The Fortnightly TIME CONFETTI
Has modern life changed our relationship with time?
Isabella Fung
I recently got my first ever watch. It’s been a game changer. No longer do I have to fish out my phone from my bag, check my messages, check my emails, check my socials, check my to-do lists, have an inevitable little doomscroll, flick through my camera roll, put my phone away, only to realise I didn’t do the one thing I got it out for. What was it again? Oh yes, checking the time.
I was reluctant to get the watch at first, as I didn’t want to be aware of every minute ticking by; I was hoping I could prolong the vaguely endless sense of time a child has, but in reality, I was instead functioning in a cloud of amorphous dread. Because, unfortunately, modern life is obsessed with time. Sectioning if off, chopping it up into segments, hunting down every last skerrick like a bounty hunter; all to squeeze out every second in the name of productivity… If I reply to emails whilst on the bus, I can save 10 mins at home, which I can then use to meal prep, so I have 30 mins extra on Monday to catch up with my friends (maybe two at a time to get it over and done with) to complain about how I just ‘Don’t Have Any Time ’ Like every symptom of modern life, someone has given it a cute name.
These fragmented pockets of time (in between classes, on public transport, waiting for the kettle to boil, before bed, after work) are called ‘time confetti’, a term coined by author Brigid Schulde. She explains that even when we have time, whether that be for productivity or leisure, it is not in one continuous block but split up by constant interruptions: text messages, work emails, sudden remembrance of deadlines, mentally adding things to to-do lists. On and on it goes ad nauseum.
This results in multitasking and frequent ‘context shifts’, reducing productivity and leading to one feeling overwhelmed, burnt-out, scatterbrained and exhausted
As academic Ashley Whillans says, ‘leisure has never been less relaxing’. The obvious culprit is technology. Yes, it has gifted us more time by giving us agency over where, when and how we work/study, but it has also reduced the quality of that time (and somehow made it feel like we are working all the time). This irony is known as the ‘autonomy paradox’.
But of course, technology is a product of our society. Hustle culture, glorification of being ‘busy’ and the monetisation of hobbies, are also to blame (thanks capitalism) Terms like ‘hardworking’ and ‘early riser’ have moral baggage. It is seen as a good, virtuous thing to transform every minute into productivity. When given the opportunity for free time, it feels… wrong. As Schulde says, leisure time feels ‘selfish’; something we must ‘earn’ by ‘getting to the end of a very long to-do list’.
More sinister still, are the underlying socioeconomic factors; gender, race and class, which determine who is most affected by time confetti Schulde argues women, especially those in caretaker roles, suffer more than men ‘Women have never had a history or culture of leisure’, she says, arguing that as women juggled relentless domestic labours, ‘ men enjoyed long, uninterrupted hours of leisure. And in that time, they created art, philosophy, literature’
I think the reality is, that even given the time, I won’t be writing a modern-day Odyssey. It would be nice just to sit and do nothing. Sometimes I fantasise about stomping on my mobile phone like it’s a crunchy autumn leaf, logging out of MyLo (forever), and cutting ties with every person I have ever known Finally, I’ll rip off my new watch and throw it into the sea, and, hopefully, I’ll be happily oblivious to the hour of the day, whilst I enjoy the feeling of all the fragments of time sticking back together
FEMALE EMPOWERMENT, SPACE TOURISM AND GIRL POWER
Ella Vanderzwan
STEM fields famously underemploy women, and space travel is no exception to this As of 2019, about 12% of space travellers have been women There is a clear disparity between the number of male and female astronauts.
So, clearly, the way to empower young women to be astronauts or work in STEM fields is to put six women on a private rocket made by space tourism company Blue Origin. Blue Origin’s seats to get shot into space are estimated to cost between $200,000 and $500,000 USD ($313,180-$782,950 AUD). These women would experience space flight and experience weightlessness for 11 minutes before returning to Earth Calling this empowering to the billions of women who could never afford that seems laughable at best.
This flight was conceived of by Lauren Sánchez, a journalist and children’s book writer, and the fiancé of Blue Origin’s founder Jeffery Bezos Along with Sánchez other people joining her were pop star Katy Perry, journalist Gayle King, scientists and activists Amanda Nguyen and Aisha Bowe along with film producer Kerianne Flynn.
This “empowering” experience had all members with their hair out, and in suits that Sánchez said in an interview with the New York Times were supposed to “bring a little spice to space”. The designer of the suits wanted the suits to be: “Flattering and sexy”. This idea brings up the concern of what exactly was empowering about all of this Women can be sexy; however, is it not more empowering to see the competency and stories of these women highlighted? This idea of “glamourous space suits” seems to be promoting the outdated idea of Girl Power.
Girl Power” feminism rose in the 90s due to a plethora of complex issues and was popularised by the Spice Girls. Girl Power feminism challenged ideas from the 80s of feminists being “angry” and unfeminine. This brand of feminism was both a product to be sold and encouraged women to express femininity traditionally
“The anger was smoothed out to be something more feminine and palatable Girl Power did not engage in feminism in any meaningful way, focusing on individuals rather than focusing on societal circumstances.
Girl Power feminism is often considered ‘out-dated’ today as there is nothing marketable and fun about feminism You can’t “sexy space-clothes” your way out of needing to examine how gender divisions of labour, unequal pay, class divides, racism and sexism effect everyone but especially women. Still in a group of empowering women (for example, Amanda Nguyen drafted the Sexual Assault Survivors' Rights Act), the fact that only a clean version of feminism was highlighted is ridiculous.
Blue Origin’s flights in general, are symptoms of several larger problems: Growing class divides and the inherent class differences that are being revealed within space tourism Sánchez’s all-women’s flight further showcased a divide between what the wealthy think is empowering compared to what is empowering to ordinary women find empowering. The reaction on social media sites and within the news cycle shows that this choice from Blue Origin was so disconnected from the everyday lives of ordinary people regarding both feminism and class and that women do not want Girl Power feminism when they cannot afford to put groceries on the table
Call out for submissions
Would you like to see your art or words in the semesterly paper??
We’re looking for a local UTAS artist to create or provide something fabulous for a center-fold art piece in our semester one paper! We’re also on the hunt for the best written pieces; hot topics, poetry, or TMI’s you can give us! Get in touch with questions or a submission by simply emailing us: togatusmagazine@gmail.com
The opinions expressed herein are not those of the editors, the publishers, the University of Tasmania, or the Tasmanian University Student Association Reasonable care is taken to ensure that the content and information included is as up-to-date and accurate as possible at the time of publication, but no responsibility can be taken towards Togatus for any errors or omissions.
If you have concerns or questions about anything that has been published, contact the Deputy Editor-InChief, Beth Hanley, by email
