Published 2009-01-20 – 16:55:06
So there’s a bit of a debate going around the web regarding the French minister of Justice Rachida Dati going back to work 5 days after giving birth.
Undoubtedly the children v work debate is an interesting one.
A lot of people seem to use the “well a dad can go back to work the same day and no one bats an eyelid” argument, however one cannot really compare a dad going back to work the day after or the same day as his child has been born to a mum going back to work a few days after giving birth. It’s not really the same thing. Dad’s are only really physically required once and that was nine months prior and he can easily be replaced by someone other male species for the emotional requirements.
Not nice but true.
For mothers there is of course the physically difference of child birth compared to the fatherly input (mostly stitches and sore nipples) but also, and this is where the real issue lies, an emotional difference. Not nice but still true. Mother and baby have not only been sharing a body for (hopefully) nine months and the baby is physically dependant on the mother for good nutrition but there is an emotional bond has also been created which needs nurturing as well.
Not even I can deny the fact that babies need their mummies just as much after birth as before which is why I despite my exceptionally modern centre liberal approach to society thought to myself when reading about Dati going back to work; why have a baby in the first place if you rather work than be with it. Especially considering the fact it’s a test tube (or one time favour) baby and there is no father in sight. My mind instantly went on a rant (I had nothing to do with it!) thinking that I’m sure she just wanted to tick another box on the female life to do list, how selfish. I then managed to take control of my brain again and thought yes it might not be the optimal way of bringing up a child and yes one can cast doubts over her reasons for having a baby and brand them as selfish, BUT how many parents bring up their children in an optimal way? I know plenty of fucked up people whose problems are directly caused by their parents. And several of those people had stay at home mums.
One can conclude that leaving your baby with someone after five days choosing work rather than looking after it yourself isn’t the best thing to do if you want to raise a well balanced kid but it’s certainly not the worst thing you can do. And if that’s what you need to do to be a happy sane mum when you’re at home go for it.
There is also another aspect of this debate which is that businesses should be flexible and “mummy friendly” enough to allow for mums to do both or stay at home the time needed (within reason). On one side you’ve got Catherine MacKinnon claiming that the an employer isn’t acting in a sexist manner when not adapting to a mother’s need but when the job wasn’t created flexible enough for a working mum to do it. On the other hand you have the arguments that are disguised as some capitalistic reasons that businesses need a certain number of hours in the office and a certain time of dedication which is why mums are unsuitable. I would strongly argue that that is bullshit. Things hindering working mums from progression isn’t “business needs” it the office culture and office politics. How often do workers not stay late not because they have work to do but to make the impression one is working late?
What I’m trying to say is that working mums are hindered by the office culture created my males (can’t deny that boys, I wouldn’t even have a job 50 years ago) that are centered around long hours rather than productive hours, social “networking” functions down the pub, rather than achievement and a general but subtle negative attitude towards female traits and behavior in the work environment where male behavior is the norm.
Interestingly enough there has been research on the employers attitude towards paternity leave in Sweden and surprisingly employers are very positive towards male employees taking long paternity leave. It’s perceived as showing signs of trustworthiness and loyalty. Not surprisingly the same does not go for maternity leave.
Wednesday, 11 April 2012
Hmm..
Published 2009-01-19 – 17:31:54
Read a good little column about boys and girls today. What I am about to write makes no sense in this language because British people (unfortunately) has not come further in the equality debate than feminists are dykes who hate men and women stay home with their children because they want to. I will however not explain terminology and theories mainly because will never finish this post in that case and because it makes me loose faith in humanity. Enough with the cryptic explanations and on with the subject.
I am very fascinated by the gender neutral child rearing and I am so impressed with parents who manage to keep it up. The columnist who wrote this little piece http://www.alltombarn.se/foraldraliv/1.12409 “Pink is still just a colour” is one of these parents who have managed to raise their daughter to think that there is nothing one can’t do because of his or her gender. Boys can play with dolls and girls can wear jeans and brown jumpers if they so please. But she complains that society keeps interfering with what she is trying to do. We are still so very stuck in terms or boys and girls and raising them as such that we forget that they are actually human first and boy or girl later. It’s sad that when boys misbehave we just tell them off, if girls misbehave we explain what they have done wrong. Because we expect boys to misbehave they do not need to understand what they have done wrong and why. Because we expect girls to behave and be good we explain to them what we are expecting them to do. Girls wearing dresses can’t play in the same way as if they were wearing jeans and jumpers. Boys are pushed to do things out of their comfort zone to prove themselves.
Everything matters! It’s time parents start thinking about how they raise their kids. Because it will make a difference when they become women and think they can’t do certain things and when they become men think they can’t be themselves. My kids will be kids not girls or boys but kids. Who will be allowed to play with whatever kinds of toys they want and wear whatever they feel comfortable in.
On a similar subject I saw a TV program yesterday called Boob Envy. Basically a show about tits. The show ended with a bunch of people judging 5 pairs of tits voting on which pair pleased their eye the most. As with anything else to do with appearance and preference it’s down to ratios and symmetry… so shockingly most people voted for the most symmetrical and proportional pair of tits. Even more of a shocker… they were fake. They then got three blokes who look like they have never been near a pair of boobs since they breastfeed (or even then considering the exceptionally low intelligence) made a list of what makes a nice pair of boobs - symmetrical, pert, proportion, firmness, not hanging, nipple size, yada yada yada, they then zoom in on one of them who finished off by stating in a very compassionate but matter of fact way “oh and natural definitely”. I turned the TV off. Perhaps if we didn’t dress two year old girls in bikinis and had tits in every other tabloid and raise our boys to be pushy and aggressive we might get something intelligent on the box about tits.
Read a good little column about boys and girls today. What I am about to write makes no sense in this language because British people (unfortunately) has not come further in the equality debate than feminists are dykes who hate men and women stay home with their children because they want to. I will however not explain terminology and theories mainly because will never finish this post in that case and because it makes me loose faith in humanity. Enough with the cryptic explanations and on with the subject.
I am very fascinated by the gender neutral child rearing and I am so impressed with parents who manage to keep it up. The columnist who wrote this little piece http://www.alltombarn.se/foraldraliv/1.12409 “Pink is still just a colour” is one of these parents who have managed to raise their daughter to think that there is nothing one can’t do because of his or her gender. Boys can play with dolls and girls can wear jeans and brown jumpers if they so please. But she complains that society keeps interfering with what she is trying to do. We are still so very stuck in terms or boys and girls and raising them as such that we forget that they are actually human first and boy or girl later. It’s sad that when boys misbehave we just tell them off, if girls misbehave we explain what they have done wrong. Because we expect boys to misbehave they do not need to understand what they have done wrong and why. Because we expect girls to behave and be good we explain to them what we are expecting them to do. Girls wearing dresses can’t play in the same way as if they were wearing jeans and jumpers. Boys are pushed to do things out of their comfort zone to prove themselves.
Everything matters! It’s time parents start thinking about how they raise their kids. Because it will make a difference when they become women and think they can’t do certain things and when they become men think they can’t be themselves. My kids will be kids not girls or boys but kids. Who will be allowed to play with whatever kinds of toys they want and wear whatever they feel comfortable in.
On a similar subject I saw a TV program yesterday called Boob Envy. Basically a show about tits. The show ended with a bunch of people judging 5 pairs of tits voting on which pair pleased their eye the most. As with anything else to do with appearance and preference it’s down to ratios and symmetry… so shockingly most people voted for the most symmetrical and proportional pair of tits. Even more of a shocker… they were fake. They then got three blokes who look like they have never been near a pair of boobs since they breastfeed (or even then considering the exceptionally low intelligence) made a list of what makes a nice pair of boobs - symmetrical, pert, proportion, firmness, not hanging, nipple size, yada yada yada, they then zoom in on one of them who finished off by stating in a very compassionate but matter of fact way “oh and natural definitely”. I turned the TV off. Perhaps if we didn’t dress two year old girls in bikinis and had tits in every other tabloid and raise our boys to be pushy and aggressive we might get something intelligent on the box about tits.
The logic of the Daily Express, not that there is any..
Published 2009-01-08 – 13:03:19
“Soft touch Britian – Jobless immigrants stay here and get £715 a week benefits against £178 back in E Europe” I have never seen such a racist front page in my life. One should almost report them! So hang on the problem isn’t that the benefits are ridiculously high and without any constraints it’s that people not born in Britain are entitled to them. Ever though WHY they might be entitled to them? Because they work and pay NI tax you fucking morons. Who would I rather give my tax money to – a single mother born and breed in England on a counsel estate who’s entire family has never worked a day in their lives or a hard working Romanian who has left everything they know to try and provide for their family taking jobs ordinary Brits don’t want and who has lost his or her job because of the failure of the entire banking system? Yeah you guessed it… Fucking racist c*nts. If I could work here and pay my taxes to any Eastern European country I would in a heartbeat!
“Soft touch Britian – Jobless immigrants stay here and get £715 a week benefits against £178 back in E Europe” I have never seen such a racist front page in my life. One should almost report them! So hang on the problem isn’t that the benefits are ridiculously high and without any constraints it’s that people not born in Britain are entitled to them. Ever though WHY they might be entitled to them? Because they work and pay NI tax you fucking morons. Who would I rather give my tax money to – a single mother born and breed in England on a counsel estate who’s entire family has never worked a day in their lives or a hard working Romanian who has left everything they know to try and provide for their family taking jobs ordinary Brits don’t want and who has lost his or her job because of the failure of the entire banking system? Yeah you guessed it… Fucking racist c*nts. If I could work here and pay my taxes to any Eastern European country I would in a heartbeat!
Kids Co
Published 2009-01-08 – 10:17:35
I wasn't wrong the charity I wrote about in my previous post was indeed called kids co. Have a look at their great ads here: http://www.kidsco.org.uk/images/KidsCompany_AwarenessCampaign.pdf Here's what they do (from kidsco.org.uk) OUR LATEST MEDIA CAMPAIGN In our latest media campaign we’re challenging public attitudes towards anti-social and ‘yobbish’ behaviour by trying to get people to understand the experiences of children who have been abused and neglected. You may have seen one of the five ads in the newspaper, at a Tube station, or in a public space. To make the debate and campaign truthful, we used images and facts which reflect the lives of some of the children we see at Kids Company. The kids featured in the photos volunteered from a local youth club in Camden. We did not involve young people from Kids Company because our client group is too vulnerable. The young people themselves were very keen to be part of these ads because they’re fed up of being discussed in the media without having a chance to explain where they’re coming from. The more people who engage with the campaign, the better. Our aim is to challenge negative perceptions of abused and neglected children and promote greater understanding in relation to the impact of trauma and neglect on the developing brain. It’s about encouraging everyone to take responsibility for this, so we can address social problems as one. You can show your support by donating to our work, volunteering your time or just helping us to raise awareness of the needs of these children. Click on the buttons to the right to find out more.em>
I wasn't wrong the charity I wrote about in my previous post was indeed called kids co. Have a look at their great ads here: http://www.kidsco.org.uk/images/KidsCompany_AwarenessCampaign.pdf Here's what they do (from kidsco.org.uk) OUR LATEST MEDIA CAMPAIGN In our latest media campaign we’re challenging public attitudes towards anti-social and ‘yobbish’ behaviour by trying to get people to understand the experiences of children who have been abused and neglected. You may have seen one of the five ads in the newspaper, at a Tube station, or in a public space. To make the debate and campaign truthful, we used images and facts which reflect the lives of some of the children we see at Kids Company. The kids featured in the photos volunteered from a local youth club in Camden. We did not involve young people from Kids Company because our client group is too vulnerable. The young people themselves were very keen to be part of these ads because they’re fed up of being discussed in the media without having a chance to explain where they’re coming from. The more people who engage with the campaign, the better. Our aim is to challenge negative perceptions of abused and neglected children and promote greater understanding in relation to the impact of trauma and neglect on the developing brain. It’s about encouraging everyone to take responsibility for this, so we can address social problems as one. You can show your support by donating to our work, volunteering your time or just helping us to raise awareness of the needs of these children. Click on the buttons to the right to find out more.em>
OMG I've been ROBBED!!
Published 2009-01-07 – 15:12:23
I’ll move on from writing about ugly British people on thankstfl.blogspot.com to writing about stupid British people here on Suspicious Minds. I almost lost hope in humanity on the train to work today, not because the woman opposite me was ugly (although she was) but because of what she was reading – The Daily Mail….. Front Page: “The great light bulb revolt Robbed of the right to buy traditional light bulbs, millions are clearing shelves of the last supplies. Millions of Britons are finally waking up to the fact that their beloved light bulb will disappear for good after 120 years.” Really? Rushing to buy light bulbs?? Millions of them? I have a few objections to this front page, apart from being absolute nonsense, how is this news? There are wars all over the globe, a financial crash and loads of interesting events around the world and they put an EU directive about light bulbs on the front page? Was anyone thinking? And the dramatic tone! Please who is feeling robbed of their beloved 100w light bulb? It’s time the UK starts realising they are not God’s gift to civilisation and that you are rather far behind culturally, socially and in the public debate. And I would like to blame the media for that. There is no intelligent debate or debate what so ever in the UK press about society. This is an essential ingredient in civic society and it is non existent. I would however like to praise the charity advertising around London (and possibly around the country) for trouble teens and anti -social behaviour. I thought they were called KidsCo but a quick look on Google tells me I’m wrong. I love their ads! They are brilliant and they are a smack in the face of the government and police over ASBOs. Of course a teen with an abusive family and involved in crime wont care about an ASBO. If you want to tackle youth crime you need to tackle the problems creating them. Family structure, schools and support systems must be excellent. I personally believe one should not be allowed to procreate without a university degree. Which is why it’s essential education of all levels be free. Schools in this country must get so much better. Who gives a shit about the level of education when none of the kids are listening? The fact that you educate teachers in a year shows how little you know about pedagogic and how children learn. A bit off topic but hey it’s a big problem. Will try to find that charity now and get involved. Always wanted to be a youth counsellor! There are animal rights activists shouting outside my office think I will go and through some fur at them.
I’ll move on from writing about ugly British people on thankstfl.blogspot.com to writing about stupid British people here on Suspicious Minds. I almost lost hope in humanity on the train to work today, not because the woman opposite me was ugly (although she was) but because of what she was reading – The Daily Mail….. Front Page: “The great light bulb revolt Robbed of the right to buy traditional light bulbs, millions are clearing shelves of the last supplies. Millions of Britons are finally waking up to the fact that their beloved light bulb will disappear for good after 120 years.” Really? Rushing to buy light bulbs?? Millions of them? I have a few objections to this front page, apart from being absolute nonsense, how is this news? There are wars all over the globe, a financial crash and loads of interesting events around the world and they put an EU directive about light bulbs on the front page? Was anyone thinking? And the dramatic tone! Please who is feeling robbed of their beloved 100w light bulb? It’s time the UK starts realising they are not God’s gift to civilisation and that you are rather far behind culturally, socially and in the public debate. And I would like to blame the media for that. There is no intelligent debate or debate what so ever in the UK press about society. This is an essential ingredient in civic society and it is non existent. I would however like to praise the charity advertising around London (and possibly around the country) for trouble teens and anti -social behaviour. I thought they were called KidsCo but a quick look on Google tells me I’m wrong. I love their ads! They are brilliant and they are a smack in the face of the government and police over ASBOs. Of course a teen with an abusive family and involved in crime wont care about an ASBO. If you want to tackle youth crime you need to tackle the problems creating them. Family structure, schools and support systems must be excellent. I personally believe one should not be allowed to procreate without a university degree. Which is why it’s essential education of all levels be free. Schools in this country must get so much better. Who gives a shit about the level of education when none of the kids are listening? The fact that you educate teachers in a year shows how little you know about pedagogic and how children learn. A bit off topic but hey it’s a big problem. Will try to find that charity now and get involved. Always wanted to be a youth counsellor! There are animal rights activists shouting outside my office think I will go and through some fur at them.
Change we can believe in!
Published 2008-11-05 – 12:29:49
Just watched McCain’s last speech. He seemed more sincere then during his whole campaign when he spoke about Obama. He almost sounded relieved that he has lost, not just because he’s way beyond working age but also because prefers Obama’s politics. He has obviously just been a republican creation, but I wouldn’t be surprised if his own ideas has been completely washed away for the benefit of what the election campaign thinks will win the election. One of the worst things about politics is that as soon as you get involved a bit higher up you seem to forget why you got into politics in the first place – the fact that you don’t agree with the current politicians and the current policies and you think you could do a better job. Well at least the sincere politicians which are few and far apart. When you start advocating policies just to win an election rather than because you believe they will make a change for the better you have lost the plot. I am of course not so naïve that I don’t realise that is what politics has always been and always will be about. Thank you Americans everywhere for making a sane choice at last! Hope you can hear the sigh of relief from the rest of the world!
Just watched McCain’s last speech. He seemed more sincere then during his whole campaign when he spoke about Obama. He almost sounded relieved that he has lost, not just because he’s way beyond working age but also because prefers Obama’s politics. He has obviously just been a republican creation, but I wouldn’t be surprised if his own ideas has been completely washed away for the benefit of what the election campaign thinks will win the election. One of the worst things about politics is that as soon as you get involved a bit higher up you seem to forget why you got into politics in the first place – the fact that you don’t agree with the current politicians and the current policies and you think you could do a better job. Well at least the sincere politicians which are few and far apart. When you start advocating policies just to win an election rather than because you believe they will make a change for the better you have lost the plot. I am of course not so naïve that I don’t realise that is what politics has always been and always will be about. Thank you Americans everywhere for making a sane choice at last! Hope you can hear the sigh of relief from the rest of the world!
Poppy Appeal
Published 2008-11-04 – 11:05:45
Some "charities" really annoy me. The poppy appeal really annoys me. If you're stupid enough to join the army (Hi there, can I hand over my brain and any opinion and free will I might have to you - you fine specimen of white middle-aged man with personality disorder? Thank you, now please send me to the desert so I can shoot someone!) then I'm sorry but you don't deserve any charity. Why do you need a yearly country wide appeal? Because you came back from war and realised you were a complete idiot and you're whole belief system has been blown to pieces? Buhuu I lost an arm – but you signed up for it! Don't give me this shit about them defending the country - who the fuck is attacking us? What? How many soldiers did you see around 7/7? I think it's a bit disgusting how people just hand out money to all these charities thinking that they have done something for the world without contemplating what they are actually supporting. It would be interesting to see how many of those who marched in the wake of the Iraq war are now wearing these god damn poppies. If you want to support people affected by war then support the civilians affected by war not the professionals who creates them. I might start an anti-poppy appeal! I’ll line up some of the mindless, heartless idiots who have received support from the poppy appeal and find the widows, children and hurt people who’s life they have directly ruined and give THEM the money and support. Make a stance – say no to the poppy appeal!
Some "charities" really annoy me. The poppy appeal really annoys me. If you're stupid enough to join the army (Hi there, can I hand over my brain and any opinion and free will I might have to you - you fine specimen of white middle-aged man with personality disorder? Thank you, now please send me to the desert so I can shoot someone!) then I'm sorry but you don't deserve any charity. Why do you need a yearly country wide appeal? Because you came back from war and realised you were a complete idiot and you're whole belief system has been blown to pieces? Buhuu I lost an arm – but you signed up for it! Don't give me this shit about them defending the country - who the fuck is attacking us? What? How many soldiers did you see around 7/7? I think it's a bit disgusting how people just hand out money to all these charities thinking that they have done something for the world without contemplating what they are actually supporting. It would be interesting to see how many of those who marched in the wake of the Iraq war are now wearing these god damn poppies. If you want to support people affected by war then support the civilians affected by war not the professionals who creates them. I might start an anti-poppy appeal! I’ll line up some of the mindless, heartless idiots who have received support from the poppy appeal and find the widows, children and hurt people who’s life they have directly ruined and give THEM the money and support. Make a stance – say no to the poppy appeal!
A kiss for a PM in waiting?
Published 2008-10-02 – 13:38:08
That is the headline today in one of the less intelligent newspapers available to the British population (and the rest of the world for that matter – you’ve got to love the internet!) with a picture of Cameron kissing his wife. I hate these pictures. For several reasons. They always look so awkward and uncomfortable to the point were it just looks fake - we actually hate each other but will pose for the cameras. Secondly I cannot understand why wives, husbands, children and dogs have to get involved? I mean who else brings their wife to work? What CEO brings their husband/wife to work and gives him/her an awkward kiss in front of everyone in the office after delivering a strategy speech? I don’t get it. I don’t understand this need to see our politicians as “just like you and me” “with feelings” blab bla. I want to see a professional person there to do a job. I don’t need to see your dog or your wife. I don’t give a f*ck about your family, I’m not voting for your wife and who gives a shit what she does, what does the shit public service got to do with her? Of course our families influence us but seriously, do you give a shit what your partner thinks when you’re at work? Sort it out. Don’t want to see you smooching ever again!
That is the headline today in one of the less intelligent newspapers available to the British population (and the rest of the world for that matter – you’ve got to love the internet!) with a picture of Cameron kissing his wife. I hate these pictures. For several reasons. They always look so awkward and uncomfortable to the point were it just looks fake - we actually hate each other but will pose for the cameras. Secondly I cannot understand why wives, husbands, children and dogs have to get involved? I mean who else brings their wife to work? What CEO brings their husband/wife to work and gives him/her an awkward kiss in front of everyone in the office after delivering a strategy speech? I don’t get it. I don’t understand this need to see our politicians as “just like you and me” “with feelings” blab bla. I want to see a professional person there to do a job. I don’t need to see your dog or your wife. I don’t give a f*ck about your family, I’m not voting for your wife and who gives a shit what she does, what does the shit public service got to do with her? Of course our families influence us but seriously, do you give a shit what your partner thinks when you’re at work? Sort it out. Don’t want to see you smooching ever again!
Sarah Palin
Published 2008-09-29 – 23:13:47
I have just watched the Charlie Gibson interview with Sarah Palin. Correction I have watched some of the interview – I could not watching more than the first two parts. It was killing me! I also watched her speech at the convention and I would say her most prominent feature is her confidence. Confidence is of course a great feature and one which we should all aspire towards. However confidence can be dangerous. When one has no knowledge, experience or clue. How anyone can find this delusional woman endearing is bewildering to me. To me she looks clueless and is compensating for he complete lack of knowledge with arrogance. A very dangerous combination. It has a tendency to lead to delusion. She has been to Canada and Mexico and she has been to US army bases in Kuwait and Germany. Right. Her world view is miniscule. I cannot write any more about her. She is so wrong in so many ways I do not even know where to start. If they win I hope Branson has sorted out the space travel because I think we need to leave!
The use of Knowledge
Published 2008-09-29 – 17:55:10
Just been reading about a new school proposition in the Swedish papers. The government would like to make music, art and theatre lessons optional for 16-19 year olds (gymnasiet) at the moment they are mandatory. And I think it’s great that they are.
Since I didn’t put my self through this particular type of high school I’m not too sure what the actual lessons are like or what you are taught, but I would like to think you are taught about music history, composition, instruments, how a modern day pop song is put together and that you are given to option to try it yourself, that art lessons include art history and the development of art throughout history and its role in society and theatre lessons about delivery articulation and performance. Who would not want to have this kind of knowledge and skills? It’s these kinds of skills that make you a worldly knowledgeable citizen, AND it can break a lot of cultural and class barriers.
Fair enough we are not all capable of performing music or theatre or drawing and should therefore not be forced to do so but that is not reason enough to get rid of this wonderful addition in the curriculum.
Here’s why I think it’s absolutely fantastic that all kids are being taught music, art and theatre:
1) The broader your knowledge the better equipped you are in life. We’re all thought loads of crap in school we will never use in our professional life but knowing why plants are green and how many operas Mozart wrote is making me able to appreciate and understand the world around me. Seeing a drawing and knowing how it has been out together makes be better at evaluating it. Broad knowledge = broad horizons.
2) The art of theatre, performance, delivery and articulation is something we all need in our professional life, no one can say otherwise.
3) Practising to do things you are uncomfortable with and bad at is great; for self-esteem, expression and it’s a great life lesson.
4) It will give the kids a break from the theoretical subjects and make the school week a bit more fun. Stimulating different parts of your brain should be encouraged and it will help them with maths and history.
Think Jan Björklund will care?
Read a funny but unfortunately very accurate comment on the Washington Post about the scariest hockey mum in the world:
She's going on a Field Trip to the UN to "meet foreign dignitaries". Then, in addition to telling us she can see Russia from her house, she can say that she "has met with foreign dignitaries." Finis. That makes it true. Thus, she is qualified to be VP and to forge ahead with her mission: "Security, Energy, and Reform". Is this real life or is this whole thing a SNL skit???
Go Straight To Jail
Published 2008-08-05 – 12:30:50
Reading yet another news article about a man raping his daughter and this time the rapist was convicted and sentenced to 4 year imprisonment, which the article stated was the lowest punishment for child rape (in Sweden), my first thought - why did guy get the lowest sentence and secondly why and when is jail an appropriate punishment.
The phenomena of jails and how long one has to stay in there are interesting on multiple levels - how we rate the seriousness of crimes and length of sentences accordingly, but more interesting (I find) is how and why the world has decided that the best/worst punishment for anyone doing something hurtful to something or someone in a manner that society does not condone of, is being forced to live with restricted freedom for a limited period of time. Some societies have of course decided that one has to pay with his/her life as punishments for some acts but most criminals are sent to jail.
I find it fascinating that being confined is sufficient payback for crimes committed. One would think that we would want to either punish these people for their crimes, in which there are many many many other situations that are worse than being restricted of some freedoms, or we would want to rehabilitate them/teach them something in which being locked up with other criminals (although evidently not the best ones) might not be such a great idea. My point is jail doesn’t seem to be all that bad; I rape you and (in the unlikely event) I get caught I have 6 months of living in a piss poor hostel that I cannot leave with strict routines and some scary people. How does that add up? How did we reach the conclusion that that is punishment? Now I have not been to jail so I would not really know but if I had to chose between spending 6 months in Holloway Jail or in a gang in Somalia I know which one to choose.
As I see it there are two reasons for sending people to jail 1) to get them out of society and away from people and 2) as a punishment. However it's not particularly efficient on either account. Firstly if we want these out of society why do we let them out again since we’re not really rehabilitating them? And secondly if we want it to act as a deterrent it has to be a lot worse than what it is. For a lot of people jail is better than the outside world.
I obviously understand that it is a cost efficient way to deal with crime – keeping them locked up is cheaper than rehabilitation, but as with everything political long term solutions are always better. I cant help but think that eye for an eye (I sell drugs = helping drug victims/working in a rehab centre) might be an idea in some cases. In other cases keeping them out of society i.e. locked up for ever is suitable and in other cases where people find themselves involuntary doing crimes in order to survive giving them the opportunity to sort themselves out is the rights thing to do.
The punishment and treatment of criminals need to be a lot more flexible and tailored to the individual circumstances in order to create a less criminal society
This thing we call culture...
Published 2008-08-05 – 12:03:14
Interesting comment today in SVD about virginity surgery (we’re a bit further along in the equality debate in Sweden, or the public debate in general, the wittiness of our politicians do not concern us as much the state of our society) which have been highlighted recently do to an evaluation of the widespread of said surgery and the use of public healthcare to fund these medically meaningless operations (virginity surgery aim to create something on the inside of the vagina to produce some blood during intercourse which in some cultures are seen as necessary to ensure the woman is a virgin). Now anyone with some knowledge of the female anatomy knows that the hymen is somewhat of a myth, it’s not a “seal” it’s a more of a fold in the internal walls which hence cannot break to produce blood. This whole virginity surgery debate is wrong on so many accounts I barely know where to start, here are a few pointers:
- Everything else aside, people want you to bleed on your wedding night! Nice…
- It’s a myth that women bleed during their first intercourse
- Even if you have surgery you might not bleed because it is simply trying to create something that wasn’t there in the first place
Onto the more serious note on why these women feel forced to fake virginity blood on their wedding nights to satisfy their male relatives that they have not had sex. It’s a bit like the witch hunt – we don’t care if it’s absolute bollocks we want our blood! The virginity issue is of course just the tip of the iceberg in honour cultures and so much has to be done by the rest of society and the community to ensure the safety and freedom of these poor girls. The other issue at hand here is then weather tax money should pay for these ridiculous medical interventions and indirectly support these honour traditions. It is of course a quick fix and when faced with a young woman who fears for her life is she doesn’t bleed we would all probably do the same. I would just like to point out that we must not forget that every culture in the world have treated women this way as some point in evolution and so we cannot make this a we and them issue because it is not.
The article today discussed the national health boards decision to not allow for these types of surgery to carried out in the public health system but allowing for male circumcision. This obviously leads to a discussion about female circumcision and voila virginity surgery, male circumcision and female mutilation are bungled up into one. The three obviously concern genitalia and have various religious and cultural connotations but cannot be compared on reason or outcome.
The issue of culture and in particular multiculture is a very delicate matter. Anything with the word “cultural” in it usually gives anyone in office the shakes. No one wants to be seen to be non tolerant/racist/narrow minded/ignorant or be accused of discrimination. But much if the multicultural debate is lacking one fundamental point - one cannot hide behind the cultural shield. CULTURE DOES NOT MAKE IT RIGHT. Let me repeat that CULTURE DOES NOT MAKE IT RIGHT. One cannot justify a behaviour with saying that it’s tradition or “culture” for it is not an argument. Saying we have always done so is not an argument. One cannot either say that by not being allowed to do a specific thing your culture is being compromised. A culture will not diminish if you are no longer allowed to club seals for the clubbing of seals is not the foundation of your culture. That is like saying that by moving house of changing my job I will loose my personality. Although my job or by home will have a great impact on my life and a change in either will most probably affect me in some way it will not change my very being. (I cannot take credit for these last assertions, my light bulb moment came when reading the closing remarks made my Brian Barry in Free Movement which I would recommend anyone to read)
This is of course a very tricky path to tread for politicians who are scared shitless of upsetting voters and appearing in general like they have any radical views what so ever. I have notice this fear of cultural issues particularly in the UK, not too long ago I read that £500k had been spent on finding a police uniform that would comply with particular religious requirements (might have got that wrong), or the hairdresser in King’s Cross who wanted to wear a veil. An interesting angle on this problem (although I am not in favour of this argument as it simply highlights ignorance and does nothing to promote acceptance of differences, and does nothing what so ever to promote co existence) is that I for instance would be required to comply with certain cultural rituals and demands if I where to travel to other countries. I would have to wear a veil in certain countries and being a women I would not be able to do all the things I normally do in every other country in the world. One could of course use that argument to say one has to adapt to what ever culture one is in. I do not agree. As long as we are all behaving as good tolerant people (the way God intended us to be) we can all live together regardless of cultures. But that requires people to treat their culture and tradition as garnish to their personalities rather than the foundation.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)