate my own body. Surely I should get strawberries as they are far healthier than chocolate. Chocolate will only make me fat. And then I will have to do more exercise to bring my body back into line. But can I control my desire for chocolate? I was conflicted. It was no longer about what do I feel like, the question became 'which option would this athlete approve of?' 'Which choice will help me to improve myself, be fitter and healthier?' The deviant choice is often the one we succumb to when no-one is watching and that symbolises a lack of self control. So perhaps I need to carry around a pocket size Olympian athlete to keep a check on my chocolate addiction.

# data[].attributes.body
"This is a rights issue. Consider rights of the child, society, taxpayer. Madness. Not designed to have kids in 60s'." Australian Medical Association President, Michael Gannon
http://www.smh.com.au/national/madness--ama-president-says-woman-having-baby-at-62-is-selfish-and-wrong-20160803-gqjt8f.html
It has been reported in the media that a 63 year old woman and 78 year old man from Tasmania have recently had a baby after under going IVF treatment. Public criticism has been directly mainly towards the mother, reflected in these two tweets from the AMA President (see below). It is described as an act which contravenes the public good, violating the rights of child, burdening the tax payer, contradicting physiology of the body, and morally irresponsible. With this criticism the woman is publicly shamed for not controlling and negating her 'selfish' desire to become a mother. All the articles I have read focus on the actions of the mother, with the only mention of the father being his age, even though one would assume that he has been an active and willing participant throughout the IVF treatment along with his wife.
The public gaze directed towards pregnant women assumes to know what is best for them and their babies, and thus prescribes what is appropriate behaviour in such a condition. The judgements voiced in this article reminded me of being a target of that gaze during my own pregnancy. In my experience, it produced a feeling of needing to be looked after, protected, scrutinised and examined by medical professionals. To a certain extent I lost a trust in my own body. I needed doctors, scans and blood tests to inform me about my experience of being pregnant. I needed society's watchful eye to make sure I was safe.
I experienced becoming both very visible and at the same time invisible. People started talking to me who previously did not - for instance regular people I would encounter on my morning walk, or at the local shops. They appeared to have an investment in tracking my health as the pregnancy progressed. Advice, warnings, stories, questions around pregnancy and birth flooded towards me, uninvited and often in an intrusive manner. I was told by strangers what was appropriate behaviour in my pregnant condition - don't swim in the ocean, as it's dangerous for the baby, for example. As my pregnancy become more pronounced, my personal identity receded. No one wanted to know about my interests, my work, my day to day happenings, unless of course it was pregnancy related. Strangers took the liberty of asking very personal questions - such as what was my plan for the birth, accompanied with a run down of their ethical concerns, judgments and worries if they heard something which didn't fit within their world view. The gaze of the public following me around certainly felt very gendered at this time. No one was asking my partner such intimate questions, interrogating him about his health or critiquing his behaviour or assuming that becoming a father meant he was less invested in his interests or his work.
I think the pregnant body becomes a site of social imagining, one which unleashes people's own fantasies, hopes, expectations for the future, the kind of society they want to live in, the kinds of bodies they want to be produced. And this means everyone feels like they have an investment in what a pregnant woman does with her body.

# data[].attributes.headline
In this collection I use Foucault's concept of 'discourse' to examine ways the regulatory gaze operates, silently scripting appropriate appearance and behaviour in people. "Discourses constitute the link between daily practices and the organisation and exercise of power" (Schilling, 2012, 79). The power of the gaze to exert control operates invisibly, "through progressively finer channels, gaining access to peoples gestures and daily action" (ibid). We can see the effect of Foucault's concept of the clinical gaze, originating from practices of "anatomy and pathology, relying on visual observation, touch, and opening up the body," (Howson, 2013, 153) which is rendered "as an object amenable to expert scrutiny" (ibid). Surveillance over our bodies comes not only from those in authority, such as doctors, but is also distributed far more widely through public health campaigns, advertising, the media, so that we also become tools of that surveillance, as well as subject to it. This self-disciplinary gaze is internalised as we monitor and judge each and ourselves to ensure that bodies are managed appropriately. When we slip up or others fail to meet certain standards one can be stigmatised, resulting in feelings of shame and guilt or we generate a negative self-image of ourselves; Schilling (2012, 87) articulates this as "if a person's appearance categories them as a 'failed' member of society, they often internalise that label into what becomes a 'spoiled' self-identity." In an attempt to restore a positive feeling about oneself an individual may then work very hard to bring themselves back into line with societal expectations of their appearance or behaviour. The examples I have drawn together are reflections from my own life experience and I have sourced images and articles from the internet to locate these concerns within a wider context.

# data[].attributes.subject
In this collection I use Foucault's concept of 'discourse' to examine ways the regulatory gaze operates, silently scripting appropriate appearance and behaviour in people. "Discourses constitute the link between daily practices and the organisation and exercise of power" (Schilling, 2012, 79). The power of the gaze to exert control operates invisibly, "through progressively finer channels, gaining access to peoples gestures and daily action" (ibid). We can see the effect of Foucault's concept of the clinical gaze, originating from practices of "anatomy and pathology, relying on visual observation, touch, and opening up the body," (Howson, 2013, 153) which is rendered "as an object amenable to expert scrutiny" (ibid). Surveillance over our bodies comes not only from those in authority, such as doctors, but is also distributed far more widely through public health campaigns, advertising, the media, so that we also become tools of that surveillance, as well as subject to it. This self-disciplinary gaze is internalised as we monitor and judge each and ourselves to ensure that bodies are managed appropriately. When we slip up or others fail to meet certain standards one can be stigmatised, resulting in feelings of shame and guilt or we generate a negative self-image of ourselves; Schilling (2012, 87) articulates this as "if a person's appearance categories them as a 'failed' member of society, they often internalise that label into what becomes a 'spoiled' self-identity." In an attempt to restore a positive feeling about oneself an individual may then work very hard to bring themselves back into line with societal expectations of their appearance or behaviour. The examples I have drawn together are reflections from my own life experience and I have sourced images and articles from the internet to locate these concerns within a wider context.