“Though the Witch knew the Deep Magic, there is a magic deeper still which she did not know. Her knowledge goes back only to the dawn of time. But if she could have looked a little further back… she would have known that when a willing victim who had committed no treachery was killed in a traitor’s stead, the Table would crack and Death itself would start working backward.” - Aslan, C.S. Lewis, The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe
Showing posts with label lawful design. Show all posts
Showing posts with label lawful design. Show all posts

You Called It Unsanitary. We Called It Civilised.


⟡ The Composting Toilet That Terrified the State ⟡

Filed: 27 March 2020
Reference: SWANK/TCI/2020-ENV-TOILET
📎 Download PDF — 2020-03-27_SWANK_TCI_SocialDev_EnvironmentalHealth_CompostingToilet_LegalReply_NNicholson.pdf

I. This Wasn’t About Sanitation. It Was About Sovereignty.

This letter, addressed to TCI Social Development, was submitted in response to unsolicited concern regarding the family’s composting sanitation system — a system:

  • Fully compliant with environmental law

  • Structurally safe

  • Intellectually intentional

  • And clearly misunderstood by the very institutions tasked with “development”

What they called unhygienic, we called ecological.
What they deemed suspicious, we filed as architectural autonomy.

II. A Toilet as Curriculum, A Home as Statement

This document outlines:

  • The composting process and its hygienic integrity

  • The educational philosophy behind child-involved sustainability

  • The lawful absence of any public health breach

  • The impropriety of unannounced home inspections

The issue was not waste. It was control.
A family designed its home around sustainability — and the state responded with scrutiny, not curiosity.

III. Why SWANK Filed It

Because ecological sovereignty is not a safeguarding risk.
Because composting does not trigger jurisdiction.
Because self-reliance in sanitation does not warrant professional worry.

When institutions fear dry toilets more than documented trauma,
we file for the record — not for permission.

IV. SWANK’s Position

We do not accept that environmental literacy triggers surveillance.
We do not tolerate false equations between nonstandard design and child risk.
We do not apologise for intelligence, elegance, or lawful innovation.

Let the record show:

  • No law was breached

  • No child was harmed

  • No water was wasted

  • But dignity was challenged — and SWANK responded in writing




No comments:

Documented Obsessions