Queen Latifah once said, "I made decisions that I regret, and I took them as learning experiences... I'm human, not perfect, like everybody else." I admire her words, especially the last part because she is absolutely right, we are all human. But I'm starting to learn that everybody else expects perfection. I see this all the time. For instance, maybe a superior figure expects a flawless proposal by eight am the next morning, but they could not finish grading abstracts the night before. It is the complete definition of irony: expecting more from others but being unable to do what was expected of you.
There is this horrible, taunting thing that we call deadlines. Some people thrive because of them, but not me. I understand that deadlines are necessary, but so is peace of mind. As humans, and I know I am not just speaking for myself, we get wrapped up in the mess of all things life. It is difficult to try and navigate a life that is full of dealings because they never go away!
Lately, I have found that I am trying to juggle two main things: work and sleep. Each night, one of them has to be sacrificed and I found that I sacrifice sleep often. Why? Deadlines. I have started to imagine a life without them, and it is not so bad. Sure, there is a bit of confusion, a lack of motivation, and a tendency to get off track, but is that such a bad thing? Imagine if this world did not work on deadlines. Just try it. Not so bad, right? Maybe that life has more sleep, less stress, and more smiles!
I made a decision that now, as I am writing this, cannot figure out whether or not is a bad one. I turned in an assignment late at the mercy of other deadlines I had to meet. Maybe it was not such a bad idea because that night I met all the other deadlines, but not this one. I felt worried for the consequences and a bit panicked. However, as much as life is about decisions and deadlines, it is also about the decisions you make to reach a deadline.
Tuesday, December 30, 2014
Monday, December 1, 2014
Cut-throat Prestigious Preschools In London
We all understand the importance of early childhood education. It is the root to profound intelligence. The application of early childhood education discerns from a general student to an advanced student. It is the prerequisite that no one mentions, but everyone knows is key. However, today, affluent parents take this to a whole other level.
Among other things, London is know for its world renown preschools. Excuse me, nursery schools. In London's education system, there are two types of schools. There are state schools, which we know as public schools, and there are independent schools, which we call private schools. Wealthy parents from around the world settle in London for a shot at entering one of the independent schools. Oh, you are not yet convinced that these nursery schools are highly vicious and competitive?
Parents in London wanting to register their children in independent nursery schools are urged to turn in the application as soon as the child is born. In other words, these parents apply for a slot at least three years ahead of time. In all rationality, as the parents register for their child's birth, they should also drop off an application on their way from the hospital. Procrastinating parents who wait until their child is two years old are immediately rejected as they are told it is too late.
The most interesting thing about the London nursery school application is that there is no application!
When your child is born, you call multiple nursery schools and plead for a slot in the far future. The slots are not cheap either, often rounding off at $23,000 a year! So why do wealthy parents pay so much for nursery school? These prestigious schools are feeder schools. If the child goes to an affluent nursery school, they will move on to distinguished primary and secondary schools and then maybe, just maybe, Oxford.
Among other things, London is know for its world renown preschools. Excuse me, nursery schools. In London's education system, there are two types of schools. There are state schools, which we know as public schools, and there are independent schools, which we call private schools. Wealthy parents from around the world settle in London for a shot at entering one of the independent schools. Oh, you are not yet convinced that these nursery schools are highly vicious and competitive?
Parents in London wanting to register their children in independent nursery schools are urged to turn in the application as soon as the child is born. In other words, these parents apply for a slot at least three years ahead of time. In all rationality, as the parents register for their child's birth, they should also drop off an application on their way from the hospital. Procrastinating parents who wait until their child is two years old are immediately rejected as they are told it is too late.
The most interesting thing about the London nursery school application is that there is no application!
When your child is born, you call multiple nursery schools and plead for a slot in the far future. The slots are not cheap either, often rounding off at $23,000 a year! So why do wealthy parents pay so much for nursery school? These prestigious schools are feeder schools. If the child goes to an affluent nursery school, they will move on to distinguished primary and secondary schools and then maybe, just maybe, Oxford.
Sunday, November 2, 2014
Afghan Parliament Claims That the EVAW is Against Islamic Beliefs
The Afghan Parliament claims that a legislation
geared toward empowering women is against Sharia Law. The Elimination of
Violence Against Women law (EVAW), according to Aljazeera America, was
"implemented by presidential decree in 2009, [and] bans 22
different harmful practices against women and girls – including
rape, physical violence, child marriage, forced marriage and the denial of
rights to education or work."
This bill bans child marriage and
forced marriage, two aspects that clash immensely with Sharia Law. In accordance
with Sharia Law, women in Afghanistan are married at very young ages, often
times before they receive their menstrual cycle. Also, women are given to older
men as wives, against their will. These acts are not only accepted, they are
expected and therefore customary.
The EVAW law encourages women
to come forth with their cases of domestic violence. However, the fear of being disowned and consequences hinders the effect of the bill. Women who fight
against Sharia Law by fighting for their own rights are punished. "Women
and girls who run away from home to flee abuse are sometimes considered to have
attempted 'zina', an Arabic term for premarital sex, which violates religious
law." There is obviously no way to win for these women. If they stay and
are beaten, raped and mistreated, they feel dehumanized, shamed and
disrespected. If they flee from these troubles, they are considered
criminals.
For women in Afghanistan, there
is always war and peace. An internal war with the self. The battle against insubordination,
depression, loneliness, and fear. There is an external
war against governmental law, however this is a silent war,
crippled by fear of oppression and torture. Furthermore, there is
peace. The hope that one day Afghan women will be seen as humans,
equal to their male counterparts and capable of superiority and
self-sovereignty.
Sources:
- Algazeera America; December 8,2013; Marsia Taylor http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2013/12/8/afghan-law-barringviolenceagainstwomenstallsunsays.html
- Raw Story; May 18, 2013;http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/05/debate-on-bill-to-protect-afghan-women-from-violence-halted-after-complaints-it-is-against-islamic-teaching/?utm_source=feedly
- Care2; May 23,2013; Mindy Townsend; http://www.care2.com/causes/afghan-parliament-its-against-sharia-law-to-outlaw-beating-women.html
Wednesday, October 15, 2014
Students From "Ebola Countries" Rejected from College
We are all to familiar with the current global crisis of Ebola. The virus has made a fast appearance in sporadic countries, including the United States. We are often told to avoid contamination as best as possible by frequently washing our hands, avoiding sick people and minimizing international travel. These precautions are standard and necessary however, are we, as a people, beginning to take things too far? In a recent Yahoo! article (attached below), Nigerian students were rejected from universities because they are from an "Ebola country".
After reading the article, I am honestly in disbelief that a college would overtly claim that they rejected the student by claiming, "Navarro College is not accepting international students from countries with confirmed Ebola cases." Much like all situations, there are two sides to this story.
On one hand, one may argue that this is complete discrimination. A student was not accepted into a college because of Ebola. Not that the student has Ebola, but rather came from a country that did. One must consider that there was a case of Ebola in the United States in Texas. Yet that does not mean the college stopped accepting American students. The student was not even rejected off of grades, standardized test scores, extra curricular activities or "pizzaz". A college destroyed the future of a young and aspiring student because they came from a country with an Ebola outbreak.
On the other hand, this act may also be seen as cautious and judicious. The college wants to prevent further outbreak of the virus, enabling a safe environment for the students. Also, by rejecting the students, the college helps to contain the disease, therefore, declining the contagion process.
When questioned about the blunt and Draconian rejection letter issued by Navarro College, the Vice President of Access and Accountability, Dewayne Gragg tried to divert from the topic by claiming that the letter was a misunderstanding. However, there is little to misinterpret about rejecting students from, "... Countries with confirmed Ebola cases." Moreover, as a unit, we must inquire how just it is to reject students from college because of a disease they do not have.
URL to article: http://finance.yahoo.com/news/texas-college-bans-students-ebola-215612192.html
After reading the article, I am honestly in disbelief that a college would overtly claim that they rejected the student by claiming, "Navarro College is not accepting international students from countries with confirmed Ebola cases." Much like all situations, there are two sides to this story.
On one hand, one may argue that this is complete discrimination. A student was not accepted into a college because of Ebola. Not that the student has Ebola, but rather came from a country that did. One must consider that there was a case of Ebola in the United States in Texas. Yet that does not mean the college stopped accepting American students. The student was not even rejected off of grades, standardized test scores, extra curricular activities or "pizzaz". A college destroyed the future of a young and aspiring student because they came from a country with an Ebola outbreak.
On the other hand, this act may also be seen as cautious and judicious. The college wants to prevent further outbreak of the virus, enabling a safe environment for the students. Also, by rejecting the students, the college helps to contain the disease, therefore, declining the contagion process.
When questioned about the blunt and Draconian rejection letter issued by Navarro College, the Vice President of Access and Accountability, Dewayne Gragg tried to divert from the topic by claiming that the letter was a misunderstanding. However, there is little to misinterpret about rejecting students from, "... Countries with confirmed Ebola cases." Moreover, as a unit, we must inquire how just it is to reject students from college because of a disease they do not have.
URL to article: http://finance.yahoo.com/news/texas-college-bans-students-ebola-215612192.html
Saturday, September 27, 2014
Unconscious Bias in the Google Workplace
Readers,
In regard to the community post about unconscious bias in the Goggle workplace, the article began with stating, "Google, like many tech companies, is a man's world". Does this mean women are just living in it? As a female, I would not consider myself a feminist, however I am borderline. Nonetheless, I do believe in the social, political, and economical equality of the sexes. Honestly, is there a problem with having a desire for an egalitarian society?
The women who work at Google work there because they are exceptionally intelligent and brilliant at what they do. Their gender is irrelevant. They produce the same quality work that any male can. It seems to me that the workers at Google are just immature and intolerant. I am yet to hear of any scientific theory, let alone fact, about the disparity between male and female brain capacity and intellectual ability. As far as I'm concerned, a brain is a brain regardless of the person it belongs to.
If I were working for Google, I would not consider that a safe environment. I would not be able to conform to being constantly demeaned just because of my physical attributes. Moreover, Google claims that they preform diversity training workshops to help better the workplace. Yet and still, attending a seminar every blue moon cannot teach tolerance. Respect is a value and a virtue that employers at Google do not seem to attain.
Moreover, this leads me to question how the female workers feel. Do they have any sentiment toward their male counterparts? If there were a time to complain, would this be it? Although in all rationality, if the women conveyed their thoughts, the issue would be of a greater magnitude. It is probably smarter to just contain any position on the subject and, like the bright women they are, do the job they were paid to do.
In regard to the community post about unconscious bias in the Goggle workplace, the article began with stating, "Google, like many tech companies, is a man's world". Does this mean women are just living in it? As a female, I would not consider myself a feminist, however I am borderline. Nonetheless, I do believe in the social, political, and economical equality of the sexes. Honestly, is there a problem with having a desire for an egalitarian society?
The women who work at Google work there because they are exceptionally intelligent and brilliant at what they do. Their gender is irrelevant. They produce the same quality work that any male can. It seems to me that the workers at Google are just immature and intolerant. I am yet to hear of any scientific theory, let alone fact, about the disparity between male and female brain capacity and intellectual ability. As far as I'm concerned, a brain is a brain regardless of the person it belongs to.
If I were working for Google, I would not consider that a safe environment. I would not be able to conform to being constantly demeaned just because of my physical attributes. Moreover, Google claims that they preform diversity training workshops to help better the workplace. Yet and still, attending a seminar every blue moon cannot teach tolerance. Respect is a value and a virtue that employers at Google do not seem to attain.
Moreover, this leads me to question how the female workers feel. Do they have any sentiment toward their male counterparts? If there were a time to complain, would this be it? Although in all rationality, if the women conveyed their thoughts, the issue would be of a greater magnitude. It is probably smarter to just contain any position on the subject and, like the bright women they are, do the job they were paid to do.
Warm Regards,
Grace
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)