Double Take

Oh, right, yeah, crayon sculptures of people. Right. Crayons. Well, at that size they could hardly be used for what my first impression suggested.

They always choose the dumbest American....

Why is it that the reporters always seem to choose the dumbest person in America to interview about whatever news event is going on?

In this article about how Baldwin Park, CA -- birthplace of the In'N'Out Burger -- is banning drive-thrus (a rarity in the UK), somehow they found this brilliant example of American intelligence to interview:

Another customer, Fabian Olguin, conceded that "to be honest, yeah, we have too many drive-thrus", but said they are a victim of their own success. Sometimes, the long line of cars outside In-N-Out often makes it impossible for him to drive there from his workplace, on the other side of the road, he complained. When that happens, he is forced to walk across the street and eat his dinner in the restaurant's sit-down section.

Nice, real nice, Fabian.

I hate the Guardian

Headline: "Budget 2010 losers: women, disabled and families bear the brunt"

Sub headings:
Disabled people (cuts and stricter regulations on disability living allowance)
Middle income families (child tax credit)
Mothers (pregnancy and maternity payments abolished)
The north (public sector cuts and job losses)
Poorer families in London (housing allowance capped)

For the Guardian, "women" = "mothers"

Nice.

Thanks, Guardian, I'm not a woman.

Sexist pigs.

World Cup "Widows"

Ah, the World Cup. This is me being excited. "Anyone But England": racist? England drawing with the US and Algeria: scandalous? WAGS: (Wives And Girlfriends -- why is it pluralised with an S on the acronym? Probably the same reason that FUBARed has an ED.) good or bad? But today I'm talking about the term "Football Widows".

"Football Widows" is used to describe women who don't watch football being ignored by husbands (boyfriends, etc.) who do.

When looking on Google News, oddly enough, "articles" from Which Bingo UK, Online Bingo Club, and Online Bingo Fans appear in top 5.

Why are these obviously commercial websites appearing on Google NEWS? Um, problem, google guys.


But this may, in effect, show how the term is used commercially to draw in women to spend money whilst their men spend money on beer, pizza, and other football snackfoods.

(See examples left)

I like the Sainsbury's ad as an example of the range of things sold about the World Cup: beer (in mini fridge, cider outside), crisps, branded clothes, and a sofa and a TV.

The Tesco World Cup section also has the TV, but has BBQ meat (mmm, testosterone!), and the more classy wines (as compared to cider).

This one kills me, though.

At Tesco, women wear shirts supporting their team.

At New Look, they wear underwear.

Thanks.








But this ad in particular caught my eye. This is an email from a local hotel we sometimes use at work for company guests.

    Love it or hate it, the World Cup is here and for our very good friends, we've put together two packages that give you the best of both worlds.

    For football lovers, there's the World Cup Warm-up package, which features a super-slinky room, fantastic atmosphere, buckets of beer and of course big screen football.

    For World Cup loathers there's the World Cup Widows package. Leave the other half in the bar or on the sofa and escape the World Cup at the [hotel]. Featuring dinner, 2 cocktails, nibbles and chocolate. As well as DVDs to watch and breakfast delivered to your room. Who says you can't enjoy the World Cup too?


    Enjoy the World Cup in style from from June 11th - July 11th 2010.


World Cup Warm-up from £99 per room
World Cup Widows  from £65 per person

The name of the hotel was removed so that they don't get embarrassed by the fact that ALL PEOPLE WHO DON'T LIKE FOOTBALL ARE WOMEN (widows).

I think my football-hating husband would disagree.

Individual Responsibility

The individual is central to the American system. In the UK, it's the group. Two examples of the power of groups in the UK is the education system and the political system. Being that the general election is tomorrow, I thought I'd explain the way it works for Americans.

Each constituency elects an MP to Parliament in Westminster. It's a standard majority vote, or "first past the post" as it's called here. The MPs then go to Parliament and the political party with the most MPs gets to be the Government and choose the Prime Minister and his cabinet. The other parties get to be "shadow" cabinet members. There are "front bench" and "back bench" MPs; the back bench MPs are considered less important and don't get as much say in things. During speeches in Parliament, it is quite traditional to have the MPs cheer or boo or do that standard RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE thing.

What this system means is that the people do not elect the Prime Minister. They elect a political party, and that party chooses the Prime Minister from their ranks. There are many political parties in the UK, but the biggest are Labour, Conservative (Tory), and Liberal Democrats (Lib Dem). Outside of that are the regional parties of Scottish Nationalist Party (SNP) and the Welsh Plaid Cymru. There are also the Green Party, the UK Independence Party (UKIP), the British Nationalist Party (BNP), the Libertarian Party, the Socialist Unionist or whatever party, and historically the Raving Loony Party. So it's not like the people have no choice in the matter. But this variety has somehow or another led to what is called "strategic voting". As I was told in 2000, "A vote for Nader is a vote for Bush", in the General Election various parties are asking the public to vote strategically. "A vote for Lib Dem is a vote for Labour" or in different constituencies "A vote for Lib Dem is a vote for Tory". They have their safe constituencies much like the Republicans can count on Texas and the Democrats can count on, um, who can the Democrats count on? Washington State? I dunno.

But I reiterate: people do not elect MPs, they elect a party. The MPs have almost no personal responsibility to their constituency: they almost invariably tow the party line. The MP is merely a cog in the big wheel of the party, run by God only knows whom. And so the people have no recourse of action if they think their MP sucks. People must consider the values not of the individual who is running for MP, but only the values of the party they are voting for. And choosing the Prime Minister? Not the public's job. So the debates on TV by the leaders of the big three parties defeated the purpose: while political goals will be the party's line, the personal charisma, integrity, and general bearing of the leader himself may not be the same as the MP the public will elect in that constituency. Thus, the public has no need to vote for an MP with any sort of sense of personal responsibility. For someone to say "I am honest and I will only think of you, my constituency, first" wouldn't work and wouldn't happen.

So personal responsibility is not necessary in UK politics. And then they wonder why there was the big expenses scandal. Be aware, America, if the ridiculous party politics continue, you could go down the British path, leading to people voting for parties not politicians and being unable to hold politicians accountable. Be selfish, be demanding, and ask for congressmen and congresswomen you trust and believe in. Person, not party.

The power of the group also continues into the education system. In the US, in most places, you have primary school, middle school (or junior high), and high school. Once in high school, your transcript for all four years will be considered by colleges and universities, usually in conjunction with a standardized test like the ACT or SAT and probably some essays. But in high school, all four years count. Every class is a piece of the GPA that will let you into some college or university. Sure primary school and middle school aren't as important, but there's always that possibility that if you are exceptionally bright you may be pushed forward or if you're exceptionally not bright, held back a year. Maybe it isn't used often, but it's there. A child is able to fail or succeed, and they hold their future in their four years of high school.

This isn't the case in the UK. The educational system is in two stages: primary school and secondary school. (I've known some Brits to get particularly snippy about referring to college or university as "school".) Some 30 years ago or so, it used to be that there was an exam at age 11 (the end of primary school) that would determine if the child got sent to a grammar school where they would complete O-level exams, or if they would be sent to the lesser state secondary schools. From what I've been told, this single exam at age 11 would decide your fate, as students from the lesser secondary schools would never get the same level of qualification as the students from the grammar schools. Typically this was along class lines: you were more likely to go to a grammar school if you were wealthy and the converse. But there was still a chance that a student could be from a poor background but work really hard and pass the 11+ exam to get into a good grammar school. You could still fail or succeed.

The duel system was done away with in the 70's. There are still "selective" private schools, much like the private schools in the US, which I would assume are likewise quite expensive and usually reserved for the wealthiest of children. Students now take A-levels instead of O-levels. These exams, taken on a number of subjects like the O-levels, are what gets the student into university. A quick look at the University of Edinburgh undergraduate admissions for English Literature shows that the main qualifications needed for getting into the degree are the number of A-levels (or Scottish SQA equivalent) and the score on them. So the classwork doesn't count. Only the exams matter.

This may be the reason that there are even fewer push-forward of hold-backs in the UK than there are in the US. At least anecdotally, it's unheard of to tell a primary student to repeat a grade. Or skip a grade. You progress at the same rate as everyone else, regardless of ability. (Note the case of Alexander Faludy who was the youngest Cambridge undergraduate student in almost 200 years.) But why care? It's not the classes that matter, it's the exams. You could potentially fuck around until the age of 15 but then pass the exams and not worry. Where is the personal responsibility in that? Personal responsibility is just like any other skill: use it or lose it. And regardless of whether you think passing an exam show personal responsibility or not, where is the university consideration of the whole rather than the part? This is, I must say a problem in American higher education with too much  weight being given to the SATs, but at least things aren't so bad that GPA's aren't recognised.

Stay alert, America. Think about the UK, and remember, "there but for the grace of God go I". Learn from the British. We owe them a lot (like our English language!), but we should not duplicate their mistakes.

The NHS, on the other hand, that could use replication.

BNP buys my love

Headline: BNP would offer £50,000 to leave the country. My response: WHERE DO I SIGN UP?!?

I've paid roughly £1000 in visa fees over the past 4 years. (Current Student Visa: £199; Current Post-Study Work (Formerly Fresh Talent Scotland): £315; Spouse visa: £475 by post; TOTAL: £989)

I won't count the taxes I've paid as I've enjoyed the NHS service, and I'd have to pay tax in the US as well.

Petrol prices are about £1.17 per litre, which at 3.78 litres to the US gallon, makes gas £4.42 per gallon, or at today's exchange rate, $6.72 per gallon, or more than twice what it is in the US. Being that (while I don't drive) my husband and I spend roughly £50 per month on petrol alone, and I've been with him for 3 years, divided between the two of us, I've overspent (50*36=£1800/2=) roughly £900 on gas.

Let's look at food.
UK (usually Morrissons): Bread: £0.75-£1.34 ($1.14-$2.04) Milk (2L): ~£1.50 ($2.28)  Eggs (12 large Free-range): £3.99 ($6.06) Butter: £1 (on sale - works out to one cup) ($1.52)
USA (Albertson's online): Bread: $0.99-$3.59 Milk (Half Gallon) $1.79 Eggs (Naturally Nested 12 Grade AA large): $3.29 Butter: (four sticks = four cups) $2.59-$3.49 ($0.64-$0.87 / cup)
Difference: Bread: On average, roughly the same if not better. Milk: UK: $1.14/L US: $0.95/L = 20% increase in the UK. Eggs: Almost twice as expensive in the UK. Butter: Twice as expensive.
So, while food prices vary from slightly less than American prices to twice American prices, we can assume that there is roughly a 50% increase on prices, if not more. So if I'd lived in the US, our grocery bill of £30/week ($45.60/week) would be cut to probably $30/week (£10/week less). So I've overspent in the 3.5 years I've been here some (10*52*3=) £1560 on food.

Visa: £989
Petrol: £900
Food: £1560
Total spent on UK (not including flights): £3449

Out of the £50,000 for leaving the country, I'd re-coup that £3500, spend another £1000 on the flight home and some £1000-2500 moving our things. Leaving £43,000 to buy a house in the US. At today's exchange rate, that's $65,360, which in Oregon would buy a 1 bedroom house in a cheap area or a 2-3 bedroom manufactured home or some acres of land. Not too bad, eh?

Of course, with the UK in its biggest economy crisis in EONS, the big question is: how would you pay for this?

But then, the BNP isn't concerned with practicality, are they?

China, HIV, and Xenophobia

The Guardian reports that China is ending its HIV entry ban. I think this is a good thing, but first some background on the situation.

When I lived in China, I was forced to have my chest x-rayed to make sure I didn't have tuberculosi, had my womb scanned to make sure I wasn't pregnant, and had my blood drawn to make sure I didn't have HIV/Aids. This was in 2004 and 2005. Fortunately for me, this was all paid for by the university I was working for. But it still remains that it was illegal for foreigners in China to have HIV/Aids. During the time I was there, there was even a case where the police were looking for a foreigner who had lied about having HIV and was on the run. They published a description of him and everything. Scary.

But even more frightening than dealing with the Chinese police (one of those fears I try to avoid), was the public opinion of STD such as HIV and Aids.

In China I had a lovely housekeeper named Sunny, who was a local woman who spoke English fairly well and had a knack for getting things done. She'd come in and clean once a week, but even better, it didn't matter what you needed, curtains, a vet, plants, she could find it for you. A clever woman, making her money off of the foriegn teachers at the university, but very genuine and nice. She was no rural bumpkin, nor a bigoted moron.

We were speaking one time about prostitutes in the nearby city. (Can't remember why.) And during the conversation the topic of safe sex came up. I think she had said that the prostitutes use no protection, or maybe I had asked about it. I had said, lord that's just wrong! Cause then these women could get Aids or something and then give it to other men who then take it home and give it to their wives! And this statement came as a surprise to my otherwise-worldly housekeeper. Only foriegners have Aids. I (probably quite angerly) refuted this saying, no, anyone can have Aids. And even if it first came from foreigners, everytime a Chinese man goes to Thailand and sleeps with a prostitute he could brind back Aids to his wife and family and any other prostitutes he sleeps with. I don't think I mentioned drug use or sharing needles, but the flat out denial that Aids (or any STD) shouldn't be a consideration between two Chinese people having unprotected sex simply blew me away.

I think I helped open her eyes about the matter some. But then, like I said, she was sharp. All of her English had been learned on her own by working for foreign teachers. But even this intelligent woman who has worked with foreigners for years still harboured some small xenophobic blame of foreigners for Aids.

Possibly the only other statement to surprise me was from that teacher named Angel from the Phillippines who, when I asked why she thought there were so many hurricanes hitting the Deep South (of the US) replied -- quite seriously -- because they are evil sinners. And here I was thinking about "climate change" or "global warming". But she actually was a loony.

They Taunt Me

 The  Independent taunts my ability to go on holiday.

Dangerous for Women?

In the debate about Primark's padded bras for tweens, the following anecdote was given:

I would have killed for a padded bra when I was in primary school, if only to give an extra boost to the wodges of toilet roll I had already begun to stuff into my crop-top. Like many girls, I was teased mercilessly for my flat chest by boys with undescended testicles who had already discovered that the best way to torture their female classmates was to mock us for not being sexy enough. A DIY Andrex bosom offered some protection; the handful of my schoolmates who had grown real breasts had no such luck, and were groped, harassed and dogged by cries of "slut" and "slag". For young women, sexual shame is learned in the playground, where we are schooled to suppress our authentic bodily appetites and mimic, instead, an adult ideal of erotic capital.

It was promptly mocked by the commentators below the article. Does such bullying and sexism exist? (Or did exist?)

A Daily Mail article on bullying had this to say:

In 1967 I was 5, and viciously beaten up on the way home form school by a 15 year old girl. I was later mugged by her brother. The parents were not informed as they were as bad, and more harm than good would have resulted. They were often there on the way home, being terrified I would panic and hide, if I saw them in time I would change my route.

At senior schooI I suffered 5 years of 'silent bullying' (sniggering behind my back, being left out, dirty looks etc). Trying to make other friends, my nose was broken by a jealous girl who didn't like her friend talking to anyone. During class, chewed gum was thrown into my hair, at breaking point I grabbed a pair of scissors, luckily I was held back by another pupil. I asked the teacher why she ignored this? she replied "what could I do".

I now have severe and enduring mental health problems and cannot work. I take enough medication to knock out a herd of elephants.

On a BBC teenage website, there's a first-person account of being bullied:

I had a dictionary in the back of my art book to explain what words mean and one day I saw that they'd gone to the S's and written my name under the word Slut. I cried for hours after that.
I really enjoy art and I went in to school one day and every page of my art book was covered in brown paint apparently to resemble pooh. It might sound like a stupid thing, but I felt so victimised and so alone.
I would get texts every day telling me I was a bitch and whore. "You think you're so great but you're a nasty little slag and everyone knows it," one text said.

Sounds pretty sexual to me.

On mumsnet, a discussion about 12-year-olds shaving their legs revealed some bullying stories:

I have a dd who is coming up 12. She is always bugging me to let allow her to shave her legs. The answer has been a resounding no.

Don't get me wrong- if he legs were particularly hairy to the point where is was effecting her self esteem, then yes , I'd agree it. In fact, only last week she said some boys had teased her about her 'monobrow' so having had a look at it, I agreed to pluck it for her.

 And this page at Frisky is a goldmine of boob horror stories:

“I was so excited when I left the doctor at age 9 or 10 because he told me that I was growing breast tissue. I couldn’t wait to tell my cousins, but they teased me mercilessly, asking me to bring my Kleenexes whenever they needed a tissue.”

“I had this really cute white, asymmetrical shoulder bathing suit my stylish grandmother bought me. I loved that suit because it had fringe and sequins. I probably liked it a little too much because I wore it for two or three summers in a row. The problem? I had developed small breasts. One day at camp I emerged from the pool and several boys started laughing at me. I didn’t get it and just ignored them. Then my female counselor told me that you should never wear a white bathing suit. You see, once my suit got wet, it became transparent and every saw my budding boobs, which were pretty much all nipple.”

In conclusion, I think that commentators who mocked the author for being teased as a child were simply lucky that they were not the objects of such abuse when they were young. In fact, they almost seem to be perpetrating the cycle, and continuing the bullying, this time for being bullied! Do they mock her because she was bullied? Do they mock her because they think she's lying or exaggerating? Or do they mock her because she's even bringing up the subject?

I do not argue that the US is a dangerous place, but I think that if you're not white middle class and male in the UK, life can be pretty fucking hard.

That's Not Funny.

Britain is a huge comedy heaven. Stand-up comedy is enormously popular, and the British are good at it. American comedians typically go out for more sketch comedy, like in Saturday Night Live. While there are some brilliant American stand-up comics (Bill Hicks, George Carlin, Eddie Murphy, Jeff Foxworthy and co, Richard Pryor, Chris Rock) most of the are either dead or making shit TV sitcoms or movies. (Eddie Murphy, you died to me long time ago.) The pinnacle of success for an American comic is making a movie or having a tv show with your name on it. Thus, most Americans are not exposed to a lot of stand-up comedy, especially if they don't watch Comedy Central late at night. Sketch Comedy is where it's at.

In Britain, however, stand-up comedy has not faded gently into that good night. It is alive and well, as shown by the prevalent TV show format of "quiz-com". These are generally trivia games where the individuals collect points which are dutifully tallied up at the end and winner declared. Americans will most likely relate this to "Whose Line Is It Anyway?" hosted by Drew Carey (another stand-up turned sitcom star turned host) where "the points don't matter". Drew Carey regularly awards a million points to his "contestants" which are really the same three or four people every week. Add to this the British addiction to trivia (witness the ever-popular "Pub Quiz"), and you can see the quiz-com is the bastard child of WLIIA and Jeopardy. (Or, perhaps their parent. I don't know.)

So the quiz-com is the best place on TV to see comedians in Britain. Every city also has their own comedy clubs, and comedians regularly do stand-up shows stadium style, as demonstrated on "Live at the Apollo" and the Edinburgh Festival. But as most people just see the quiz-coms. And it is here that accusations of racism and sexism are most strongly demonstrated.

The Guardian asks "The black comedy circuit is booming, with packed crowds and a host of stars. So why aren't there more on TV or at mainstream venues?" Last year, host of quiz-com "Mock the Week" was forced to say that quiz-coms aren't sexist. Yet when you look, most of these quiz-coms have few ethnic people of any gender and few women whose names don't begin with "Jo" and end with "Brand", as comedienne Victoria Wood said.

To me these are valid observations and valid questions. But I feel the fault lies not with Dara O'Brien (for one) or even the producers of these various shows and formats. It is the British culture itself.

Comedy works best coming from the underdog. Who was the last comedian you say whose act was based on the wealthy, the well-to-do, the posh ones? Perhaps Monty Pythons "Upper Middle Class Twits" sketch, and David Mitchell (Guardian commentator extraordinaire) and Marcus Brigstocke ("Argumental") often base their acts upon their posh upbringing, but by far the most popular character is The Working Man. Example: Al Murray's "Pub Landlord" character who is loud, drunk, sexist, racist, etc. etc. etc. In the US we likewise do not see upper class comedians. Instead, we treasure the black comedians, the blue collar comedians, the anarchist comedians. To be middle class (in the American sense) might be ok, but to be upper class (British: middle class) would mean career death.

But it is the very inequality that gives rise to great comedy. The Guardian comments:

Comedy is, or is perceived to be, an art form rooted in recognition and shared cultural references. Its audiences – far more so than those for music, films or fiction – are wary of artists whose experiences may not resemble their own.

 Britain is a very splintered and schizophrenic nation: it thrives on inequality. Inequality between genders, inequality between races (by which I include all ethnic groups such as "English", "Scottish", "Irish", etc.), but above all, inequality between classes. It is imperative that everyone know their place. Add to this the fact that there really is no middle class the same way that there is in the US, and you have a vast proportion of the population that feels like the underdog. This gives way to reception to comedy. You like comedy more if you feel like the comedian understands what's hard about your life.

And yet, the inequalities are still maintained, not broken. In areas of high unemployment, it's quite common for others to hold you back, discourage success and effort. Parliament still reflects the high and mighty, not the every man. Southern English accents are more common on the news, but broad regional accents (like Yorkshire, Lancashire, Scottish) are more common in commercials (as my husband says, "to inspire trust"). The people in Britain have no desire to lead, "Mary Dejevsky: We already do too much. Don't expect us to govern, too." At best, the British person just wants to be left alone. But that's no revolution. And it isn't equality either.

"Freedom" of Speech

The Huffington Post made the New York Times when it announced it was going to stop allowing anonymous comments. We're all familiar with the phrase "on the internet, no one knows you're a dog". We all have avatars, screen names, and multiple email addresses. But to comment anonymously, is that freedom of speech?

Comments on newspapers here in the UK have been moderated and link to profiles for some time. The Scotsman does not require a full profile, but you need to supply an email address to sign up. Other papers require them as well.

So is it really such a shock that US newspapers are restricting anonymous comments? Is it such a threat to freedom of speech? I don't know.

AV Club on Buckfast

Awesome. I am well "chuffed" as they say. Perhaps that isn't quite right. But at any rate, I am so entertained? pleased? glad? amused? that the Onion's AV Club is doing a Taste Test on Buckfast Tonic Wine.

Full props to them, they mention the political issues, the ASBO issues, the class war issues, but really, it's all about the booze:

Put it this way: Usually we would feel a little trashy drinking wine out paper cups instead of proper glassware, but in this case, even pouring it into a sipping vessel, no matter how humble, seemed like overkill. Buckfast is clearly meant to be guzzled straight out of the bottle, preferably inside a paper bag so as not to offend with its ugly label and sludgy looks.

Overall reaction: pretty poor.

But then, you have to realise that the AV Club is for hipsters. Hipsters don't drink Buckie. They drink fine wines, cocktails, microbrew ales. Labels that are quirky and small, not mass-produced. When they do consume mass-produced products (of any kind) they do so with irony, a sort of condescension towards the plebs that says "look, I too appreciate crap, but I do so with full knowledge that it is crap, so I'm sort of like you, only better."

Far better would be to have Neds have a wine, cocktail or microbrew tasting.

How long does a UK spouse visa take?

A common enough question. The application is form FLR(M) if you are already in the UK and are married to a British Citizen. You are not required at this stage to take that silly Life in the UK exam to prove you know English (that comes later). But you do need all the proper documentation to show you're legally married and that you can support yourself and that you weren't here on a Fiancée visa. The resulting visa is one of awful ID Cards. Yeah, that's right, British Citizens don't have to have them, but us foreigners, yeah.

Date application was posted: 11 Jan 2010
Letter stating I had to schedule my fingerprinting for my ID card: 22 Feb 2010
Date of ID Card fingerprinting: 04 Mar 2010
Passports and documentation received back: 29 Mar 2010
ID Card received: 31 Mar 2010

So that's only 2 1/2 months. Not too bad.
I think one reason it may have gone so quickly is that I already took 3 months to get the Certificate of Approval to Marry. That meant that I was already in the system and most of the paperwork was already submitted for the CAM as was needed for the FLR(M).
It also helps that I haven't committed any crimes in any country, so my fingerprinting only took 25-30 minutes. Some sort of record, as the guard said some people are there for 3 hours. Not sure if my non-criminal status helped, maybe it was my nationality, but whatever it is, huzzah! Any sort of response under 90 days from the government is a good thing.

So this is what the ID Card for foreign nationals looks like:

No, I'm not going to scan a copy of my own card, silly! This is the one from the brochure that came along with my card. Most of it is pretty straight forward:

1.Photograph (I look like a zombie)
2. Name
3. Expiration Date
4. Place and time of issue
5. Type of Permit (Spouse/Partner)
6. Remarks (work status) (Work Permitted)
7. Unique number
8. Sample Signature (mine is really small)

9. Biometric Chip (photo and 2 fingerprints)
10. Date and place of birth
11. Gender
12. Remarks (if you get benefits) (No public funds)
13. Nationality
14. Machine Readable Zone (like a passport)

Some other fun things not pointed out above:

• Just to the upper right of the photograph, you can see the outline of a neat hologram. They like those. 
• On the back, the little circle in the upper right corner is another hologram. You turn it one way and it has your photo and the letter U. You turn it the other way and it has the expiration date and the letter K.
• Below that is a little black circle. It's raised like a wart or a ringworm.
• Also raised is a floral design that covers the coloured part of the back. It stretches from above the chip over the place of birth and down across to the black ringworm circle. It's actually quite pretty when you look at it under the light.

The card is the size of a credit card, and of approximately the same material and thickness. Pretty standard, really.

It's just really insulting that while British Citizens don't need one, foreigners do. But then, the US hasn't exactly been nice to foreigners lately, what with the fingerprinting at the border and all.

Things I don't understand about Britain #431

As this Economist article so eloquently puts it:

In America these people would be called what they plainly are: middle class. They are around the middle of the national income distribution. They have jobs of middling status, perhaps in retail or self-employed manual trades. Their nondescript semi-detached houses are neither in the inner cities (from which they, or their parents, often migrated) nor in the kind of suburbs conventionally described as “leafy” (to which they aspire to move).
In Britain, though, “middle class” has come to refer to people who are actually well off, in part, perhaps, because a small aristocracy notionally occupies the top spot socially. Middle-class professions are taken to include medicine, teaching and the law. One newspaper columnist thinks a typical middle-class family might have a “combined income of £100,000”, or $150,000; in fact it is probably closer to £30,000. Rising school fees are supposed to be a middle-class worry, though only 7% of British schoolchildren are educated privately. And the term is just as misused in politics. Advocates of cutting inheritance tax say it punishes the middle classes; yet it is only charged on estates worth at least £325,000, fully £100,000 more than the price of the average home. The 40% rate of income tax is also said to affect them; in fact, it catches just 3.8m of Britain’s 31.7m income-taxpayers. 

My husband is guilty of this as well: The Middle Class is well-off; everyone else is working class.

If you can't beat 'em, wee on 'em.

The headline: "Don't keep up with the Joneses. Beat them." (Independent, opinion) The article is actually talking about the recent research that says that making a million pounds doesn't mean much if all your friends make two million.

My first thought was, yeah, but she doesn't mean literally!

My theory of Britishness is not "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em." British society is all about class and status. It doesn't really matter what people do, just if they are better or worse than you.

But different sections of British society have different ways of dealing with people who succeed [at anything].

The English, I feel, like to mock and humiliate things that are better than them or that they perceive to be better than them. They see something nice, and they want to wee on it. That's all, just to make a statement that it doesn't matter to them and they sincerely don't care that it's nice.

The Scottish, by contrast, when they see something nice, they want to destroy it.

I feel like in most parts of England, if I had a nice greenhouse in my garden in a crappy neighbourhood, the locals would mark it with grafitti, maybe nick some stuff, but it would be relatively undamaged. The Scottish, however, are more likely to put a brick in. Not cause they want what's inside, but just cause they don't want you to have something nice.

It's the one thing that's holding the underclasses back -- peer pressure to be, um, the same shit as everyone else. How dare you be better than us! How dare you think that an education and reading are going to improve your life! Your role in life is not to work hard, learn, get ahead, or improve anything. Your role is to reinforce the fact that I have nothing in my life and neither will you!

Men can be victims, too.

Also in the news today, if you recall my earlier post about the Scottish Parliament discussing male victims of domestic violence, it appears that the debate seems to have created just a little bit more gender equality in the Scotland. A new advice line aimed at male victims of domestic violence will be starting next month, funded by the Scottish Government.

The Men's Advice Line is a free phone number that is open 30 hours a week (don't worry, there's a voicemail system) for men in both heterosexual and same-sex relationships. The website also helpfully has a page about covering your tracks (though most people would be suspicious if they had no cookies left). They also have a nice little assessment thing to help people know if they're in an abusive relationship:

Does your partner:

• Humiliate you, call you names or make fun of you in a way that is designed to hurt you?  
  
• Threaten you that you will never see your children again?
  
• Threaten you with violence or hit, kick or throw things at you?
  

Or do you:

• Change your behaviour or your appearance so your partner doesn't get angry?
  
• Feel scared, anxious or like you are ‘walking on eggshells'?
  
• Cut yourself off from your friends or family?  
  

If you answered yes to some or all of those questions you may be experiencing domestic violence. You can find out more here.

 Most of the webpage contains information and views similar to most female-orientated domestic violence assistance groups. To someone familiar with the range of activities that abuse can encompass, there are no surprises. The only major difference is that this page is aimed at men.

There are still problems in getting this information out to men. Do they plan on putting flyers in all health clinics and hospitals? Will they be putting up any billboards to raise awareness? On a simpler level, what does a man have to google to find this webpage?

Preliminary searches show that "men's advice line", "domestic violence male"and "domestic violence men" all serve up the Men's Advice Line. But it should appear in general searches about "domestic violence scotland" and even "scotland my wife is abusive". ("scotland my husband is abusive" reveals help some help groups.)

Another issue that should be studied is the way in which domestic abuse affects men. It is noted on the website that:

A significant number of men calling the Men's Advice Line who initially identify as victims change their own identification by the end of the call or provide information about the violence in their relationships which strongly suggests that they are either not a victim or in fact are the perpetrator (monitoring the Men's Advice Line calls in December 2008 and January 2009). Men's Advice Line staff are skilled at working effectively with all callers, including genuine victims and those who present as victims but are using violence themselves. Our focus is increasing the safety and minimising the risk.

 The question in my mind is "can a victim use violence?" If you google "my wife hits me until I hit back" you'll find all sorts of stories of women hitting their spouse or boyfriend and driving them to use violence. This is inline with research that says that men have a limited number of acceptable emotions to express (happy, horny, angry, but not hurt), and it could well be that the range of available emotions to men in Scotland leans more towards violence as an acceptable reaction. If violence is how men in Scotland communicate in general, then when pressed they would naturally use violence again. So I challenge the Men's Advice Line to not look at all male violence as abuse, especially where there is evidence of female violence (emotionally or physically). Yes, it is wrong to hit someone in anger, but like children, sometimes it's all you have left when they don't listen. If you have no other way to express your hurt, sadness and anger, sometimes violence is all that remains. Better would be to encourage other communication skills to reduce the retaliation violence so that the true abusers are exposed.

Women in the RAF - advertising equality

If you recall, some months back I posted about an RAF ad in the Metro that I found rather cliched and sexist. Well, the RAF seems to have learned from their mistakes and placed another ad in the Metro that is much improved in their visualisation of women in the RAF.

(Taken the Metro 18 March 2010) (My apologies for the folded corner.)

The text reads:

FLIGHT LIEUTENANT
ANNE GEISON
RAF AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLER

KINLOSS, SCOTLAND
12TH SEPTEMBER 2006

(image: plane in clouds)

A RUSSIAN PILOT CAUGHT IN A
STORM - LOST AND LOW ON FUEL.

 (image: black and white plane with lightning)

AND ME - 2 WEEKS
OUT OF TRAINING.

THE STORM KNOCKED OUT
HIS INTRUMENTS AND
HALF OF MY RADAR...

(image: black and white radio tower with lightning)

HE WAS HEADED FOR SOME RADIO
MASTS - I HAD TO ACT QUICKLY.

(image: black and white man in plane looking stressed)

I GOT HIM BACK ON COURSE,
KEPT HIM CALM, GUIDED HIM DOWN.

A FEW WEEKS LATER I RECEIVED
AN AWARD AT DOWNING ST.

(image: photo of RAF woman in front of No. 10 Downing Street)

MUM WAS
REALLY CHUFFED.

BE PART OF THE STORY

Comparison of the two ads: (apologies for sloppy formatting)

Role of main character:	Nurse	Air Traffic Controller
Person(s) helped:	"men"	"Russian pilot" (male)
Problem:	"What do you do for men who've seen what they've seen?"	storm knocked out radar
Actions taken:	care, gave coke & kind word	got him back on course, calmed, guided
End Result:	proud of soldiers "brothers"	award in Downing St, mum is happy
Words in bold:	ambushed, injured, care, they'd, kind word, coke, brothers, proud	lost, low on fuel, training, half of my radar, quickly

The main emphasis of the first ad was emotional; the main emphasis of the second ad was technical. While the first ad focussed on empathy and social skills in comforting, the second ad focussed on ability to work under pressure. The results of the ad also vary from a non-descript feeling of pride to a nationally recognised award leading to others being happy. This can also be shown in the words in bold from the ad: training, and half of my radar are both knowledge and skill based as compared to care, kind word and coke from the previous ad.

Overall, this ad shows a gender-neutral look at women in the RAF. The role is less stereotypical - how many air traffic controllers in the RAF are women? The actions and skills displayed are also more knowledge and skill based rather than a soft genereic skill such as giving coke. The ad doesn't make the flight lieutenant in question completely emotionless, though, as the note that "mum was really chuffed" shows that she still cares about her family and what they think. It softens the entire ad without over-sentimentalising it.

Congratulations, RAF, for not falling into the stereotypes that caught you last time. The huge size of this ad and its placement in the general news section of the Metro should attract women who are thinkers and doers rather than passive television viewers. The only change I'd make is from a blue colour scheme to a warmer one, as that blue is generally associated with masculinity and warmer colours with feminity. (Except for purple. Maybe that's an idea?)

Why the Guardian sometimes drives me nuts.

Usually I read, in order, the Scotsman, the Independent, the Guardian, the New York Times, the Economist and the Onion's AV Club. Each presents a slightly different view on matters, and each discusses things on a different level. Except the AV Club, which I use for Savage Love and my film reviews. But, man, the Guardian sometimes drives me nuts!

The Guadian is a left-wing broadsheet in the UK, recognised around the world. Sometimes their opinion articles feature in the New York Times (and vice versa), but the Guardian is far more frustrating than the New York Times, if only because of the readers.

The Guardian, like the other British newspapers, allows comments on the articles posted online. It is this haven of what they like to consider freedom of speech where my ire is usually directed.

Like this recent opinion article about the new dog law. As the Scottish Libertarians report, the government is considering forcing all owners of some breeds of dogs to take out insurance in case their pet attacks someone. This legislation is aimed at the "vicious" dogs generally owned by the underclasses which they own either for protection or to look tough. (Which can be a protection in itself.) It would be costly and would effect far more of the underclasses than of the middle and upper classes.

The Guardian hosted a nice piece by a 23-year-old woman with a cane corso, a "dangerous dog". She makes a nice case for why she got her dog (she lives in a rough neighbourhood, so she trained it to growl at groups of young men in hoodies), how harmless her dog really is (burglars get licked instead of bitten?) and how she feels discriminated against just because some people can't (or don't) control their dogs.

But it's the comments that pissed me off. Here is a good girl with a good dog making a case for discounted dog training classes instead of expensive insurance and microchipping, and the comments loudly reject her and her arguments.

There's no good reason to have a threatening looking 'status' dog.

How about state-funded, compulsory dog-training classes?

How about not?

Yes your personal experience outweighs all the vast evidence and everyone elses personal experience.

Did you get paid to write this?
As for the "attack dog" Jack Russell, a swift boot and problem over. Not so easy when its a pitbull, Doberman, Rottweiler, German Shepard, etc etc
As for prejudice.....yup am guilty of that, as soon as I see someone with a certain type of dog I immediately think, Chav. Am sure I am not alone in that either.

So let me get this straight. You think poor people should get subsidies to help them cover the costs of training dangerous dogs.

Okay. So perhaps we could also pay chavs to go on courses designed to teach responsible boozing, or how to enjoy a football match without wanting to beat up other people.
Funny how CiF commentators never talk about personal responsibility

I know I'm middle class, but Jesus Christ was a bunch of middle class tossers!!!

What the Scotsman REALLY thinks of the letters to the editor...

Noticed today  on the Opinions page of the Scotsman website:

Yes, this is an actual screenshot of the webpage, with my red circles added for emphasis. Blah blah blah blah.

Incedentially, the blahs are continued on the individual pages, which are about (in order from the top down):
Charity beggars, Leith, historical archives, various quotes, and hat happened on this day. Turns out only the first blah involved readers' opinions, the last three are standard Scotsman features. Perhaps this comment is not directed at the readers, but the editors?

It could be the Hatfields and McCoys

A 24-year-old man was shot AND stabbed in a pub in Edinburgh. How's that for overkill?

The man was reportedly shot several times in the face with an airgun but police could not confirm the type of weapon used.

He was also stabbed in the upper thigh, although these wounds were said to be less serious.

(All quotes from 'Man shot in face and stabbed in pub attack'; Scotsman 08/03/10)
First of all, he was both shot and stabbed? Who leaves the house with both a gun and a knife? "Gee, I don't really know what level of violence I'll be committing tonight -- better take both." Excessive? Yeah, I think so. But, fortunately,

No-one else was injured in the incident.

And the cause for this seemingly random act of excessive violence?

It is believed only one attacker was involved. There were reports the incident could be connected to a long-running feud between two families.

Yes, that's right, a family feud. Somewhere in the supposedly civilised capital of Edinburgh are two families at war with eachother.

How long does it take to establish a family feud? More than one generation, I'm sure. At least 3 to get it firm. That means that these two families have been living in close enough proximity to reinforce the feud for at least three generations. Recall what I said about people living their whole lives on one street. Bizarre.

Oddly, McCoy isn't a Scottish name. The National Trust of Names makes it Celtic/Irish, with distributions heavily wieghted in the port towns of Liverpool and Newcastle. Hatfield is an English name, centered in Yorkshire and North Wales. Maybe the roots of the age-old American cliche are British -- we all know how the Irish hate the English.

In other news, Virgin Media's cheapest broadband is really really really slow.

South Leith Parish Church and Cemetary

On my way to and from work, I often cut through the South Leith Parish cemetary on Constitution Street. My options are to go up the shopping alley past the delights of Lidl, Cash Converters and that Frozen Food place and then further up under some schemey apartment block, or to go around down Constitution Street which for some reason reminds me of men peeing on walls, or to cut through the lovely cemetary that's usually open during the day.

I think the answer is obvious.

The church website claims history dating back to the days of William Wallace, but more than likely the bulding and grounds itself only date back some 200-300 years. (The nearby Leith Town Hall, current home of the Leith Police) was built in the late 1800's.) Most of the gravestones in the cemetary date back to the 1700's and 1800's, though not all of them are legible.

[Agnes Sutherland]

THEIR ELDEST DAUGHTER

DIED 11TH OCTOBER 1865

AGED 2 YEARS

WILLIAM ANDERSON

THEIR SECOND SON

CHEIF ENGINEER S.S. ESPARTO

DROWNED IN THE ENGLISH CHANNEL

20TH NOVEMBER 1897

AGED 29 YEARS

HUGH JOHN CUTHBERTSON

THIER THIRD SON

DIED AT KALIMPONG INDIA

7TH SEPTEMBER 1914

AGED 43 YEARS

In Memory of

JEAN C NICOLL

Daughter of

MICHAEL NICOLL, Baker in Leith

who died 13th Aug 1813

Aged 19 years

Her blameless life

and mild unassuming manners

Endeared her to all who knew her.

She will live long in the

Recollection of her Friends,

the ardent Affection of her Parents,

(which was reciprocal) will only terminate

with their Existence.

Here lie also the Remains of

MARY and MARGARET

who died Young

Also SARRAH KYLES his Spouse

who Died July 6th 1818

Aged 43 years

Sacred

to the Memory of

JAMES MACNEILL

eldest son of Rob Jolly

surgeon

who died 29th Dec 1828

Aged eight years

and nine months

He was a mild amiable and

a promising youth and

will ever be Remembered

with the deepest regret

by his aflicted parents.

ROBERT PATTERSON his Son

died the 2nd Jan 1830

Aged 7 years and 5 month

much regretted.

Mrs MARY BLACK MACNEILL

his wife died 2nd June 1831

She was a good wife [text obscured]

There are other pictures, other stones, and other stories that linger under the trees. Babies who lived only long enough to have a name, husbands and wives, sons and daughters, all are mourned. The most recent stone I saw was 2004; most were in the eras named above.

It's definitely worth a look if you're in the area. It's a peaceful oasis in the sea of noise and junkies.

Advertising Fail

In today's Metro. Effective, isn't it? What's that big black blob? Oh, right, a bunch of roses! Poorly planned, poorly executed, massive failure. Next time, check the contrast before you print the ad in black and white. (I wrote in red pen in the top corner, just to prove it wasn't my scanner.)

Get th' Scots doon!

Ah, the Scots language. To anyone unfamiliar with the dialect, it is a mangling of vowels, a slurring of consonants, and an almost French ability to leave the end off words, all said whilst lowering your voice and sounding as aggressive as possible. To the average American, it is incomprehensible. Or near enough. Remember Mike Myer's character "Fat Bastard"? And his caricatures in "My Wife is an Axe Murderer"? Compare that to the character on "Rab C Nesbitt", an unemployed ex-alcoholic from the back estates of Glasgow (or "Glasgae" as it's sometimes called).

But what is it that makes a language? A language, famously is "a dialect with an army". Ha ha. True, but these days, with linguists advocating for the recognition of different Englishes, for example, Hong Kong English, there is an ever-growing cry to recognise Scots as an actual variety of English, that than a mere local quirk.

The Scotsman newspaper often hosts letters and articles about Scots (the language), but today an article about an author releasing a book in Scots for a whole year before the book is released in English. A quote from the book, as given in the article:

WHIT wid ye dae if ye fund yersel face tae face wi a muckle lion? Staund as still as a stookie? Mak yer feet yer freens and rin? Creep awa quiet-like? Mibbe ye wid jist steek yer een and hope that ye were haein a dream – which is whit Obed did at first when he saw the frichtsome lion starin strecht at him.

Translation (of my best guess):

What would you do if you found yourself face to face with a "muckle" lion? Stand as still as a "stookie"? Make your feet your friends and run? Creep away quietly? Maybe you would just "steek yer een" (rub your eyes?) and hope that you were having a dream -- which is what Obed did at first when he saw the fightsome lion staring straight at him.

 Want some more Scots fun?

The Bible in Scots:

  7. Than, Herod, convenin the Wyss Men privately, faund oot mair strickly o' the comin o' the starn ;

    8. And bad them gang to Bethlehem ; and quo' he, "Gang, and seek ye oot the wee bairn ; and whan ye ken, fesh me word again, that I as weel may come and worship."

(Mathew Chaipter Twa, verses 7 til 8 frae 'The Four Gospels in Braid Scots' - Rev William W Smith)

 Or perhaps a translator:

Your translation (from woohoo) is:
Ah, th' scots leid. tae anyain unfamiliar wi' th' dialect, it is a manglin' ay vowels, a slurrin' ay consonants, an' an almost french ability tae lae th' end aff words, aw said whilst lowerin' yer voice an' soondin' as aggressife as possible. tae th' average american, it is incomprehensible. ur near enaw.

Or read Scots straight from the source (the horse's mouth as it were), on Bebo, the social networking site popular among the working and underclasses of Scotland. Some excellent samples are found on the Glasgow Rangers page:

 Boyd is SHITE......you wee deluded hun......
King of scoring wee SHITTY goals you mean.....

Nae bother greg. goodnyt n godbless yous fuckin huns go on

Or the rival Glasgow Celtics Page:

YOUS HUV WON MARE TITLES THIN US COS YEESE WUR MADE ABOOT 16 YER BEFORE US UR SUM FUKIN HING YA DIRTY WEE HUN BASTERD

Or a comment on the somewhat satirical Glasgow Neds page:

haha loveittt neds are the fuckin best , hilarous m8 ! specially glesga wans but i think yeez are a bunch ae goons fur makin a group boot it ?

Is there a cohesiveness to it? Does the use reflect the academic dictionaries? Or is the bulk of it the random phonetic scrawlings of a half-educated ape sitting at a computer? And is my knee-jerk reaction that this is primarily a class issue correct?

Psychic or Chiropractor?

Earlier this week (Monday, perhaps?) I noticed the following ad in the Metro and thought, gee, that guy looks like a psychic!


Notice the overly large face pic, the gentle smile and light facial hair, the blue and white lines radiating from his space-age state-of-the-art chrio-whatsit machine...

I was dying to compare it to an actual psychic ad to see if I was right in my first impression. Fortunately for me, John Edward is coming to Glasgow.


The expression is different, a pensive seriousness to show that being a psychic is hard work and that he's touched by our dead relatives' presence, the whole hand on head thing lends an air of relaxation. And there are no space-age lines coming from his head (or eyes, like lasers!). So really, I suppose these are two different beasts.

They're both still twats, though.

Nanny said NO!

More signs today that the people running the government have no interest in self-sufficiency and Independence.

Example 1:
An Englishman built a castle behind haystacks, lived in it for 4 years, and then was told by the local council that he had to tear it down.
Apparently it took him two years and only £50,000. The case is founded on a law that says if someone builds a property and lives in it for four years, it can't be torn down. But the property in question was hidden behind bales of hay. The court argues that the bales of hay constitute construction material, thus, they only lived in the place while it was under construction. I just think that if any official with the slightest bit of curiosity could have easily found out what was behind the bales of hay.

This is a clear case of the government taking steps to discourage personal independence.

In other news, children are apparently being curtailed as well.
Up in Aberdeenshire, Scotland, a bus full of school children got stuck in the snow, so the kids got off and walked home. Of course, that isn't the way the adults see it. "Inquiry after pupils refuse to stay on school bus stuck in snow"! Apparently the policy is to keep the children on the bus, you know, for safety reasons. These kids apparently had other plans, and all of them got off and started heading for the nearest town, a mere mile back. Some caught another bus, and others called their parents.

Who cares? This is probably the most exercise these kids got all week! Inquiry, my ass!

Breaking down Gender Stereotypes

Browsing through my followed blogs, the Scottish Parliament Petition blog mentioned the petition from the Men in Scotland webpage asking that all publicly funded domestic abuse/rape bodies recognise and cater for male victims of domestic abuse and rape.

The petition's description:

Calling on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to ensure that all publicly funded action (campaigns, publications, action plans, projects, training programmes, etc.) on domestic abuse/violence are overhauled to fully acknowledge the extent to which men are at the receiving end and to address the needs of male victims and their children.

They had 409 signatures.

Men in Scotland are absolutely correct in asking that the resources for male survivors of rape and domestic abuse be expanded. Scotland's main rape resource is Rape Crisis Scotland. When you look at the resources for people who are asking for their help (located under "How we can help"), you notice all of their centres are run "for women by women". When you click the helpful "Men and boys" on the sidebar, they recommend looking in their links section. The help they recommend is in mental health, men as survivors of abuse, the National Association of Male Sexual Abuse Survivors (website not found!), and two US sites. Where's a Scottish guy to go? Google "Scotland male rape help" and all you get is the Scotsman article from 2003!

Under Scots law, only a man can rape. The 2009 Sexual Offenses Act defines rape as:

(1) If a person (“A”), with A’s penis—
(a) without another person (“B”) consenting, and
(b) without any reasonable belief that B consents,
penetrates to any extent, either intending to do so or reckless as to whether there is penetration, the vagina, anus or mouth of B then A commits an offence, to be known as the offence of rape.

One good thing about this is that "penis" includes "surgically constructed" penii. Another good thing is that you can be orally and anally raped, thus allowing men to be qualified as victims as well as women.

But the British reluctance to recognise women as potential sources of violent abuse is still strong. When it broke that a female nursery worker in Plymouth had created and distributed child porn of her young wards, shock rippled through the nation.

Up to 64,000 women 'are child-sex offenders'! (The Guardian 4 Oct 2009)

When the face of evil is female! (The Scotsman 4 Oct 2009)

Female abusers are more prevalent than anyone likes to believe! (Times Online 1 Oct 2009)

Females And Sex Abuse: The Ultimate Taboo! (Sky News 1 Oct 2009) (Alternately titled: Female Paedophilia: The Ultimate Taboo -- The Scale of Sexual Abuse by Women)

Feminism began as a call for people to recognise that men and women were equal. Yet people are still shocked when women complete the same atrocities that men do. It's bad for men to be drunk and fight and vomit on the streets, but it's HORRIBLE and SCANDALOUS for women to do so! It's bad when men rape and abuse, but it's SHOCKING and UNNATURAL for women to do so! It's bad when women are raped, but it's UNHEARD OF for men to be so! Until men and women are treated the same in terms of their actions -- not their genitalia -- we will not see equality.

This petition to recognise and help male survivors of rape and sexual abuse is one step in the right direction.

Another step towards gender equality

It is standard practice that when a woman gives birth, she gets some time off as maternity leave. Here in the UK, a woman can get 52 weeks off, with 39 of them paid. Men, however, were only given two weeks.

Various academics and researchers have commented on the fact that extended maternity leave can actually damage gender equality (ie for women) in the workplace.

Ann-Zofie Duvander says:

The flexibility of the Swedish system, which still has extensive transferable leave rights, has the consequence that the lion’s share of parental leave days is still taken by mothers, among other things making it difficult for women to compete on equal terms with men in the labour market. Consequently, the gender-based division of parental leave may contribute to a preservation of traditional gender roles and inequalities.

Laura van Dulk's paper:

Argues that if work-family arrangements are only available to women or if men do not use the existing facilities, inequality in the labour market will be maintained rather than reduced.

The New York Times blames pay inequality in Germany:

Maternity leave is another [reason for pay inequality]: men get promoted while their female colleagues take time off to have children.

However, here in the UK, men are going to be allowed to take the same length of time as women for paternity leave. They'll get 6 months leave, which will allow the women to use 6 months leave and return to work earlier.

I may or may not argue with the idea that you have to spend every waking minute with your newborn child until he/she is a year old, but I do not argue with the idea that women should not bear responsibility for this alone. If women want to be equal with men, it means dragging themselves out of the kitchen and home and into the workplace. And in order to do this, you need to drag men out of the workplace and into the home. While I doubt that all men will utilise all of the time allotted, it will certainly help.

Language and Media Bias

An excellent discussion of language use and media racism as displayed by the difference between "looters" and "finders/gatherers" post-earthquake in Haiti. White = finder/gatherer... Black = looter...?

Lost in British Cities

I'm not the only one, it seems. I've traveled to cities across the globe, into places where few people spoke my language. I traversed Beijing, Nanjing, New York, Auckland, Taipei, Bangkok, and a bevy of others without problem. I could aimlessly wander around the back streets of Shanghai or Quanzhou and return to my starting point with minimal difficulty. But never in my whole life have I ever been as lost as I have in British cities. And it seems even locals have difficulties.

Helen Croyden of the Independent blames people who steal road signs. I've been told that road signs were removed during The War to prevent any German invaders from finding anything, but that may be a myth. Either way, roads are poorly labeled.

In addition to the roads not being labelled, it is nigh impossible to guess what a road should be called because they all curve around back on themselves and have names as random as a child's toy chest. The problem with the road design is due in part to the fact that most roads are historical roads, having been established by cows and people on horseback some 400 years ago.

The US, by contrast, is populated largely by planned cities, with roads in stable grids. The extreme version of this Salt Lake City and other towns developed by Mormons.

View Larger Map
These Mormon towns all have a grid where instead of a standard numbers one way, names the other method most US cities use, they have a literal X-Y axis style grid. Notice that the streets are called West 400 South, or East 400 South. Addresses follow in a style of West 400 South 300, moving along from the (0,0)(usually the Temple) West 400 and then South 300. Perfect mathematical sense. (Except that you'll notice in the top right hand corner of the map they switch to standard numbers/names grids for some reason.)

Edinburgh, by contrast, sports a similar confusion of old meandering roads in Old Town (notice the road marked Cowgate) dating back some 400+ years and straight grid-like roads in New Town that are only 200 years old.

View Larger Map
What is likely to confuse Americans visiting the UK is that the road will carry on for quite a while, perhaps with curves in it, but will change names every few blocks. The spaces between the name changes aren't even static. They change when they feel like it.
On the one hand, this means that when you're scouring South Bridge for that one restaurant, you only have a few blocks to search. But on the other hand, these changes are usually poorly marked, with signs hiding on buildings, behind trees or bushes, or facing another direction. The standard street sign in the US doesn't exist in the UK.



Notice that one is free-standing and usually located on a corner. Notice the other is attached to the side of a building and is usually hidden behind a bush or tree, if it's there at all.

There's a reason most people in the UK have taken to SatNav like a duck to water. If they travel beyond their own village, they're likely to get lost. Not because they don't have a sense of direction, but because the roads are impossible to navigate.

And I haven't even brought up roundabouts!