Parental Sexism

For the past five years, I've repeatedly been given countless reasons to ponder one question: "Why is sexist parenting so socially acceptable?"

It starts from the moment you tell people you're having a baby: "Do you want a boy or a girl?"

It never seems to end.

Bafflingly, it often comes from the strangest places. Adults, male and female, who treat each other with respect and equality - as soon as they become parents they seem to feel the need to "teach" their little ones that blue is for a boy and pink is for a girl.

For little children, the entire world is split into "boys" things and "girls" things. Flowers, football, dolls, cars - the list goes on and on.   Even if someone "allows" their child to break the mold, they feel obliged to make statements such as: "she's not really a girly girl, she's more of a tomboy."

Why? At an age when girls and boys have most in common, why does society do everything they can to split them up?

Maybe you think I'm being silly, they're small, it's cute, what does it matter? I can't help thinking all the battles for gender equality stem from this one area we seem to have all agreed to ignore.

We split boys and girls up, we make their interests not overlap, they grow apart or face social ridicule. They only start noticing each other again over a decade later when their minds turn to sex - at this point they turn each other into objects and, hey presto, we have all the grown up, less cute, sexist issues.

Maybe you think I'm wrong. Boys and girls just are different. Maybe. But why do we need to amplify those differences? Why do I see so many parents pushing their little boys away from the pink aisle in the toy shops? "Those are girls toys."

Why can't a little boy be interested in pretending to be a daddy? I was. I still have my doll, gave it to my kids. I also loved Transformers, watched Carebears, like Thundercats, was (am) bored silly by football.

I don't think I'm alone in having a mixture of "male" and "female" interests - I think the people who don't have any mixture are far more unusual.

So why do we falsely "teach" our children that their are "boy" things and "girl" things?

Why is sexist parenting so socially acceptable?

Year of the Cock.

I'm not normally a believer of horoscopes, but you have to admit the Chinese have nailed it: 2017 is definitely turning into the Year of the Cock.

I'm very tempted to go into a rant about what a hideous excuse for a human being Trump is, but I doubt I would be telling you anything you don't already know.

Instead, let me skip straight to the conclusion I've come to:

"What the world needs now, is love, sweet love."

Trump has made the world a darker place. We need to brighten it up again.

So, this year, whatever situation you find yourself in, think "What would Trump do?"

Then do the opposite.

Happy Chinese New Year everyone!!!

Smile, Be Happy.

Too Fee or Not Too Fee.

On the 9th December 2010, Parliment voted 323 vs 302 in favour of the new highly controversial University Tution Fees structure.

So what is all the fuss about? Who are the main winners and losers? Glad you asked...

Protesters:

The recent riots were disgusting. Spoilt by gangs of idiotic children looking for a "legalised" excuse to smash stuff up, they did no favours for anyone.

Property was damaged, people on both sides were seriously hurt and it didn't have the slightest affect on the vote.

Those who caused the trouble did so delibrately. They are criminals and should be locked up.

Overall Verdict: Losers.

Students:

For UK students, Universities can currently charge up to £3290 per year. Students from poorer backgrounds do not need to pay these fees, but can take out student loans for cost of living. Students who do need to pay can take student loans to cover the cost. Most students leave Uni with £12K-£15K of debt, which is paid back at a rate of 9% of all income above £15K gross per year. Interest is kept in line with inflation so no one pays more than they borrowed in real terms.

The new system is essentially the same, but its 9% of everything above £21K per year, saving students up to £45 per month. Yay!

...oh, and the minor fact that Tution fees can be up to £9K per year, so that over the 30 year lifetime of the loan (wiped clean after 30 years) the majority of students will pay back thousands more than they do now. Darn.

It could be argued that the rise in threshold will mean that the poor will pay less. This, however, depends on the definition of poor. The son of a billionaire, who leaves Uni with several cars and houses from daddy and gets a part time job from his dad's company, giving him a £21K salary as pocket money would be one of the children who would never pay back.

In addition, the £21K is in 2016 terms, which is not that far from £15K in todays money.

Overall Verdict: Losers.


Universities:

Quids in? Nope. The new tution fees will really only cover the huge hole in funding caused by spending cuts. And if the higher fees scare students away they'll end up quids out.

Overall Verdicts: Losers


Lib Dems:

Not a day has gone by since the Lib Dems signed their "deal with the devil" that their popularity hasn't sunk lower and lower. Signing a pledge before the election to scrap tution fees and then becoming part of the government that nearly trebled them has, shockingly, not helped.

Nick Clegg may need a new strategy.

In addition to being at an all time low in opinion polls, the party looks ready to fall apart, with 28 "Yes" votes, 21 "No" votes and 8 "I didn't come in to Politics to have an opinion, I came for the free moats" votes.

Overall Verdict: Losers


Labour:

With the biggest riots in 20 years and alot of unhappy people around, its generally a great time to be in oposition.

Unfortunately for Labour, they have failed to really make the most of a "bad" situation. Although its easy enough to critise, Labour have failed completely to offer any kind of alternative, which is pretty bad. Particularly when even saying "just leave it alone" would have been more popular.

Instead they stand behind a graduate tax, just days after saying a graduate tax could never work.

Overall Verdict: Losers.


Conservatives:

Being the main driving force behind this whole event, and having kicked all other major players into the "losing" catergory, it may be fairly obvious that the only way is up for the Cons. Sure, there will be some political backlash, but the Lib Dems are taking the worse of it and Labour are failing to clear up. More importantly, by the time the elections swing round again this policy will have cleared shed loads of debt and make the Cons come out smelling of roses.

... or will it?

Having masively cut University funding because "there's no money left" the Universities will instead be funded by... the government...?

Sure the students will, eventually, pay back more under the new scheme, but all initial costs will need to be put up by the government. In fact, these initial costs, spent NOW, when the country has no money, will be more than under the old scheme. When the students do start paying back, they will pay back up to £45 per month less. Meaning the initial return, the return now, when the country is desperate for any spare change, will be less.

Even in the long run, on average it is expected that a graduate will need to earn over £45K per year to pay back everything within 30 years. For such large amounts over such a long time, any errors in predictions could mean the government falls far short of its expected returns and as more and more students pass through the system this could lead to an increasing blackhole in funding.

There's only one thing left to say about the Cons then.

Overall Verdict: Losers.


So, you may ask, has anyone won from all this?

Of cause they have.

The Scottish, who after centuries of abuse from the English, can now sit back and grin as the only members of the EU who need to pay for Universities in Scotland are the English (and Welsh and N. Irish).

Good Times.

Voting Results

For the past few months, one key question had been put to the people. A simple choice, the result of which would alter the lives of many in potentially unfathomable ways.

It was the debate that every one was talking about:

“Would Alan be having a boy or a girl?”

Those who were expecting a boy included, but were not limited to Dave, Jean, Dave’s mum, Dave’s Dad, Andrea, John, Emma, Ste, Cheryl, Pea, Aline ... etc etc.

Those who were expected a girl? Alan.

After months of vigorous campaigning from both parties the results could finally be confirmed:

It’s a Boy!!!!

It just goes to show that democracy CAN work.

...unfortunately, another lesser known poll also held recently went a little less smoothly.

When asked, “Who should be Prime Minister?” the UK rather strangely managed to get the answer completely wrong, with the largest proportion saying, “David Cameron.”

Dave could only assume they had never seen the chap and had just been, understandably, won over by his great name.

Even worse, having picked the wrong horse, they hadn’t even managed to back it right, resulting in all the MPs getting hung.

Ah well.

It’s a Boy!!!!

Talk the talk.

According to Wikipedia "Liverpool has a population of 435,500, and lies at the centre of the wider Liverpool Urban Area, which has a population of 816,216."

The population of the whole of Northern Ireland is estimated around 1,759,000.

In comparison, Obama's Inauguration was apparently attended by approximately 1,800,000.

Take a moment to let those numbers sink in.

Say "Wow."

The majority of people seem to think the speech went rather well for Obama, although a few grumbles in the media could be seen from the lack of a specific sound bite they could cling to and milk for all its worth. But no big surprises there, Obama showed long ago he could talk the talk.

He sounded honest and sincere, he admitted to difficulties and hard times but was hopefull he could pull us out of Bush's era. He has offered the hand of peace to all nations, races and religions, including the non-believers. Heck, he has even offered to bring scientists in out of the cold.

And yet, within this hope inspiring message of world wide peace, Obama has already started to possibly alienate one of the world's strongest players. The Dragon, China.

China, like the majority of the world, was broadcasting the speech live and translating it as they went, when Obama said, "Recall that earlier generations faced down fascism and communism not just with missiles and tanks, but with sturdy alliances and enduring convictions."

The translator stopped talking when the word "communism" came up as a negative term and apparently the live broadcast was interputed by suddenly jumping back to the studio. Funnily enough, Obama then went on to say it was wrong to "cling to power through ... the silencing of dissent." This was also silenced.

China has done some fairly silly things in the past, but surely they could recognise that censoring of one of the world's most powerful and popular people is going to do their rep far more damage than leaving it in ever would.

That said, communism really does get a bad press. Wiki:

"Communism is a socioeconomic structure and political ideology that promotes the establishment of an egalitarian, classless, stateless society based on common ownership and control of the means of production and property in general. Karl Marx posited that communism would be the final stage in human society, following a socialist stage, which would be achieved through a proletarian revolution. "Pure communism" in the Marxian sense refers to a classless, stateless and oppression-free society where decisions on what to produce and what policies to pursue are made democratically, allowing every member of society to participate in the decision-making process in both the political and economic spheres of life."

"Capitalism is a very economic system in which wealth, and the means of producing wealth, are privately owned and controlled rather than publicly or state-owned and controlled. In capitalism, the land, labor, and where investments, distribution, income, production, pricing and supply of goods, commodities and services are primarily determined by private decision in a market economy largely free of government intervention. "

When Obama said "Our economy is badly weakened, a consequence of greed and irresponsibility on the part of some" and "It has not been the path for the faint-hearted - for those who prefer leisure over work, or seek only the pleasures of riches and fame. Rather, it has been the risk-takers, the doers, the makers of things - some celebrated but more often men and women obscure in their labour, who have carried us up the long, rugged path towards prosperity and freedom."

Which of these ideas are actually closer to what he said?

Shoes

Shoes are a funny old thing. Simple design, simple function, not changed much in a fairly long time and not likely to any time soon. Sure you can add sparkly bits and dangly things and whatever else it is women spend hours upon hours looking at, but basically you put your feet in and walk, safe from little sharp and/or dirty objects you may later step on.

A sensible guy can get a decent pair of shoes somewhere in the range of £20-£50 and be set for years to come. But some people lack this common sense approach and thus the shoe industry has taken the humble shoe and turned it into a multi billion pound industry.

The Clarks website has shoes ranging from less than £10 all the way up to £120. LV shoes on the other hand start at around £300 and head up to around £4,000. In one episode of Sex and the City apparently more than £20,000 is spent on a pair.

So what is it that makes a pair of shoes "worth" so much? Again, the common sense approach would say comfort, no contest, but actually the more expensive articles are often the bigest death traps for feet. Value is generally rated by material costs, appearance, brand names, the fact that a celeb wore something similar or just because some people have too much money.

But how do you make a pair of shoes REALLY valuable, without ANY previous shoe making experience, no brand name, no shiny bits or dangly things?

Simple.

Throw them at Bush.

For anyone who didn't hear about it (seriously, how could you miss this?), during Bush's most recent and last visit to Iraq (as president at least, but will he really visit for holidays later?), journalist Muntadar al-Zaidi stood up, shouted "This is a goodbye kiss from the Iraqi people, dog." (Why he doesn't like dogs I have no idea), and threw his Iraqi made shoes at the out-going president.

Bids are now coming from all over the world to buy the shoes. A former Iraqi football coach, Adnan Hamad, has offered £65,000 for the pair, but that's apparently small fry as a Saudi citizen has rumouredly offered £6,500,000. It's not entirely clear as to who actually has the shoes right now and where the money would go though, and there is a slight health warning, as the Iraqi officials has apparently beat the cr*p out of Muntadar and he may face up to 2 years in jail.

Still, this is a very new market for the shoe industry and clearly has a huge amount of potential. £6.5 mil and the shoes didn't even really hit Bush. Imagine what you would get for a bulls eye?

Dave finally had an idea for a business...

Credit Crunch

Credit Cruch. Tumbling house prices. Downturn. Recession. A global finiancial turmoil the likes of which the world has never seen.

Like the majority of people, Dave's initial thought was

"Whoohoo!! I'll finally be able to aford a house!!!"

Unfortunately, much to Dave's and many others like him great astonishment, there is a dark side to the Credit Crunch.

It all started with subprime loans and mortgages in America. A "subprime" loan basically translates as a loan from a person you doubt will ever really pay you back. A high risk individual. So why oh why would a bank ever want to agree to give such a loan?

Simple. You sell the loan on to someone else. They take the risk, you keep a small profit. Repeat that enough and you a whopping big profit. No real risk. But why would someone want to buy it off you?

Simple. They sell the loan on to someone else. They pass on the risk, they keep a small profit. Repeat that enough and they get a whopping big profit. No real risk. But why would someone want to buy it off them?...

Pyramid scheme anyone?

Of cause, the banks are not, despite popular opinion and all the evidence, stupid. They realise someone has to be holding the loan if/when it finally fails. But they have safety nets in place. The loans are usually secured on a house. Loan fails, bank gets the house, sells it and makes the money back. But what happens when house prices drop and are no longer worth enough to cover the loan? Big risk and a loss. Repeat THAT enough times and it's a whopping big loss.

Unfortunately, it gets worse. See things like money and shares are funny old things. They're the fundamental building blocks of the world as we know it, and yet they rely purely on Faith. Money doesn't actually exist. It's a figment of our collective imagination. Shares are worth only what people want to pay for them. So when a bank makes a big loss, it can't just shrug it off, put it down to experience and move on, because it hasn't just lost money, it's lost the Faith of it's followers. That makes the bank worth less, lossing them more money, and in turn more Faith. If they can't perform a miracle, they may face a slippery slop.

Unfortunately, it gets even worse. You can make money from money you don't have. For example, if you get a 0% creddit card and buy everything using the card, then before you pay it back, the money you have technically already spent is sitting in the bank earning you money. Banks like these kind of games, so they borrow lots of money from other banks to try to make profit with it. They also lend out lots of their own money to earn interest on that. Whatever kind of opertunity comes along they call on their fellow rivals to help them out. Try not to think about where this money actually comes from, it'll make your head hurt. Just remember it's all not real anyway. But what happens when because you've lost the Faith of your followers, you also lose the Faith of your rivals?

Your source of cash gets cut off, your miracle becomes that much harder, your followers become less Faithful and the slippery slop looks that much slippier. And when THAT anoucement reaches the media, those Faithful that still had some hope or just hadn't yet noticed pull out while they still can. Game over.

But still not the end of the story. Because the Bank that just died did so in a classic "If I go down I'm taking you with me" manner. Chances are he still owed alot of his rivals ALOT of money, and they're never going to see that again. Which means whopping big losses for all of them. Which means loss of Faith from all their followers and from each other. And hey presto, Credit Crunch.

The only way the banks can get some money back is to increase interest on borrowing and sack all unnecessary staff. This steals money from the non-financial world, and the job loses spread.

So despite finally having the arrival of the glorious house price drop, harder mortgages and a lack of employment mean Dave and the others still don't have a house.

Damn.

Good Old Bush

One of the world's least popular people, up there with terrorists, murderers and Brittney Spears, it's good Old Texas boy W. Bush.

Now, after the pounding McCain took just for kinda reminding people a little of Bush, one may imagine Bush would just sit quietly in a corner and wait to be taken out with the rest of the trash. But not good old Bush, nah, he's going down swinging.

His latest trick? "Bush 'seeks to ease wildlife law'"

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7738933.stm

Apparently Bush has realised that digging for oil would be a lot more efficient if people didn't worry so much about petty little things like "a full scientific assessment as to the likely impact on the environment." Nope, if we worried a little less about that kind of thing we could dig in all kinds of new places and our energy problems would be over. So good old Bush is hoping to make that dream come true. Hurray for Bush!

Unfortunately, if he doesn't finish the paperwork by Friday, he won't have time to get it done before Obama kicks him out and we'll be stuck with this pesky "environment" of ours a little longer.

Darn.

Obama

November 4th 2008. A day to remember.

The US election was in full swing, the result of over 600 days and billions of dollars of campaigning boiled down to the last few hours. According to all the polls it was an open and shut case, Obama had it in the bag, and yet the world watched with bated breath.

Around 4 am in England, the result the world had waited for was finally announced. Obama would become the 44th president of America. Dave and the rest of the world gave a collective huge sigh of relief and an overwhelming jump for joy.

Obama seems to be the guy the world has waited for. An intelligent, logical guy who appears to focus on bringing peace and hope and has plans to comunicate with the rest of the world and work together for the greater global good. After 8 years of terror from Bush, it comes as welcomed news. How much of a change Obama can bring only time will tell.

"The road ahead will be long. Our climb will be steep. We may not get there in one year or even in one term, but America - I have never been more hopeful than I am tonight that we will get there. I promise you - we as a people will get there.
There will be setbacks and false starts. There are many who won't agree with every decision or policy I make as president, and we know that government can't solve every problem. But I will always be honest with you about the challenges we face. I will listen to you, especially when we disagree."

The election of Obama was a turning point in history not only because it marked the toppling of the statue of Bush. For those who haven't heard, Obama is the first black president of the USA.

"Rosa sat so Martin could walk, Martin walked so Obama could run, Obama ran so our children could fly."

Rosa Parks was a black lady who refused to stand for a white passenger on a bus in Alabama. At the time that was a big deal. A very big deal.

What's difficult for a kid born in the 80's with Greek father, English Mother, Chinese wife and friends of all races and sexualities to fully comprehend is that that time was as recent as 1955. Just 53 years ago.

From subhuman to worlds most powerful postion within living memory, Obama really has changed the world. Martin dreamed of a world where man would be judged on character alone and not the colour of his skin. The election of Obama has seen a huge step in the right direction and renewed faith in America and the world that Martin's dream will become a reality.

Only two things dampen the spirit of Obama's election. The two sheets of bullet proof glass present at Obama's acceptance speech. A painful reminder that although we can now see the promised land, perhaps we're not quite there. Obama will still be judged by the colour of his skin. Whatever he does, good or bad, he does as a black president.

But "If there is anyone out there who still doubts that America is a place where all things are possible; who still wonders if the dream of our founders is alive in our time; who still questions the power of our democracy, tonight is your answer. "

The dream is alive and kicking.

Penguins

Dave and Jean sat and watched a documentry about the birthing process of various animals, namely Shark, Kangaroo, a type of Wasp and the Emperor Penguin.

The female Shark is brutally gang raped by a bunch of males, several of which can all result in pregnancy. In some types of Shark, survival of the fittest begins before birth. The strongest baby will kill and eat the other babies inside the womb. Seriously.

The Kangaroo is an odd little animal. Long before the baby is ready to be born, when it is still just a red little thing with two tiny arms and no legs, it crawls out of one of it's mum's holes, across the fur and into another, where it stays nice and safe in the pouch. When it's finally developed better, it will start it's life by popping in and out of it's mum for a few weeks.

The Wasp is incredibly evil. It injects it's kids into a catipillar, along with it's own unique virus, which basically takes over the catipillar's mind and body. The catipillar can no longer reproduce and lives only to serve it's new hosts. It's eats and eats and eats to provide the needed nutrients. When the kids are ready, they eat they're way out of the catipillar, but he doesn't die straight away. The final insult to him is that the virus effects it's brain so that it protects these things that have just ripped him apart as if they were his own kids, until he dies and they are big enough to fend for themselves.

The Penguin is simply incredible. They are the ultimate in selflessness. After the egg is produced, the male looks after it while the female goes to hunt. The males are willing to go without food for months with the egg balanced on their feet to keep it warm. As a group, the penguins huddle together and take turns as to who should be on the cold outside of the group. They all work perfectly and peacefully together for the greater good.

Dave couldn't help but wonder what the world would be like if humanity had evolved from Penguin instead of Monkey. If our vast knowledge and abilities were all combined freely for the benefit of all, rather than the personal satisfaction of the few.

Maybe after we've destroyed ourselves, the Penguin Empire, led peacefully by the Emperor Penguin, will put right what once went wrong.

(Hi Penguins. By the time u read this I will be gone. Assuming ur advanced enough to bring people back, I voted for u guys first. I'll be a good Monkey, I promise.)

Olympics Final Score

Well the Olympics is over for another 4 years and everyone wants to know the final score. Who won? How did there country do?

Well it's not always a straight forward answer.

In terms of gold medals, the ranking is:

1. China - 51
2. USA - 36
3. Russia - 23
4. UK - 19

Well done China. However, in terms of total medals, the ranking changes:

1.USA - 110
2.China - 100
3. Russia - 72
4. UK - 47

Unsurprisingly, our good old cousins from across the pond prefer this method of scoring. But everyone knows not all medals are equal and it's crazy to score them as if they were. The simple example of gold = 3 points, silver =2 and bronze = 1 gives:

1. China - 246
2. USA - 220
3. Russia - 134
4. UK - 102

Slightly fairer, but it still doesn't take into account the real attitudes towards medals.

Here, for the first time in Olympic history, the new undisputedly perfectly fair method of medal scoring is unveiled.

Golds:
The first 10 gold medals are fantastic and thus worth 6 points each
The next 10 gold medals are great but nothing new and thus worth 2 points each.
Anything after 20 is unnessary and thus not scored.

Silvers:
The first 10 are OK and worth 1 point each.
The next 5 become painful, "so close to gold" and thus result in the lose of a point for each
Anything after 15 is really painful and thus loses 2 points each.

Bronze:
The first 10 aren't noticed.
The second 10 are OK, "at least we got a medal", 1 point each.
Anything after 20 aren't noticed.

Much research into the attitudes of both spectators and atheletes shows this scoring is 100% accurate and has, at time of writing, never been argued with by anyone ever. In addition this system has the added benefit of having a maximum score of 100.

Taking this to be the unquestionable true scoring system then, the final ranking for the 2008 Beijing Olympics is:

1. UK - 88
2. China - 83
2. Russia - 83
...
10. USA - 49

Congradulations to the UK, worlds greatest. Well done to China and Russia, good efforts, very close. USA? 10th? Poor performance, better luck in London.

Coffee, Redemption and a Muffin please.

According to Dave's limited knowledge of the Bible, Jesus Christ only truely got angry and lost his cool on one recorded occasion in his short life time. On walking into a church he found it was being used as a market place. He smashed things, overturned tables and put everyone there to shame. Selling things in church was a major no no.

Knowing this, Dave stood speachless. He was in Liverpool's Old Cathedrale. The vast size and feel of the building would be enough to quiet any tongue. Unfortunately, Dave was speechless in a bad way.

The Cathedrale had a shop. Ok, the Cathedrale needs money and true the majority of things in there seemed to be religous or cathedrale related. But did it really need to sell things like a phonebox moneybox? Upstairs in the shop, a cafe added further insult. But what REALLY annoyed Dave was that the Cathedrale was putting on a mass and there were three times as many people in the cafe than sitting and listening.

There was something very wrong with that.