Abortion

I'm Pro-choice - to an extent. If a woman wishes to terminate her baby then it is up to her, but at the same time I feel that if the woman is in a relationship then it is a joint decision and there should be two signatures on the consent form. The man has just as much of a right to know that his baby is being terminated.

Obviously, each case is individual - in rape circumstances then it is simply up to the woman, obviously - but to a a 17 year old who is about to go in for her 25th abortion because she can't be bothered to get up and go to get condoms... surely something else should be worked - forced sterilisation maybe?

I had a look around and managed to find some statistics for abortion in 2001 - turns out that there was 12 abortions for people under the age of 15!

Under the age of 15?!! And that was just in the UK, in the rest of the world there was another 22. Those statistics can be found here

Apparently teenage pregnancy rates got so high in Swindon, that they began to give free abortions to teenagers if they had a Swindon post code...

"The official statistics show that in 2004, 12,866 women from the South West had an abortion.bpas performed 92% of the abortions (more than 560) for women from Swindon and is the main abortion provider in the area."
- Click here for the article

...MAIN ABORTION PROVIDER?!?

Surely this is a world gone mad when companies are cashing on women doing this, Im all for the women making a choice for themselves and being able to carry the decision out but I find it slightly horrifying when there are companies competing for the right to do so.

Why drink so much?

Ok, so binge drining in Britain is quite a problem, but why is it? Why do we as Britons feel the need to drink to excess so much? Even now, Britain is still the number one country in Europe for Binge drinking, even through the recession are still drinking more than every other European country, why?

"in England in 2005, 73 per cent of men and 58 per cent of women reported drinking an alcoholic drink on at least one day in the week prior to interview. Thirteen per cent of men and 8 per cent of women reported drinking on every day in the previous week" - NHS site

So, 75% once a week, and 13% everyday. Thats high, why do we have to drink every day? Is it a social thing? is it because we go out and we can't simply g out and not get drunk, do we instantly have to have an alcoholic drink the minute we walk through a door with a license?

I think it's because when people go out, especially the younger people, we go out specifically to get drunk - maybe not as often as the older generation, we may only go out once or twice a week but you can guaranteee that we will drink to excess, to the point where we can't actually drink anymore and are phycially removed from the premises sometimes.

But... WHY?!

Why do we feel the need to go out and get hammered, why do we go out and feel the need to cause trouble? I've seen people get in some absolutely terrible states, but why get that bad? Why not stop a drink before?

Now, the statistics also show that the older generation drink more frequently than the younger generation, but not to as bad a state - so, the older men might go the pub every single day, but they might only have one or two pints, where as the younger will go out once or twice a week and drink anything up to three times there weekly recommended allowance of units in one night.

"older people were more likely to drink regularly 28 per cent of men and 18 per cent of women aged 45-64 drank on five or more days in the week prior to interview compared to 10 per cent of men and 5 per cent of women aged 16-24. Younger people were more likely to drink heavily, with 42 per cent of men and 36 per cent of women aged 16-24 drinking above the daily recommendations, compared to 16 per cent of men and 4 per cent of women aged 65 and over" - NHS site

Is it because of the promotional activites of certain night clubs? - Having one night a week where it's cheap entry for stuents followed by free drinks all night? Is it because the younger people are full of pride and wanna see how much they can do and not be the first one to appear to fade? Is it a mix of all these things.

I think most likely ll the things mixed together is what is going to affect the younger culture the most, image, nights given, price drops for certain nights, things like that. The clubs may be making a bomb - but our livers are going. Why don't we care about the medical connotations of alcohol? Why don't we care about needing a new liver when we grow old, because it will happen, the same as taking cocaine will rot your nose and smoking will cause lung cancer, why is it we simply ignore the fact with alcohol?

Oooooh, the reason we don't hear about the medical connotations of alcohol so much would most likely be because of the amount of money the government make off of it with income tax and so on. Or am i WAY off?

Broadcasting suicide??

Ok, so surely the will or intent to kill oneself is up to the said person and noone else. The usual want or need to terminate your own life would come from a fit of depression, or a fit of slight insanity, whichever - there would usually be some underlying cause for this. So, why do A) people promote this possible mental condition, and B) broadcasty it over the internet.

I found two posts which angered me about said subject:

One: Teen broadcast suicide over internet
Two: How to kill yourself like a man



In the first link, it shows you a post in the New York Post about a guy in Miami who killed himself over the internet on a livewebcam stream, this is the part that got me: "while some users egged him on". Why would anyone do that? Sure, friends joke with each other, but for people to actually egg someone on in killing themselves is just WRONG! - But, who's to blame? This raises two points for me: a) who's to blame for the suicide? and b) should anything happen to the people that egged him on ?

Since suicide is (surprisingle and rather wierdly) a criminal offence should the people egging him on be held nd prosecuted for aiding a criminal?

- The second post is just stupid, and yes most likely a comedy thing - but people will take this seriously if given the right mental conditions and so should not be allowed on the internet, now I'm not saying that people should be constantly monitored as to what they put up on the net in this age of "freedom of speech" but surely something should be down to take down the offending page - I mean offering "fun" ways to kill yourself? Why would someone put that up? Maybe THEY have the underlying mental condition.

Comment on Laura's blog - Abortion Advertisements

Laura's blog

Ok, so to the actual point about abortion being advertised on TV, probably not the best idea - I mean, surely the adverts would be saying how easy it is, and how it protects the young females life for so many years because they won't be laden witht he child that she had just created.

To be honest, with the whole abortion issue itself, Im prettymuch Pro-Choice, if a woman wishes to do that, she wishes to do that, but I'm under the complete and utter guise that a guy who helped create said foetus should also be alerted to the decision of the woman, no matter what the decision is and who it hurts in the long run.

Laura stated a case about a guy being allergic to Condomns. know someone who is allergic to latex yes, and there are latex free condoms available from your local GUM clinic. I, myself, can't stand using them - but that said I've never forced a girl to have sex with me without using them, it's her problem too if she agrees or consents to having sex with the male while not using a condom.

Yes Laura, abortion is not an alternative to condoms, but the injection and the pill possibly are.

What kind of a role-model is Barbie really?

The first thing I want to bring your attention to is this: Tramp stamp Barbie, now this is a youtube video of a guy reviewing one of Barbies more... intriguing little doll lines. Tramp stamp Barbie?! Come on. Yes, it's real, yes girls buy this - and as we all know (apparently) all girls wanna be just like the dolls that they buy from Woolworths, or from other stores that haven't actually closed down.

I'm not the first person to think about Barbie in this way, there's numerous articles over that thing we call the inter web about Barbie being a little whore - but there also ones of a contradictory note - one of the more interesting finds was this: Barbie as a role model.

Now, here the author states that Barbie is not to blame for anorexia, bullemia, social anxiety and eating disorders, peer pressure and other thoughts about a child needing to look perfect in every way.

...Personally, I don't know. I mean, surely things such as "Tramp stamp Barbie" should not be around, but that would be more of a morla high ground - exposing children to something that shouldn't really be talked about or thought about until after a certain age. So what do we do? Censor Barbie? Say "you can't have Tramp Stamp Barbie until you are at least 16 years of age or sexually active"? Hm, I can't see that happening. And then there's the fiasco of a child saying "but mum, I have teenage pregnancy barbie, why can't I have tramp stamp barbie". - All sorts of questions will then arise.

Maybe Barbie is to blame for children wanting to look good, I mean, at the end of the day she is the stereotypical image of a sexually attractive girl - but, thats nothing to do wit the makers of the doll wanting to change social outlooks on women, it's more the simple fact that people prefer to buy aesthetically pleasing figurines - would you realy buy a barbie doll if it looked like someone who would be considered too ugly to pass for the ugly stepsisters in cinderella? - No, you'll be much morelikely to buy the beautiful Cinderella herself.

So, I'm not too sure about this one. Maybe certain lines of the barbie products are wrong, but all in all I can't see that Barbie is solely responsible for girls wanting to look pretty - thats just natural, guys like attractive women.

Comment on Zoe's comment on Claire's blog

Ok, I don't know if I'm allowed to do this, but I'm doing it anyway.

- The whole Jade Goody fiasco is terrible, a woman gets diagnosed with cancer, she's given a prognosis, the prognosis rings true and she leaves her family, friends and kids behind. Terrible situation, don't get me wrong - it truly is awful. Probably one of the worst things that you can imagine, as a parent, leaving your kids behind, and as a kid watching your parents go.

Guess what? - - She isn't the first woman in the world to get that type of cancer, she isn't the first woman in the world to die of an early age and she isn't the going to be the last. Is it really right that the whole nation should apparently mourn so much over the fact that a "celebrity" contracted cervical cancer? What about the other hundreds of people affected by it?

• "In 2005, 2,803 women in the UK were diagnosed with cervical cancer.
• Cervical cancer caused 941 deaths in the UK in 2007." - taken from Cancer Research UK

So, more to the point, why is Jade so different to the other 941 people that dies in 2007, or the other 2,800 plus people that were diagnosed witht he same illness in 2005 ? Because she has money, because so many people recognise her face? How many other mums had been diagnosed with this illness and suffered in silence with everyone else not knowing or caring how they died.

Yes, she's a celebrity and yes she's an idol for some... strange people out there i suppose and yes she said she's doing the reality shows for her kids to be able to go to college and whatever else. But there are people out there that didn't get that chance, there are people that lost their mothers and had no other parents, had to go into foster homes ETC. Why is it SO different and SO much more tragic to have stuff like this happen to a celebrity?

Comment on Claire's blog - Drugs

Claire's post

First and foremost, you said "the idiots that abuse them" - You know, some people take dugs because they have a problem, an they don't get prosecuted as such, they get help like they need. Other people take drugs because they feel as though they need to, they feel that without them there life is simply not worth living and it helps them to carry on.

I have known people who take Marijuana to such extent that when they have not had a smoke, or when they are not "stoned" they actually seem normal, it is when they have not had any of the said drug that they seem different. Strange concept and notion I know.

I think that people who take drugs... well, it's up to them, no point in us getting worried about it, so long as it doesn't bother anyone. - Ok, maybe when its getting to the point that the person is so hopelessly addicted that they would go out and mug old ladies in order to come up with the money for another gram of cocaine, or another needle then it's probably getting a bit much...

Then there is the question which lingers... why? - why do people take drugs? why do people try them? why do people continue to do them after years of abuse and damage, and knowing that on average for every gram of street-sold cocaine there is at least 60% of unknown subtances in it that it has been cut with. Why would people put themselves through that?

... Addicted? Possibly. In the same way that people become addcited to caffeine, alcohol, and nicotine. Now, nicotine is actually the single most addictive drug used on the streets? Is smoking that bad? Yes. But it's legal.

"Based on the level of dependence, the most common measure for determining the addictiveness of a drug, the substances ranked as follows, from most to least addictive:

1. Nicotine
2. Heroin
3. Cocaine
4. Alcohol
5. Caffeine
6. Marijuana"

- Taken from here.

Hm... So, the first, fourth and fifth most addictive drugs that we have are currently on sale n the UK so long as you are over 18. - Why not go the whole shabang?