I'm not particularly bold or brave, but haven't really been in a situation where I've had to be. I am relatively free though. I can think & do what I want, within the limitations of the law & my own conscience, (which is vociferous!)
I'm probably someone who can be difficult to take, because I have a very clear expectation of fairness & quite a developed moral compass. I do try not to be judgemental, prescriptive or offer unasked for advice though.
So, I find the situation in Syria very complex & troubling. We in the West only know what we are told by the press, media & politicians & we all know how reliable & unbiased they are. But anecdotal evidence is coming out that seems to strongly indicate that what is happening in Syria is simply unacceptable by any standards. Houla may possibly be the final straw.
Politicians make choices based on political expediency which are usually very short term. Getting International consensus about action is almost impossible because of vested interests based on natural resources & money. The public is rightly outraged by the murder & torture of innocent civilians. The armed forces of all nations are trained to see force as an appropriate response, but aren't so good at predicting the long term outcome of the use of force. Sanctions & public opprobrium may work in the very long term, but that is by no means guaranteed. In the meantime people are dying - appallingly.
Basically, when do we have the right to intervene directly in another country's affairs? (How would we feel as a nation if a foreign force invaded us because they didn't like what we were doing?) Surely the appropriate question is how can we stand by, knowing what is happening, & do nothing? At a very simple level if I saw someone deliberately hurting a child, a woman or an old person, would I just walk past & say "it's got nothing to do with me", "let them sort it out for themselves"? I hope not. I hope I would recognise the risks, but would try to do something to intervene directly & stop the harm being done. There are times when a halt has to be enforced & mediation should be put in place.
The world is a volatile place & there are some despicable & extremely unpleasant people in it. Many have a great deal of power. This isn't the first such situation & it won't be the last. What we need is a world policy or a protocol for direct intervention in defined circumstances. I thought the United Nations was set up to do that, but it has been singularly ineffectual.
The are times when it is simply morally indefensible to "walk on by" or "turn the other cheek". If this isn't one of them what sort of human beings are we?
Wednesday 30 May 2012
Tuesday 29 May 2012
Bank - A new 4 letter word!
I am really p..... off with banks. Not content with having my savings & paying a piddling interest rate which doesn't even keep the value of the investment, they also operate a "closed shop," which makes it really difficult to move my money around. So having had 3 savings accounts which matured this month I discovered that:-
Nothing has changed. No lessons have been learned. The arrogance & bonus culture continues. We, the people should rise up & force them to operate in our interests. I have no objection to profit so long as I get some of it too. The politicians & the bankers are in cahoots - interestingly that's one of my banks.
- One of the new accounts I opened will not accept cheque deposits.
- Despite the new legislation, two others will not transfer money to a different bank without charging me a ridiculous amount of money for a transaction which takes a couple of minutes.
- One put the interest into a different account & didn't send me any information about how much interest there was or where it was.
Nothing has changed. No lessons have been learned. The arrogance & bonus culture continues. We, the people should rise up & force them to operate in our interests. I have no objection to profit so long as I get some of it too. The politicians & the bankers are in cahoots - interestingly that's one of my banks.
Friday 25 May 2012
No news is good news.
We have the most sophisticated communications systems, which means that the news we get is more or less instantaneous. Ordinary people have become very savvy about using technology to inform the world about what is going on in their country or neighbourhood. There is nowhere for anyone to hide now.
In many cases that is excellent news. Wrongdoing can be broadcast, perpetrators can be brought to justice. The forces of good can be mobilised against the forces of evil.
But I do have my doubts too. The media / press can also whip up a climate of fear or frenzy. They can make the news they report into a self fulfilling prophesy. Our current global financial woes & specifically the Eurozone crisis is a case in point. Every possibility is laid bare under the microscope, dire predictions of collapse can all to easily become reality. If we have a run on the Spanish banks it will be because that possibility has been talked up & people are scared to leave their money in the bank.
There is an argument for not examining the possibilities too closely. Perhaps news should be just that - events that have actually happened, rather than speculation about what might, just, happen. After all for every opinion & speculation expressed there is always another "expert" with an opposing view.
We are talking ourselves into a "black hole" of catastrophe. There may not be a way out.
In many cases that is excellent news. Wrongdoing can be broadcast, perpetrators can be brought to justice. The forces of good can be mobilised against the forces of evil.
But I do have my doubts too. The media / press can also whip up a climate of fear or frenzy. They can make the news they report into a self fulfilling prophesy. Our current global financial woes & specifically the Eurozone crisis is a case in point. Every possibility is laid bare under the microscope, dire predictions of collapse can all to easily become reality. If we have a run on the Spanish banks it will be because that possibility has been talked up & people are scared to leave their money in the bank.
There is an argument for not examining the possibilities too closely. Perhaps news should be just that - events that have actually happened, rather than speculation about what might, just, happen. After all for every opinion & speculation expressed there is always another "expert" with an opposing view.
We are talking ourselves into a "black hole" of catastrophe. There may not be a way out.
Friday 18 May 2012
Moving On - 4 - A weird property market
It's a good job I'm not desperate to move & love my house & it's location. The market is definitely very weird. There has been a constant stream of viewings since the house was actively marketed just over 5 weeks ago. Even 3 lots of prospective purchasers coming back for a second viewing. No one has made any negative comments or seriously queried the asking price. Everyone seems very impressed & positive about the house. So, all very encouraging.
Well, maybe. But, only two of the viewings were by people who were actually in a position to make an offer as far as I can tell. To my mind, as a prospective purchaser, I'm not going to waste everyone's time by viewing untill I have an acceptable & proceedable offer. Whereas Hamptons seem to send anyone, regardless of if they can actually afford a house at this price. They also send not only people who have got their house on the market, but also people who haven't.
How seriously can you take people who aren't committed enough to be actively selling their own property? How seriously can you take people who tell you they didn't get as much for their house as they thought they would & can't raise as much mortgage as they thought they could - Then ask you to drop by £75,000? Frankly it's their problem & they shouldn't be looking at a house so far out of their price bracket & wasting everyone's time. They don't realise that they lose all credibility as a purchaser by adopting these tactics.
From memory, when I was last in the property market in 2003, it's a totally different ball game. Agents then screened purchasers very effectively. They probably do now, but they seem to think that buyers simply want footfall. Maybe they also think that there are so few buyers & so few properties on the market that they just have to basically let anyone view & see what happens.
So, it's probably a waiting game. Not simply for someone who likes the house & want's to buy it - there seem to be plenty of those. What sellers need is someone who can make an offer and actually go forward if it's accepted. I do feel sorry for people who actually have to move for some reason. It must be extremely stressful.
Well, maybe. But, only two of the viewings were by people who were actually in a position to make an offer as far as I can tell. To my mind, as a prospective purchaser, I'm not going to waste everyone's time by viewing untill I have an acceptable & proceedable offer. Whereas Hamptons seem to send anyone, regardless of if they can actually afford a house at this price. They also send not only people who have got their house on the market, but also people who haven't.
How seriously can you take people who aren't committed enough to be actively selling their own property? How seriously can you take people who tell you they didn't get as much for their house as they thought they would & can't raise as much mortgage as they thought they could - Then ask you to drop by £75,000? Frankly it's their problem & they shouldn't be looking at a house so far out of their price bracket & wasting everyone's time. They don't realise that they lose all credibility as a purchaser by adopting these tactics.
From memory, when I was last in the property market in 2003, it's a totally different ball game. Agents then screened purchasers very effectively. They probably do now, but they seem to think that buyers simply want footfall. Maybe they also think that there are so few buyers & so few properties on the market that they just have to basically let anyone view & see what happens.
So, it's probably a waiting game. Not simply for someone who likes the house & want's to buy it - there seem to be plenty of those. What sellers need is someone who can make an offer and actually go forward if it's accepted. I do feel sorry for people who actually have to move for some reason. It must be extremely stressful.
Saturday 12 May 2012
Sex, Love & Loving.
Sex is the physical act of intercourse & we in the West seem to have brought it down to this lowest common denominator. We talk about "having sex", in the way I say I have museli or porridge for my breakfast. I like both museli & porridge, but surely sex is more than that?
We have debased something good between two human beings into something akin to porn, which is shown routinely & graphically on TV & in films. Every sort of sexual practise is described in detail in books & magazines, often unexpectedly, as my book club of middle aged ladies recently discovered! People talk openly about "one night stands" or worse "a quick shag". The words we use to describe sex show how little we value it.
It is commonplace to brag about the number of sexual partners you have had. Does it occur to those braggarts that they are saying something about themselves & their own lack of ability to sustain a relationship? Do they realise they are also saying that they don't value themselves if they are happy to squander their bodies to a passing acquaintance. Both women and men dress to show & emphasise their sexuality. What else can they be saying but that they are available for casual sex?
I can hear the comments now - "She's a prude - she needs to get laid - she's too old / too ugly to get a man - she's past it" - and probably much worse. I just think that to give oneself to someone else should be in the context of love. If the act of sex is not a demonstration of mutual love it is nothing. A loving relationship is enriched by "making love" & I don't think it was called that for nothing. "Having sex" doesn't come close to what the act should involve. I don't think it is possible to be "in love" for years on end, but it is possible to love someone for a long time.
The "raison d'etre" for sex is procreation, but thank God women have a choice about that now & shouldn't be at the mercy of sexual desire. Some things have improved. We have freedoms now that my generation never envisaged. But with those freedoms come responsibilities, to ourselves, to others & also to our society. We are not animals driven by basic needs & hormones, we are sentient, we can chose. We each need to value ourselves & other people, because if we don't no one else will. I dislike the advert "because you're worth it", but there is nothing wrong with understanding that people are more than their base instincts.
Instant gratification has got us where we are now in more ways than one. Maybe it's time to savour our pleasures & understand the price we pay for them & what they are worth.
We have debased something good between two human beings into something akin to porn, which is shown routinely & graphically on TV & in films. Every sort of sexual practise is described in detail in books & magazines, often unexpectedly, as my book club of middle aged ladies recently discovered! People talk openly about "one night stands" or worse "a quick shag". The words we use to describe sex show how little we value it.
It is commonplace to brag about the number of sexual partners you have had. Does it occur to those braggarts that they are saying something about themselves & their own lack of ability to sustain a relationship? Do they realise they are also saying that they don't value themselves if they are happy to squander their bodies to a passing acquaintance. Both women and men dress to show & emphasise their sexuality. What else can they be saying but that they are available for casual sex?
I can hear the comments now - "She's a prude - she needs to get laid - she's too old / too ugly to get a man - she's past it" - and probably much worse. I just think that to give oneself to someone else should be in the context of love. If the act of sex is not a demonstration of mutual love it is nothing. A loving relationship is enriched by "making love" & I don't think it was called that for nothing. "Having sex" doesn't come close to what the act should involve. I don't think it is possible to be "in love" for years on end, but it is possible to love someone for a long time.
The "raison d'etre" for sex is procreation, but thank God women have a choice about that now & shouldn't be at the mercy of sexual desire. Some things have improved. We have freedoms now that my generation never envisaged. But with those freedoms come responsibilities, to ourselves, to others & also to our society. We are not animals driven by basic needs & hormones, we are sentient, we can chose. We each need to value ourselves & other people, because if we don't no one else will. I dislike the advert "because you're worth it", but there is nothing wrong with understanding that people are more than their base instincts.
Instant gratification has got us where we are now in more ways than one. Maybe it's time to savour our pleasures & understand the price we pay for them & what they are worth.
Friday 11 May 2012
Men, Children & Sex
There have been horrific cases in the news of men abusing children, both girls and boys. This is nothing new. Old instances of abuse that come to light many years afterwards show that it has been going on for a very long time. The repeating pattern of the "Cycle of Abuse" is well known. Several thoughts occur to me about this disgusting phenomenon.
Firstly, I cannot believe that it has very much to do with sexual pleasure. What pleasure can there be in forcing very young children into aberrant sexual acts? So, is it simply about power? If this is the case what sort of disfunctional childhood did these men have which led them along this path? Are they so lacking in the ability to see themselves clearly & the dreadful harm they do as perpetrators, that they objectify the children? See them as somehow less than human? Block out their fear & pain? How inadequate a human being do you have to be to only be able to see yourself as powerful in this sad & pathetic way.
Secondly, is this inability to clearly see children as human beings who suffer pain & who have emotions, translated into the rest of the population? Are these men incapable of empathising & sympathising with someone else, such as the parents of the child, in any context? Are they mentally ill & can they be treated? If they are, how should we treat them, both in terms of punishment & in terms of healthcare & re-habilitation? Are we, to some extent, blinded by our disgust at the crime & against the perpetrator?
The really worrying thing about these crimes is that the men often act in groups. This seems to me to raise the seriousness stakes enormously. These men share, plan & target in a calculating & well thought out way. They are skilled at covering their tracks & using modern technology. In fact technology, it seems to me, has allowed the crimes themselves to grow exponentially. In the same way that it has changed the face of politics in opressed counties, it has actually helped these men to be better organised to spread & continue the cancer of their actions.
If I had a child who had been violated by a man, or gang of men, I know that I would want to do them physical harm. I feel loathing for the acts against children & if I'm honest, against the perpetrator/s. But that raw emotion doesn't help us as a society tackle & deal effectively with this crime. We all need to face up to "the evil that men do" and find a more effective way of dealing with them & protecting our children. We need to do it soon.
http://www.childmolestationprevention.org/ I found this after writing the blog & found it very informative.
Firstly, I cannot believe that it has very much to do with sexual pleasure. What pleasure can there be in forcing very young children into aberrant sexual acts? So, is it simply about power? If this is the case what sort of disfunctional childhood did these men have which led them along this path? Are they so lacking in the ability to see themselves clearly & the dreadful harm they do as perpetrators, that they objectify the children? See them as somehow less than human? Block out their fear & pain? How inadequate a human being do you have to be to only be able to see yourself as powerful in this sad & pathetic way.
Secondly, is this inability to clearly see children as human beings who suffer pain & who have emotions, translated into the rest of the population? Are these men incapable of empathising & sympathising with someone else, such as the parents of the child, in any context? Are they mentally ill & can they be treated? If they are, how should we treat them, both in terms of punishment & in terms of healthcare & re-habilitation? Are we, to some extent, blinded by our disgust at the crime & against the perpetrator?
The really worrying thing about these crimes is that the men often act in groups. This seems to me to raise the seriousness stakes enormously. These men share, plan & target in a calculating & well thought out way. They are skilled at covering their tracks & using modern technology. In fact technology, it seems to me, has allowed the crimes themselves to grow exponentially. In the same way that it has changed the face of politics in opressed counties, it has actually helped these men to be better organised to spread & continue the cancer of their actions.
If I had a child who had been violated by a man, or gang of men, I know that I would want to do them physical harm. I feel loathing for the acts against children & if I'm honest, against the perpetrator/s. But that raw emotion doesn't help us as a society tackle & deal effectively with this crime. We all need to face up to "the evil that men do" and find a more effective way of dealing with them & protecting our children. We need to do it soon.
http://www.childmolestationprevention.org/ I found this after writing the blog & found it very informative.
Saturday 5 May 2012
Every middle aged woman needs a Geek!
2 Blogs - 1 day - opposite ends of the spectrum!
In praise of Carphone Warehouse - I have just cracked my Samsung Galaxy Tab - Hooray!!!!! I've had it since before Christmas - it was my present to myself. My computer guru set it up for me & a techie friend tried to give me lessons. All to no avail. New gizmo's take more time now I find.
Anyway, in desperation, I went into Carphone Warehouse in Gloucester because I need to replace my stolen mobile. I didn't realise that you can pay for the Geeks to help if you didn't purchase from them. This lovely young man was absolutely wonderful. Patience personified. His fingers were nimble & quick & he knew exactly what he was doing, but he made me do things myself, so I really learned & hopefully remembered. (Not guaranteed). But I made scribbled notes & I've just accessed Skype & G Mail on my own for the first time.
I can't tell you how brilliant I feel. A problem solved is a great boost to the aged ego. I wish I knew how to send Carphone Warehouse this blog so they know what a treasure their employee is & how much I appreciate his help.
In praise of Carphone Warehouse - I have just cracked my Samsung Galaxy Tab - Hooray!!!!! I've had it since before Christmas - it was my present to myself. My computer guru set it up for me & a techie friend tried to give me lessons. All to no avail. New gizmo's take more time now I find.
Anyway, in desperation, I went into Carphone Warehouse in Gloucester because I need to replace my stolen mobile. I didn't realise that you can pay for the Geeks to help if you didn't purchase from them. This lovely young man was absolutely wonderful. Patience personified. His fingers were nimble & quick & he knew exactly what he was doing, but he made me do things myself, so I really learned & hopefully remembered. (Not guaranteed). But I made scribbled notes & I've just accessed Skype & G Mail on my own for the first time.
I can't tell you how brilliant I feel. A problem solved is a great boost to the aged ego. I wish I knew how to send Carphone Warehouse this blog so they know what a treasure their employee is & how much I appreciate his help.
Robbed - Twice. By a thief & the Insurers.
My bag was stolen the first night in Barcelona. I did everything you are supposed to & got a police report for Nationwide Insurers. Now, weeks later I have discovered that the Insurers are as bad as the thief! In fact probably s/he needed the money more.
I filled in all the forms straight away & sent everything I could to back up the things I was claiming for. These were the typical handbag items for most women on holiday. In fact probably not as much as most because I travel light. Along with most people I don't keep receipts for more than a year as most things aren't guaranteed for longer than that. I also don't keep bank statements for more than a couple of years either.
So after a couple of weeks with no acknowledgement of receiving my claim or action on it I rang & asked what was happening. It was being processed.
Then yesterday I had a phone call. They won't pay for my handbag because I don't have a receipt - it was a gift from my husband who has died. I did send them a manufacturers registration card as proof of purchase. They will pay for a purse, despite the fact I have no receipt, because it is a personal item. So why isn't my bag a personal item? The agent wanted a photograph of the bag & the purse. Who on earth takes photos of these items & how is a photo proof that you actually own it?
At first the agent denied getting the receipt for my new camera so said they wouldn't pay for it. Then he found it, but said he wouldn't pay because the receipt total wasn't the same as my claim. That was because I had deducted the cost of the gizmo that transfers the images direct from the card to the camera, which I hadn't taken away with me.
As for the mobile, which is a very basic Nokia camera phone, not an all singing all dancing touch screen one, I didn't have the receipt. So I sent them the printout of the calls made after the phone was pinched from the T Mobile website where I was registered. (I had phoned the day I posted the claim to say I had found the Nokia handbook which I had forgotten to include & which they said they may accept as proof of purchase). The agent said he did now want me to send that. But I couldn't send it to a named person who was handling my claim. That isn't the way they work. It just goes to the address & you have to hope it will arrive in your claim file & not be lost. Although I could prove how much credit was on the PAYGo at the point it was stolen it isn't their policy to pay that.
By this time I had got over being very angry & was in fact in tears. I felt that I had been robbed twice over. It is obvious from my claim that it isn't inflated. I am not a person who makes serial insurance claims & they can check that on their systems. I feel that the whole insurance ball game has changed hugely in the decades since I last made a travel insurance claim. It seems to me that there is very little point in having baggage travel insurance unless you are obsessive about producing proof of ownership of every single item you take away with you. A claim is not judged on past history & the reasonableness of the claim as I feel it should be. Do they really think I would have wasted part of an evening & a whole morning of my 5 day holiday in a police station if the claim weren't genuine?
I understand that some people do make spurious claims, but the premiums reflect that & we all pay for it. It's bad enough that Nationwide won't pay the replacement value of any of my posessions, which I didn't realise. But their unreasonable demands in terms of the standard of proof, & the lengthy processing of the claim mean that clients are very much out of pocket.
What is the point?
I filled in all the forms straight away & sent everything I could to back up the things I was claiming for. These were the typical handbag items for most women on holiday. In fact probably not as much as most because I travel light. Along with most people I don't keep receipts for more than a year as most things aren't guaranteed for longer than that. I also don't keep bank statements for more than a couple of years either.
So after a couple of weeks with no acknowledgement of receiving my claim or action on it I rang & asked what was happening. It was being processed.
Then yesterday I had a phone call. They won't pay for my handbag because I don't have a receipt - it was a gift from my husband who has died. I did send them a manufacturers registration card as proof of purchase. They will pay for a purse, despite the fact I have no receipt, because it is a personal item. So why isn't my bag a personal item? The agent wanted a photograph of the bag & the purse. Who on earth takes photos of these items & how is a photo proof that you actually own it?
At first the agent denied getting the receipt for my new camera so said they wouldn't pay for it. Then he found it, but said he wouldn't pay because the receipt total wasn't the same as my claim. That was because I had deducted the cost of the gizmo that transfers the images direct from the card to the camera, which I hadn't taken away with me.
As for the mobile, which is a very basic Nokia camera phone, not an all singing all dancing touch screen one, I didn't have the receipt. So I sent them the printout of the calls made after the phone was pinched from the T Mobile website where I was registered. (I had phoned the day I posted the claim to say I had found the Nokia handbook which I had forgotten to include & which they said they may accept as proof of purchase). The agent said he did now want me to send that. But I couldn't send it to a named person who was handling my claim. That isn't the way they work. It just goes to the address & you have to hope it will arrive in your claim file & not be lost. Although I could prove how much credit was on the PAYGo at the point it was stolen it isn't their policy to pay that.
By this time I had got over being very angry & was in fact in tears. I felt that I had been robbed twice over. It is obvious from my claim that it isn't inflated. I am not a person who makes serial insurance claims & they can check that on their systems. I feel that the whole insurance ball game has changed hugely in the decades since I last made a travel insurance claim. It seems to me that there is very little point in having baggage travel insurance unless you are obsessive about producing proof of ownership of every single item you take away with you. A claim is not judged on past history & the reasonableness of the claim as I feel it should be. Do they really think I would have wasted part of an evening & a whole morning of my 5 day holiday in a police station if the claim weren't genuine?
I understand that some people do make spurious claims, but the premiums reflect that & we all pay for it. It's bad enough that Nationwide won't pay the replacement value of any of my posessions, which I didn't realise. But their unreasonable demands in terms of the standard of proof, & the lengthy processing of the claim mean that clients are very much out of pocket.
What is the point?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)