Monday, 4 May 2009

Response to Questionnaire!

Age: 23

Sex: Female

Degree: English

I don’t think the ‘Being Bad’ module related very well to the other modules I am studying at the moment, as there was no actual connection to English. However, that is not to say that I haven’t enjoyed the module.
I think the ‘Being Bad’ module is an appropriate level and I don’t think it was too demanding or too easy.

The topics covered within the module were interesting and appropriate. There are no other topics that I think would have improved the overall module.

The format of the classes worked well, and the module team were great!

Overall the module worked well with a mixture of small discussions and large group debates. I don’t believe there is any need for improvement.

I definitely think interdisciplinary modules are a good idea as they improve your way of thinking and approaching certain subjects. They also test how well you work outside of lectures, as this module required you to develop your own way of thinking and then support it. I have benefited from this module overall.

I would most certainly recommend the ‘Being Bad’ module to a friend, however, I am unsure if I would like to take the follow up module PH2004.

The blogs are a great idea. It makes a change from continually being assessed by writing essays or taking exams. They also test your dedication to work outside of University, as you have to maintain them throughout the module in your own time.

I think it may have been a good idea to have had another longer form of assessment alongside the blogs, rather than two shorter ones. Either a 1200 word essay or a 1200 creative writing piece of your choice. 600 words is a short amount of words to express, develop and back up your ideas on your chosen question. I did not really enjoy the creative writing piece, as I found it difficult to support my thoughts, ideas and story with credible sources.

Overall, I have really enjoyed the module and I don’t think any of the topics were a waste of time. I wouldn’t say that I have learnt anything new in this module as I have in other modules, although I don’t think that was the general aim of ‘Being Bad’.

Sunday, 3 May 2009

Finders Keepers! Or Maybe Not?

This is an interesting story. A couple who found a winning lottery ticket on the floor of their local supermarket have been charged with fraud and theft after spending someone else’s lottery winnings. The police became involved and the ticket was proven not to be theirs. The couple involved said “they did not think what they had done was illegal”. I admit, that I did not think what they had done was illegal either until I read this story. I knew it was immoral and wrong, however, as there was no name on the ticket I presumed who ever had possession of the ticket was the legal winner.

In my previous blogs I have discussed issues of fraud and theft and depicted them as being bad and completely wrong. However, how many people out there find things on the floor or in the street, on public transport, or left in pubs and clubs? Now, how many of you actually hand the items you have found into the police? I personally have never found anything of value other than the odd £1 coin here and there, but I think if I did find a wallet, bag or jewellery, I would hand it in, as you do know that it rightfully belongs to someone else. You never know what sentimental value these belongings have to the people who have lost them either. I had never really considered finding things, such as lottery tickets or small amounts of money as a form of theft. Technically you have not gone out with the intention of stealing something from someone else, so can this be defined as being really that bad? Apparently the saying 'finders’ keepers, losers weepers’ is not true'. In this situation I think the couple probably did innocently pick up the lottery ticket, although when they discovered it was a winning ticket they should have contacted Camelot, before going ahead and spending the money. I am sure in the back of their minds they knew it was wrong and not legitimately their money to spend.

Monday, 27 April 2009

Abortion Advertisements!


I do not think that giving information on the television about abortions would be a good idea. I feel it would give mixed signals to the younger generation about having unprotected sex. I believe the advertisements may send out the message that it does not matter if you become pregnant at a young age, as it is easy enough to obtain an abortion. Abortion is not an option to be considered lightly, as you are taking away a life that you are responsible for creating. I am of the opinion that by promoting the use of condoms more often on the television is the key to preventing sexually transmitted diseases and unplanned pregnancies. There was a story on the Jeremy Kyle show this morning where a young girl had an unplanned pregnancy and her partner left her as soon as he found out she was pregnant. She contemplated an abortion, however she was unable to have one as she was too far into the pregnancy. She should have considered the consequences before having unprotected sex. Abortion is not a replacement for contraception! Jeremy asked them the usual question as he always does “why did you not think to use a condom?” The man’s reply to Jeremy was the oldest excuse in the book. He replied “I am allergic to them”. How convenient! I mean who believes that one? I am sure that in 2009 there are some anti allergy or latex free ones available by now. If not, and someone from Durex is reading this, please make one available to counteract that age old excuse.

Wednesday, 22 April 2009

Today's Bad Budget!

Well, I thought I would write a blog on today’s budget, as I believe it must be one of the most dishonest presentations of a set of facts and figures I have ever heard. Lying is ‘BAD’ by the way!!!

No surprises that there has also been yet another increase on the duty of tobacco, alcohol and fuel.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer has introduced so called Governmental ‘efficiencies’ saving £15billion, and an income tax rate of 50% for so called high earners (£150,000+), when the true scale of Government debt is around £1trillion. The honest working men and women will have to pay big style for these borrowings and debts, the income from the two revenue streams I have quoted above will only bring in marginal revenues, as so few people earn that amount of money.
I feel that a greater degree of honesty from the Chancellor would have been much more appreciated by the working men and women, who by and large are no fools.
The Chancellor knows that a large amount of money comes from the 25 million or so earners on average wages, and that as unemployment increases less tax is naturally gathered both form the individual and the employers.

Whatever the causes of this financial debt, and whose fault it actually is will soon be history, however, one thing that is apparent, is that as a country we were very unprepared for this downturn with no contingency ‘pot’ to ride the storm.
It is my concern that a whole future generation, including myself are going to have to pay for these events with higher taxation, as the Chancellor said “there are no quick fixes”. This will still apply whatever political party is in power.

Friday, 17 April 2009

Comment on Katy Finch's Blog!


Anorexia!

Katy's Blog!


I agree with Katy that the media does have a lot to answer for regarding teenage anorexia and bulimia. Celebrities are portrayed in the media as perfect human beings, when the reality is they are far from perfect. Celebrities are simply normal everyday people like you and I, they are just airbrushed and photographed in a complimentary way to represent perfection. Although I do agree with Katy about the pressure from the media on the teenage generations of today to appear perfect, I believe there must be some form of mental instability present in the first place for anorexia to develop. Everyone is subjected to the media coverage of super skinny celebrities, however, only a small percentage of people develop disorders such as anorexia or bulimia. I am of the opinion that the media cannot be blamed for everything that is ‘bad’ in the world today. A scientific study documented in the Observer newspaper revealed that anorexia can develop as a result of a malfunction in the brain during early childhood development. This is similar to that of conditions such as ADHD and dyslexia, and no one is to blame for these conditions occurring.

Thursday, 16 April 2009

Jack Tweed!

Bad boy Jack Tweed has been in the media again this week for finally being sent to prison for twelve weeks for assaulting a taxi driver. I am not sure what everyone else thinks of this situation. I am thinking why was Jack able to have his curfew extended for his wedding night, and now have his jail sentence reduced due to the loss of his wife Jade? Would the courts have done this for anyone else who was not in the public eye? I know Jack has had a terrible time of late, however, I am sure that there have been other people convicted and sentenced for crimes who have been in a similar situation. Unfortunately losing loved ones either before or after their conviction. What makes Jack any different? Being a celebrity should not change anything. It amazes me how someone already on licence, fitted with an electronic tag by the police for a previous offence, commits another crime and only gets twelve weeks in prison. Jack claims his anger was alcohol fuelled, like most incidents that still occur on a Friday or Saturday night still are, this does not excuse his actions. As I have said in previous blogs, if you cannot handle alcohol then do not over indulge. I believe it is unfair for him to be given a shorter sentence than other people who have committed similar crimes.



Tuesday, 14 April 2009

Graffiti!


Yes, graffiti is a criminal offence, so I suppose it should be considered as ‘being bad’. Is it really that bad though? In some circumstances, I do agree that certain types of graffiti can look a mess and spoil the image of many towns and cities. Gang tags are especially unsightly particularly on public transport or empty derelict houses. Some types of graffiti however, I think are fantastic pieces of art work, and I enjoy looking at some of them. The time, effort and detail put into some pieces is amazing. I do not agree with damaging other people's property, and I believe that type of graffiti is offensive and should not go unpunished. I understand that graffiti costs a huge amount of money to clean up with many hours of work needed. Not all graffiti needs to be cleaned up, especially if it looks as fantastic as the above picture. Perhaps some people ‘graffiti’ for fun or for the thrill of getting caught, knowing that what they are doing is wrong. On the other hand, maybe some people ‘graffiti’ to express their talent or point of view about something allowing others to appreciate their ‘art’ and thoughts. Let’s face it, graffiti does brighten up some dull buildings. In New York graffiti like that in the above picture is particular prevalent on the freeways especially on bridges and to be honest it brightens your journey. Well I think so anyway.

Sunday, 12 April 2009

Stalking!

I personally consider stalking to be very bad. I have just read an article in the Sun newspaper about the star Geri Halliwell who has had to increase the level of security at her home due to someone stalking her. It is claimed the star fears for the safety of herself, and her daughter Bluebell. I cannot imagine how Geri must feel knowing she is being watched 24 hours a day by someone she has never met. According to a National US Stalking awareness website, stalking is where a person is made to feel fear by another person, whether it is due to numerous phone calls, waiting outside the person’s home, or turning up at their workplace. Stalking can have severe consequences, a shop assistant who worked in top store Harvey Nichols in London was shot and killed as a result of being stalked by a previous partner. It is alleged that it was well known throughout the store that the 22 year old girl was being frequently stalked by her previous partner. The 30 year old man claimed he was not stalking, but that he merely loved her and would not harm her, however, he pleaded guilty to harassment and was also arrested prior to killing his former girlfriend. This incident demonstrates the reality of stalking if it is not properly dealt with by the police.



Thursday, 9 April 2009

Comment on Josephine Daly and Agnieszka Soltycka's Blogs!




I disagree with Josephine and Agnieszka, I honestly did not think the film 'Kids' was really that bad. Admittedly, it may have disturbed and shocked some people in the lecture, I personally was a little taken aback by some of the graphic scenes in the film too. However, unfortunately it brought home the harsh reality of what some teenage children get up to these days. Some teenagers do drink heavily and excessively, some take drugs, and they are certainly having frequent unprotected sex. This is obvious by the fact that the UK has the highest rate of teenage pregnancies in the EU. I think the film did portray a purpose and a moral, I believe it was trying to convey the dangers of having unprotected sex, and to demonstrate how easily sexually transmitted diseases are spread. The film simply used shock tactics, using the contraction of the virus HIV, to reinforce this issue. I can understand why the film caused so much controversy when it was first released. I am not sure it would be good viewing for children under a certain age, although maybe if children 16 and above were to watch it, perhaps it would make them think twice before having unprotected sex. It may also enlighten some parents as to what children can actually get up to in this day and age, and allow them to confront these issues with their children before they explore them for themselves. I am of the opinion that if people talked more openly about sex, sexually transmitted diseases, drugs and alcohol, there would not be as many problems as there are. In the UK we appear to be a little prudish when it concerns discussing sex.

Tuesday, 7 April 2009

Comment on Ruth Sheppard's Blog!


Fox Hunting!

Ruth's Blog!

I completely disagree with Fox hunting, or any other type of hunting, I believe it is cruel and unnecessary. I do not understand how people can gain pleasure from watching an animal suffer. How would the hunters like to be flushed out of their homes and shot at point blank range for no reason? In response to the comment that foxes are regarded as pests or vermin, I could say the same about some people, however, we are not allowed to go and shoot ‘human vermin’ for the sheer fun of it. Maybe the world would be a better place if we could. Foxes are a part of nature exactly the same as rats, pigeons, squirrels, and every other living creature. What gives hunters the right to decide if these animals live or die, whether they are considered vermin or not? Hunting foxes cannot be thought of in the same way as killing chickens or cattle for meat. The foxes are killed for fun, not for food. Honestly, what is there to understand about fox hunting? It is my personal opinion that it is simply affluent people gaining pleasure out of parading around on horses all day, causing needless suffering to innocent animals. That cannot be regarded as a sport it is cold blooded animal cruelty, and the government should have banned it completely a long time ago! I absolutely agree with Rebecca Webb's blog about hunting, it is not just ‘bad’ it is barbaric!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4724028.stm

Monday, 6 April 2009

Drugs!

Thursday’s lecture about drugs initiated the debate as to whether or not drugs, especially hallucinogenic and amphetamine drugs should be legalised? As we discussed in the lecture, making drugs illegal does not seem to have solved the problem of people abusing drugs and becoming addicted to them. To a certain degree I do agree with this suggestion, however, if drugs were to be made legal I think this would simply increase the problem of people abusing and also becoming addicted to them. I suppose if they were to be made legal, it may decrease the number of drug dealers that are on the streets, and stop them from making a huge profit from other peoples addictions. It may also decrease the appeal to teenagers taking drugs, as it would not appear so cool if they were legal. Another positive factor for legalising drugs would be to those people who use drugs such as cannabis, for pain relief of certain medical conditions.

On the other hand legalising drugs could cause a drug epidemic and increase the likelihood of future generations becoming drug addicts. I think there are a number of pros and cons for this idea. Although some people may disagree with me, drugs are dangerous and can kill you, especially drugs like ecstasy and cocaine. Some people react badly to taking these types of drugs. I am of the opinion that legalising drugs would be a ‘bad idea’. According to the UK drug website 'FRANK', even short term use of hallucinogenic and amphetamine drugs can cause paranoia and panic attacks. Even drugs that can aid pain relief, such as cannabis have awful side effects. I personally do not see the appeal of taking drugs, you only have to look at the people that appear on the ITV programme Jeremy Kyle to see what effects drugs can do to people who use them long term and illegally.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/feb/11/ecstasy-downgrade

Sunday, 5 April 2009

Comment on Zoe Cox's Blog!


Child Obesity!



I agree with Zoe about the fact that the parent’s of obese children do have a lot to answer for. Obviously, with the exception of the parents who have children with medical conditions that can cause obesity. I think parents should encourage their children to undertake more outdoor activities and try to have more control over what their children are eating. In some circumstances I believe parents sometimes give children what they want to eat simply for an easy life, avoiding the ‘tea time tantrums’. As Zoe has said, you need to be strong with your children and let them know they cannot always have what they want and when they want it. However, as I am not yet a parent I cannot really pass judgement on this issue. On the other hand, if you look at this debate from another point of view, some children can be very fussy eaters. I remember a friend of mine commenting that her child only wanted to eat chips. She refused to eat, or even try anything else. Luckily, her child did eventually grow out of only wanting to eat chips! Looking in from the outside, I thought to myself the same as Zoe, be strong and let her know who the parent is, however, if your child refuses to eat anything other than fatty foods, what are you meant to do? You cannot let your child starve simply because it is not ‘healthy food’ what we are all encouraged to eat. Such a scenario is a no win situation, if your child does not eat, it is ‘bad’, and if your child does eat, but unhealthily, it is also ‘bad’. I am of the opinion that eating so called ‘junk food’ is impossible for a parent to prevent their child from doing. Moderation, like everything else, is the key to acceptance. There is no excuse for lazy parents who just cannot be bothered, and let their children become dangerously obese.

Thursday, 2 April 2009

Comment on Karen Owen's Blog!


Teacher Films the ‘Truth’

Karen's Blog!

I agree with Karen on this subject. The hierarchy of the teaching profession have no idea of what really goes on in the classroom today, and they would not last five minutes in a classroom scenario. I think the teaching council now need to acknowledge that there is a serious behaviour and discipline problem in a number of schools. Instead of trying to conceal these issues with false statistics, they could at least attempt to try and resolve these difficulties for the sake of the children who would like a decent education. I watched an interview on ITV's This Morning programme with Alex Dolan, the teacher who carried out the secret filming of the behaviour of some children in a number of schools. I believe that Alex was simply trying to expose the truth to encourage public awareness, and to prompt action that quite obviously needs to be taken. I do not believe she was trying to make a mockery of the schools and the head teachers involved, as some people have suggested. As Karen has said, maybe the ‘top dogs’ of the teaching world should have a go at teaching a class for a day or two, and let’s see how many lesson targets and learning outcomes they actually achieve.

Wednesday, 1 April 2009

Gambling!


Is all gambling really that bad?

I think the answer to the above question really does depend upon how much the individual is undertaking gambling. In moderation, I do not see it as 'being bad' or a problem. Being addicted to gambling, on the other hand, is no different to being addicted to drinking alcohol or taking drugs. Over one million people in England alone are estimated to be problem gamblers. According to a website I found promoting National Gambling Awareness Week, compulsive gambling can lead to depression, suicide, theft, violent crime and domestic violence. The consequences of excessive gambling can be just as serious as other addictions. When I am talking about gambling, I am not talking about the odd game of bingo, a weekly go on the lottery, or a yearly flutter on the Grand National, I am talking about the people who gamble most of the day, every day. I believe the launch of online gambling sites does not help the situation with over 200,000 people now addicted to this form of gambling. Individuals can now accumulate serious amounts of debt without even leaving their homes. It is my opinion that compulsive gambling is bad, similar to that of alcohol and drug abuse.

Tuesday, 31 March 2009

Public Pay for Porn!


Yet another embarrassing blunder for the government. It was revealed yesterday that the Home Secretary, Jacqui Smith, ‘mistakenly’ claimed expenses from tax payers’ money to pay for her husband’s adult films. The films cost just £5 each, which he is supposed to have watched while she was away. It does not matter if the films were pornographic or not, it is not my issue with the subject. I do not think the public should be paying for the privilege of MPs’ to be watching films of any kind, or for them to use the Internet for their own private use. Why can they not pay for these luxuries themselves? They earn more than enough! This also relates to a blog I published the other day about MPs’ claiming tax payers’ money for both second and holiday homes. Yesterday’s story highlights what I have said previously about tax payers’ funding these second homes, as Jacqui Smith is no exception. It is stated that she has claimed more than £23,000 of tax payers’ money on her second home. It was alleged in the news that money had also been claimed to pay for a number of goods and even a bath plug costing just 88 pence. How ridiculous!




Monday, 30 March 2009

Masturbation!

After the masturbation lecture we had a few weeks ago, it became clear that masturbation could no longer simply only be associated as a male dominated activity. Women were found to do it just as much as men do, if not more. Women just lie and deny they even do it.

After reading an article yesterday in the Sunday Times Style magazine entitled “Let’s talk about sex”, which stated that “sex toys and vibrators are now chic lifestyle accessories”, it became apparent to me that masturbation cannot still be seen as a ‘bad’ activity. It is evident we now live in a highly sex driven society. According to the article, vibrator manufacturers in China are one of the very few industries at the moment which is surviving the global recession. Obviously many people especially women are taking part in masturbation, otherwise the company would have closed down by now. Masturbation is now part of everyday life whether we like it or not. When we go shopping we have shops and brands like Agent Provocateur and Ann Summers promoting sex and masturbation toys. Admittedly, it is the choice of the individual whether or not to go into these shops, although, honestly you can hardly avoid it, the temptation and curiosity is far too intense. Media and television coverage also promotes and portrays living in a sex driven society. For example the article I am talking about now, and programmes such as Sex and the City where sex and masturbation is talked about openly reinforces my view. I really don’t see the problem with it.

The Sunday Times Style article also talks about a study that shows 21% of British people do not have sex at all, and 33% only have sex once a month, with work commitments and stress playing a vital role in the lack of activity in the bedroom. Is there any wonder masturbation is becoming increasingly acceptable and more popular?

Sunday, 29 March 2009

Greedy MPs'!


I cannot believe what I have just been reading. An article I found in the Daily Mail tells of how MPs are spending ridiculous amounts of tax payers’ money on second homes and holiday homes for themselves and their family. How selfish and greedy can people be? No wonder the country is in such a state if we have people like that running it for us. We are not just talking about a little perk of the job, it is claimed that more than £60,000 of tax payers’ money has been spent on either funding these second homes, or modifying them for the benefit of the MPs’. How can they justify spending that amount of money on homes that, let’s face it, they do not really need, or do not even live in. You can only live in one house at a time. It is obvious that these MPs could not care less that some families are struggling to pay only the one mortgage they have, some families have become homeless as they have been unable to pay just the one. It is no wonder the government has revealed plans to increase student tuition fees, as the extra cash will come in handy for another new home or maybe another car. I have nothing against MPs having second homes and even holiday homes, everyone would have one if they could afford it. I do object however, to MPs’ using hard earned tax payers’ money for their gain, when there are many more important issues the money should be being spent on.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/mar/22/employment-minister-mcnulty-allowances-row

Friday, 27 March 2009

Fraud!


Fraud costs the UK around £20 billion per year and it is set to rise with the current economic climate. There are many types of fraud such as identity theft, credit and debit card fraud, benefit fraud and scams that defraud people, especially the senior citizen age group, out of money.

Identity theft, the adoption of someone else’s identity, usually occurs as the individual concerned either wishes to hide their original identity, or use the identity of the genuine individual for monetary gain. This is morally wrong as it is theft of someone else’s hard earned money.

Benefit fraud is particularly dishonest and morally very wrong, as it makes a mockery of both our welfare system, and genuine people who are actually unable to work due to illness or disability.

Credit and debit card fraud usually occurs when someone’s card, or cards, is subjected to ‘cloning’. This is when the card is copied with or without it’s associated Pin number and then used to either purchase goods or obtain cash either form an ATM or from a bank.
Again this is very distressing for the person who is subjected to this type of fraud as it can leave them without any means of obtaining cash whilst an investigation is completed. Worst of all it can adversely affect their credit rating.


Wednesday, 25 March 2009

Comment on Claire Cramphorn's Blog!


Teen Sells Virginity!

Claire's Blog!

This story is very strange, and I think eBay has a lot to answer for. I agree with Claire on this subject. Yes, it is the girl’s own body, and she is entitled to do exactly what she wants with it, however, this is nothing more or less than an act of prostitution. Although, I do disagree with Claire when she says prostitution does not deserve the stigma it receives, as I believe it should. Surely there is some other way the girl can make money to pay for her tuition fees, other than to sell her virginity online. Why can she not simply get a job in retail or an office, like every other normal student? That also goes for prostitutes, why can they not get a normal job in an office or whatever? Admittedly it probably would not pay as well as prostitution, but at least they would still have their dignity. Whatever happened to good old fashioned saving for things anyway?

I think the girl is very disillusioned about the way most men in today’s society behave. I doubt very much she is going to meet the husband of her dreams in the circumstances she has created. I agree with Claire when she says the girl’s innocence is scary, let’s hope she does not fall pregnant as she has already declared she is not going to use protection. I am not sure the lucky man would be so keen to stick around if she did. I think the girl is also putting herself in danger and at unnecessary risk, who knows what weird men she will meet. Silly Girl!

Tuesday, 24 March 2009

Bullying!


Bullying is cruel, heartless and completely unacceptable. I was amazed to read that almost 45% of bullying now takes place online. Not only are children and adults having to put up with the misery of being bullied at school and at work, they have to suffer it in their own homes too. According to a website I found, people bully for a number of reasons. Some people bully as it gives them a feeling of being in control. Some bully because they are unhappy or are being bullied themselves. Some people bully simply to become more popular and to follow the so called, ‘in’ crowds. Bullying can have fatal consequences, as some people resort to committing suicide as they are unable to cope with the daily trauma of being bullied.
I believe there should be firmer measures put in place to both identify and tackle bullies, especially in schools and work places. What gives people the right to make another human being feel miserable, and to make them reach the point where they feel the only way out is to end their life? Bullying is just wrong!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1164350/More-23-000-cyberbullying-victims-flood-help-website-just-weeks.html

Monday, 23 March 2009

Dangerous Driving!


Ok, so I am not denying that we all fail to stick to the correct speed limit at times. I am one of them. This is inevitable as if we all travelled at 30mph all of the time we would never get anywhere. However, I do not agree with people driving at stupid speeds. I cannot believe a driver who admitted to driving at 105mph on a 50mph road escaped a prison sentence. I understand he did not hurt anyone in the process of driving this fast, although, he could have quite easily. Is there any need to exceed the speed limit that much? The only reason he managed to escape a prison sentence was due to the police being unable to prove the car he was driving had been modified to travel at a speed of 173mph, which he was accused of doing. They were unable to prove this, as the car had been sold abroad after the incident occurred, what a coincidence! Admittedly the police equipment used was open to human error, but seriously could the equipment have really been that much out?

I think that driving even at the speed the man admitted to doing was incredibly dangerous, irresponsible and immoral. Why do people need to drive that fast? I believe it is simply to show off and to illustrate the power of their precious car. If people wish to drive at dangerous speeds there are appropriate race tracks available that provide for this need. According to an article I found in a Los Angeles Paper, testosterone plays a large part in dangerous driving with men, similar to that of road rage. I agree with this article as men seem to use the road as a playground to demonstrate their masculinity. I am not saying that some women don’t do the same because I am sure they do, however, research shows that men are more likely to drive dangerously than women. Women tend to do stupid irresponsible things like attempting to drive in 6 inch killer heels, which results in them being unable to drive correctly. I am not one of them by the way!

Sunday, 22 March 2009

Bad Video Games!


The debate continues on this subject, whether or not violent video games contribute to violent and aggressive behaviour, especially in children. The research that has been carried out over the past few years is still yet to be 100% conclusive. There is suggestion, however, that aggressive behaviour increases in children when they are subjected to violent video games over a prolonged period of time. I am not sure what to think about this, although, I do believe children can be very easily influenced.

I am also of the opinion however, that the parents play a vital role in the matter. Firstly, children should not be playing certificate rated 18 video games. Secondly, children should be brought up in an environment free of violence, and thirdly children should be taught to know that violence is wrong from a very early age. I know however, that it is not a perfect world and that this is not always possible. I am of the belief that external factors such as social background and family upbringing, may contribute more so to children becoming violent, than simply playing a fictional video game. Maybe some people just have a naturally violent character, or perhaps psychological factors are triggered by the viewing of such video games resulting in violent behaviour.

I do wonder, however, if children who play these violent games throughout their childhood, does this contribute to them being abusive and violent when they become adults? It would be interesting to see the results of a prolonged research on this subject.

Friday, 20 March 2009

Body Modification!


Last night’s lecture about body modification was fascinating, and at times a little gruesome and graphic. I only say that though, as I hate the sight of blood, it makes me feel very queasy, yet I was intrigued and wanted to learn more. It was interesting to learn that religion and tribal traditions play a large part in tattoos and piercings, as well as people just doing it for aesthetic reasons. At one time, it would have only been those in the Army, Navy, Japanese gangsters and people who had been in prison who had tattoos. Now however, it seems as though most people have at least one tattoo or piercing. Many celebrities also have them, such as David and Victoria Beckham, Peaches Geldof, Amy Winehouse and many more. This may be why tattoos and piercings appeal more so to a younger generation, allowing them to follow fashion and celebrity trends.


I don’t think having tattoos or piercings is immoral, irresponsible, unhealthy or dangerous; I suppose it may be a little dangerous to the person having it done. Although these days I think hygiene, health and safety standards regarding tattoos and piercings are very high, even though this does not always prevent infection after having the tattoo or piercing.


I think some tattoos look really nice and tasteful, yet I consider some to be really distasteful, and too many can look over the top. According to a survey carried out why people get tattoos, apparently 44% of people got them to feel unique, 33% to feel independent, and 28% to make a life experience. I think tattoos and piercings do allow people to be unique, although so many people have them these days it is now more like the norm. The survey also showed that more women were getting tattoos, and more so than men, they were more likely to regret getting one done. For women in some cultures a tattoo can signify a voicing of an opinion, or of no longer being possessed or owned by men. Although as a nation I feel we are now becoming more socially accepting of tattoos and piercings, some employers still make employees cover the tattoos up with a plaster or an item of clothing. I understand this reasoning with piercings from a health and safety point of view, however, maybe there is still negative stigma attached to having tattoos.

Thursday, 19 March 2009

Comment on Jade Lopez's Blog!


Jade Goody!

Jade's Blog!

This topic has caused numerous debates and heated discussions at my place of work this week, more so than politics. I have to agree with Jade on this subject, I feel very sorry for Jade Goody having Cancer, as it is a terrible illness. No one deserves to go through what she and her family are experiencing at the moment. However, I think the media coverage it is receiving is disgraceful and very immoral. Do people really want to watch and read about someone dying day in and day out? Obviously they do as Jade Goody is on the front cover of many magazines at the moment. When did we become such a morbid country? There are numerous other people in the world also battling Cancer, but they are not as fortunate to receive thousands of pounds for the privilege of selling their story to papers and magazines. Some people cannot even receive the basic medical treatment they need to help fight the Cancer, let alone have 24 hour care and make thousands of pounds every day. Why should Jade Goody be any different to any other person?

I understand that Jade Goody insists she is doing all of this for the benefit of her children, although as Jade has already commented on, is that really how she wants her children to remember her? Hasn’t she made enough money to support them over the past years anyway? Only one good thing can come from this media coverage, and that is to raise the awareness of Cervical Cancer to a younger generation. Perhaps the government may now consider lowering the age when free screening is available.

Wednesday, 18 March 2009

Amy Winehouse!


Here we have a classic example of someone who loves to act badly. Amy Winehouse is continually in the media for one thing or another. This week she is in the spot light for assaulting one of her fans. I mean what can I say, other than she clearly has issues and needs professional help. She is alleged to have attacked a fan for wanting to take a picture of her. Isn’t that what fans are supposed to do? Amy ticks all of the boxes for acting immoral, irresponsible and dangerous. She is always in and out of rehabilitation for either drug or alcohol abuse, or both at the same time; she has numerous distasteful tattoos all over her body and she is also alleged to have committed adultery. Yet, as a nation, we still seem to like her, and inevitably we fuel these habits and addictions she has by buying and downloading her music. I think the more money such people make, the worse they become.

Tuesday, 17 March 2009

Bad Banks!


So let’s talk about the banking crisis. I believe that the Banks have created their own problems as a result of their policy of irresponsible lending to both business and private customers. Their view that a loan could be made without little recourse to ‘fact finding’ or collateral support, was a recipe for disaster. This resulted in banks building a large portfolio of ‘bad’, or as some have called them, ‘toxic debts’.


Government, mindful of the repercussions of a bank collapse, have floated the idea for creation of a ‘toxic bank’, into which all these bad debts would be ploughed. I believe that the various European Governments had no option to also allocate funds to the banks to try and stimulate interbank lending, as well as lending to the wider community.


It is my opinion however, that this is in reality a very short term solution and the banks must extricate themselves from the current difficulties. I am also somewhat bemused by the UK Government’s statement that funds given to the Banks are to stimulate lending, when lending in the past created the current situation.

My view, for what it is worth, is that these measures still don’t seem to have kick started the housing market or stopped the rise in business bankruptcies. However, the bank managers are still drawing large salaries and taking large redundancy pay outs. How is this possible with the current crisis? It seems to me the banks and their managers are all out for themselves.
I also wonder if these loans have been solely used by banks to put their balance sheets into the black.

Perhaps I am a cynic!


With all this in mind, it is my belief that creation of a ‘toxic bank’ would not be a good idea.
However, if none of this works is there is plan ‘B’?






Monday, 16 March 2009

Bad Police!


I was amazed to learn that there are more than 1,000 police officers in the UK with criminal records. I know everyone makes mistakes especially in their youth and I don’t think it is a problem for police officers to have a criminal record for minor offences. According to a report however, published last week, some police officers have criminal records for battery, fraud, assault, dishonesty and theft. The public trust the police to enforce the law, not break it themselves. I find it concerning that someone convicted of battery and assault would have been able to get a job in the police force in the first place. I am also convinced that if the conviction was given whilst in the force, they should not be allowed to keep their job. According to the report, the highest numbers of police officers with criminal convictions were in the Metropolitan Police Force, with the West Midlands Police following a close second. Although these forces are amongst the largest in the country, it doesn't surprise me!


I don’t think someone who has been convicted of a violent crime should have the power to enforce the law, giving someone with a violent temper a uniform and such powers is a lethal combination. I cannot understand how a police officer who has been convicted of dishonesty can do his/her job correctly, especially when policing is all about duty of care and being honest.


Sunday, 15 March 2009

Is Lying So Bad, and Is Telling the Truth Really So Good?



I think the answer to the question is it really does depend on the lie that has been told. For example, telling your children lies about the tooth fairy and Father Christmas are really not bad lies in my opinion. That is all part of growing up. According to a website I found, children are taught to lie from an early age by their parents anyway. For instance they are told to say they like their Christmas presents their grandparents gave them, or they enjoyed staying for tea, when really they hated it. This type of lie protects the feelings of others, and is often referred to as a ‘white lie’. I am of the opinion that this form of lying doesn’t do that much harm in the long, although according to some research it can encourage long term lying when children become adults. The lies that accompany infidelity on the other hand, are usually lies to protect the person who has been unfaithful. I think this form of lying is very wrong as it is deceitful and malicious.

People tell lies every day for one reason or another, some might say that telling lies for a better world is acceptable. Research as referred to in the link below, also shows that some people don’t believe they are telling lies at all, but simply exaggerating the future truth. Psychologists suggest that people who exaggerate the truth are simply demonstrating overconfidence, and genuinely believe that at some point in the future what they have said will be true. This results in them being unable to distinguish a big lie from a small lie. Experts also say that small lies, such as exaggerating academic grades can improve performance and encourage future goals; however, frequent exaggeration can also encourage people to become compulsive liars, aiding in the telling of big lies with ease.

So in conclusion, small lies are not really that bad, as they can assist improved performance. However, they can also encourage people to lie more often and progress to telling more serious lies. Deceitful lies are wrong as they destroy trust, although, it could be said that deceitful lies also protect the person on the receiving end. As the saying goes, “what you don’t know can’t hurt you”. This debate really does depend upon the individual circumstances and issues that are involved.

Tuesday, 10 March 2009

Comment on Rebecca Webb's Blog!




Alcohol Abuse!

I agree with Becky on this subject. Alcohol related violence has increased, as has violence inflicted by strangers. It’s not as though we don’t want people to have a good time when they go out, we just don’t want to get smashed in the face with a glass just for looking at someone in the wrong way. If you can’t handle your drink then you should know your limits, or if drinking alcohol makes you that violent don’t drink it at all. I don’t think the pubs and clubs help the situation by serving alcohol, not only during the day but also early in the morning. The 24 hour opening hours of some pubs, and happy hours has also enhanced the problem by allowing people to drink alcohol all day.

Thursday, 5 March 2009

Comment on Dave Fox's Blog!




Spitting!

I completely agree with Dave’s blog entry about spitting. It is very disgusting and although it is not a topic on the module, I do think it is a manifestation of bad behaviour. I really do not understand why footballers have to spit continually throughout a football match, is there some medical reason for this? You do not see tennis players or golfers continually spitting during their games. It is not nice to see someone spitting, and Dave is correct when he says it is the ultimate insult when someone spits at you, especially in your face, which is just completely out of order. There must be thousands of cold and flu germs in spit, not to mention other horrible infections such as mumps etc. This also raises the issue of chewing gum on the pavement, which is equally as nasty. There is nothing worse than stepping in saliva covered gum, especially if you have new shoes on.

Sunday, 1 March 2009

Drink-Driving!


Drinking whilst under the influence of alcohol is not only irresponsible, but it is extremely dangerous. It is not only a danger to the person who is driving the car, but also to the passengers in the vehicle, other innocent road users and pedestrians. Some people may think they are alright to drive after consuming just a small amount of alcohol; however, research shows that your judgment is impaired after any amount of alcohol. http://www.dft.gov.uk/think/focusareas/driving/drinkdriving

The consequences of drinking and driving can be fatal. Footballer Kills Kids Two children lost their lives due to an irresponsible driver, stated by experts to be that ‘drunk’, he was “at best semi-conscious.” Not only has the father of the two boys lost his two sons due to the accident, but he is also paralysed. Nobody can imagine what the family are going through; all we do know is their lives have been destroyed. All due to the irresponsible decision made to drive whilst under the influence of alcohol. These consequences could have been avoided. There is no excuse for drink-driving and there is nothing else to be said on the subject other than it is wrong!

Wednesday, 25 February 2009

Comment on Andrew Kirby's Blog!


Legalising Prostitution.

Andy's Blog


In response to Andy’s views on legalising prostitution, I think it would cause more problems in the long term. I believe if prostitution was legalised it may encourage more women to do it, and more men to participate in it or vice versa. I cannot visualise that by legalising prostitution it would decrease the number of STD’s, or increase the safety of the girls. If anything, I feel it would raise the number of STD’s as more people would take part in it. It may also boost human trafficking, as there would be a higher demand for girls to become prostitutes. Some of the immigrant girls may be unable to speak English, let alone practice safe sex, and they are exploited for the gain of others. If prostitution was legalised, as a society we would be saying it is OK to sell your body for money, when in fact it is simply degrading. Prostitution is not a glamorous job as it is obviously portrayed in the movies which Andy refers to. What example would it set for future generations if we glamorise prostitution? If it was legalised who would be responsible for the ‘safe sex’ policy and the well being of the girls? I am sure the police have better things to do with their time other than look after girls who continually put themselves in danger night after night. I am not denying the existence of prostitution because we all know that it does, I just don’t see the benefits of it being legalised. Do we really want prostitution imposed upon us day after day? Thankfully this is not Amsterdam!

Sunday, 22 February 2009

Comment on Claire Cramphorn's Blog!


Smoking!
Smoking is certainly ‘sexy’ when you have the likes of Brad Pitt and Colin Farrell with a cigarette in their hands. The whole ‘Bad Boy’ image is a huge sex appeal, and the cigarette completes the look. I fully agree with Claire when she says it is only the people with poor hygiene anyway, who have the yellow teeth and smelly clothes from cigarette smoke. I am not so sure your everyday person would look so sexy with a cigarette in their hand, standing in a smoking shelter surrounded by smoke. If they are lucky enough to have the looks of Brad Pitt, maybe! There is definitely something sexy about smoking, and I am sure the tobacco companies are aware of this fact. I am convinced that this is why the NHS has set up the “smoking isn’t sexy” campaign to deter us from these thoughts. Perhaps long-term, once the sex appeal and attraction had worn off, the smoking wouldn’t actually appear so sexy.

Friday, 20 February 2009

Infidelity!


The lies, selfishness and scheming that usually accompany infidelity are upsetting and vindictive. It would be far easier if the partner who was cheating was honest beforehand, and admitted that he/she was unhappy in the relationship. Obviously I know that we do not live in a perfect world and that this does not always happen. I do think however, that sometimes people do not admit they want the relationship to end, as they are not entirely sure if they do or not. Maybe they just want to see if the grass is greener on the other side, before finalising a life changing decision. In some cases people just want to have their cake and eat it, or in other words, have the best of both worlds. Either way infidelity is wrong!

In some circumstances infidelity may not be so bad. For example, if you are 16 or 17 and your partner kisses someone else, that is not really that bad. Yes, it would still cause hurt and unhappiness in the same way, but the relationship would probably not be a serious one at such a young age, and I doubt there would be any serious commitments to take into account. On the other hand, if you have been married for many years and have a mortgage, house and children, the damage caused by infidelity would be more severe. I consider marriage to be a serious commitment and there are many more important issues to contemplate, such as the children, and the upset it would cause them. I don’t think infidelity is purely about sex, although I am sure that it plays a large part in it. In some circumstances people just get bored and want to experience the excitement of new things. It is human nature! I believe just as many women commit adultery as men do, women probably just don’t boast about it as much as men and they are more likely to be better liars.

I found it interesting to read that infidelity may be in some people’s genetic makeup. I am not sure what to make of this; can someone really be programmed to be unfaithful? Apparently research shows that it is possible. I would be more inclined to think that external social factors and family backgrounds would contribute more to infidelity. If children are brought up in an environment where adultery is committed, or portrayed as normal, they may be more likely to be unfaithful in a relationship. Perhaps that works in the opposite way too; children who have had personal experience of the pain and grief infidelity causes it may encourage them not to want to put their own family through that. Whether infidelity is in the genes or not, I imagine some have tried to use that as an excuse to escape the consequences.

Tuesday, 17 February 2009

Smoking! Is it really such a drag?


What is all the fuss about? Isn't it enough that smoking has been completely banned in all public places? Apparently not, you must be in the designated smoking areas outside too! I am a non-smoker, but I do believe it is every person's human right to decide if they wish to smoke or not. We all know the health risks as a result of smoking, and consequently we make our own choices of whether or not to do so. I can understand why smoking has been banned, because of the rights of non-smokers and the health effects of passive smoking. Why are people still going on about it? In my opinion smoking is no worse than any other addiction such as drinking alcohol, and it is certainly not as bad a taking drugs. We do not however, see as much publicity about these subjects as we do about smoking. Drug and alcohol related illnesses must cost the NHS just as much as smoking related illnesses, so why just the huge campaign about smoking? In today's society it has been drummed into us that smoking is bad, and that we should not do it.


I really do not see the problem if people wish to smoke outside in the open, I personally cannot see any harm caused to other people. Some may argue that the smoke still affects them, even though the smoke is dispersing into the air. From the articles that I have researched below, it is apparent that some people dislike smoking outside of hospitals. Why is this? If people wish to smoke why shouldn't they? Why is smoking outside of hospitals any different to any other public place? I agree that it is not a good advertisement for the NHS in general, especially if the staff were smoking and were wearing their uniforms. That would just be unhygienic anyway, and I am sure that would not be allowed. What is the problem with patients and relatives smoking outside? They are only human after all. It is entirely their choice if they wish to smoke outside which is where they must be according to the law. Is it really that bad? I am sure there is much worse happening in the world.

Sunday, 15 February 2009

Shoplifting!


Is shoplifting different to any other kind of theft and why do people do it?


The answer to the above question in my opinion is no! Shoplifting is still theft no matter what. Some people might say that shoplifting depends on the circumstances of the person who carries out the offence. For example: Is it more acceptable for a single mother of four to shoplift, opposed to a teenager who is just doing it for a laugh? Some might disagree with me on this, however, I think the answer is no. I can understand the reasoning behind the single mother of four shoplifting. I would presume it would be to survive and simply be to feed and support her family, although I still think it is morally wrong. I suppose desperate times call for desperate measures. When we say the word shoplifting, why do we always associate it with teenagers? Well I do anyway!

Teenagers are probably more likely to shoplift than any other age group. Why is this? Maybe it is due to group peer pressure, or could it simply be just for the sheer fun of it? Some teens may feel they need to shoplift to pay for a drug habit. I also think shoplifting may give some people an element of control, it could be a form of addiction for others. Teenagers might see shoplifting as being cool; I personally have never stolen anything and honestly I couldn't be bothered to shoplift. It would be too much like hard work if you were to get caught and have to make a great escape. I would not want to end up in prison either, it is not my kind of hotel! Maybe some people just love the thrill and the idea of getting caught.
Theft is the same whether you steal a chocolate bar or a car. Whatever the circumstances shoplifting is still theft!

Thursday, 12 February 2009

Who Loves Being Bad?

I suggest a field trip to a prison to see who loves to be bad and the consequences that are involved.