Cameron's Kitchen Table #2

*A villa in the South of France*

David is collapsed on a deckchair, his nose and cheeks slowly roasting in the sun.

He wakes slowly and wipes away the string of saliva dribbling out of his mouth.

David: Oh Ow!  Oh damn, damn, damn! 

Samantha: what have you done? You've gone bright red!

David: I've got sunburn! Bloody European weather. 

Samantha: Awww-

David: Bloody Europeans full stop.

Samantha: that's a little extreme isn't it darling?

David: Bloody vile tea. Bloody hot sun. Bloody continental breakfasts. 

Samantha: aren't you enjoying yourself dearest?

David: I know! I'll bloody well cut off all communication with them. That's it! I'm taking lovely, cold, conservative Britain out of the EU. Bloody well serves them right too! they'll miss us, they will!

Samantha: don't you mean we'll miss them?

David: No. I mean what do they ever do for us? eh?

Samantha: oh well i don't know... umm... We get those EHIC thingies and... and well we get to holiday here every now and again! Oh and I think it...  it means we're part of the world's largest economic zone! And easy trading... i guess that's a plus.  

David: That's true. BUT I've got to punish them some how. I know! I'm going to threaten to leave the EU. That'll teach them to mess with the Camerons. They can take all of their European Union benefits and .... and... not give them to us! Yeah. Ha. Humph. 

Tip: let's not vote the conservatives in again so we actually have to consider leaving the EU. Please. Thanks. Good.

if you missed camerzzz kitchen table take 1 you can find it here- http://thenobodyguide.blogspot.co.uk/2013/01/camerons-kitchen-table-1.html

16 reasons to let 16 year olds vote

As you've probably got from the title i thought i'd tell you a little bit about why giving the vote to 16 year olds in the UK is a good idea.... So here we go...

1: 16 year olds have to take part in compulsory citizenship lessons so they aren't completely oblivious to politics

2: At 16 the government clearly thinks you are reasonably responsible as you're allowed to leave home, get married, have sex, join the armed forces, own premium bonds and work full time. methinks that's quite a bit of responsibility why not add voting to the pile?

3: You can actively take part in politics at any age, especially in your teens. For example you can join the Labour party at 14. Why not let people vote for the parties they are members of?

4: 16 year olds can vote in Austria, Brazil and Argentina amongst others.

5: to continue from point 2- you can also claim benefits, you have to pay more for travel and you have to pay for your prescriptions. Therefore why can't 16 year olds be involved in what happens to these expenses? Why can't they help choose whether travel costs go up, the NHS gets privatised or benefits get cut? Why can't they help vote for the party that will help them to survive?

6: Prisoners can't vote- do we compare 16 year olds to prisoners?

7: It would help prevent governments ignoring the needs and wants of their young people. Would Gove have been able to damage the education system so much if 16 year olds had the vote?

8: Governments make 16 year olds into children when in fact they have finished their school education and are about to become members of the community who no longer rely on their parents for very much including their parents choosing which government represents them.

9: Not giving 16 year olds the vote makes the rest of the public assume that 16 year olds are not mature, responsible or well-informed which encourages stereotyping and prejudice- that's not right.

10: Some working 16 year olds pay tax. The government relies on their input in the same way that it relies on 18 year olds- maybe it should start listening to them.

11: Arguably 18 year olds are less enthused about politics because they have already left education and have not had to contribute and participate in citizenship lessons. Some 16 year olds have finished their citizenship courses and according to the education system know all they need to know about politics- why let that knowledge stagnate? Lowering the voting age could ensure that young people continue to be informed about politics for a longer amount of time.

12: If we don't listen to 16 year olds in a controlled and well structured way, they might try to voice their opinions in an uncontrolled and unregulated way- do we need more riots because we won't respect our young people's intelligence?

13: The reason we are even considering lowering the age of voting is evidence that we understand that 16 year olds play an important role in politics nowadays.

14: We often assume that the people we do let vote fulfil all of the criteria that we are using to justify not letting 16 year olds vote. Sadly not all middle aged people are mature, responsible or well-informed.

15: many people say that 16 year olds have less "stake" in the country. This isn't true however- as young people are likely to spend the most time in the country (because they have the rest of their lives to live) after it's been changed by a government they couldn't choose, it seems a little unfair to suggest that they are lesser citizens who aren't going to be as affected by the bad choices of parliament.

16: We live in a democracy. 16 year olds are just as important as 18 year olds (and everyone else for that matter) and therefore should have equal say in what happens in their country. It's not fair to penalise them for their age when there are many reasons (some of which are stated above) that say they should definitely be given the vote. It just makes sense.

And there you have it. Let us vote. I'm a young person and I'd like to vote. In fact I'd love to vote and I think I am entitled to do so. I'd also love to see a bit of positive change politically in our country- we've been rather deprived of good decisions methinks.

TIP: Help 16 year olds get the vote. Support the campaign. Do some research. Help us out. Let us vote.

this is one of my fave blogs: http://politicsforteenagers.blogspot.co.uk/?m=1

Thinspiration: what's not to hate?

as i pour half a teaspoon of soya milk onto my bland, greyish muesli and peer through my glass of warm water to the article behind that dictates to me the top 10 ways to get my "bikini body" and tells me that size 8 is the new size 80, i find myself wondering if it's all just a load of thinspiration rubbish. What is a bikini body? It's certainly not an emaciated size 0, teeny weeny, all ribs and defined organs corpse lying on a beach swamped by even the smallest bikini they sell in TOPSHOP.

And yet we still find ourselves being taught that thin is better, thin is hotter, thin is... well.. thinner. We are taught to aspire to be like the cat walk models who only eat on Sundays and the women modelling lingerie on posters and TV who have the perfect figure and so decide to shout it out by modelling what is basically a scrap of badly diamanted fabric. We are inspired to lose weight any way we can by magazines that don't actually know what we look like and how thin we are.

Anorexia is an ever growing problem in the UK and we ought to be inspiring girls to avoid developing eating disorders not telling them that it's the only way they are ever going to achieve the supermodel body they've always wanted!

So I'm saying no to 'bikini body' promoting magazines. I'm saying no to size 0 models telling us that it's so lovely being skeletal. I'm saying no to thinspiration, no to eating disorders and no to my soya milk and muesli- give me nutella on toast any day!!

Tip: Feel inspired not to be thinspired. You are great the way you are.

Professional. Affordable. Impossible.

 If you've read my earlier post on Blonde jokes (http://thenobodyguide.blogspot.co.uk/2013/01/im-female.html) then you will know that i'm blonde. But I'm not an all hair and no brain blonde. In fact I struggle to maintain any sort of acceptable "hair-do" but manage to sustain with impressive ease any number of "hair-don'ts".

I thought i'd just run a few hair fashions past you:

My hair is long, blonde and completely untameable but apparently that doesn't matter nowadays: cue the matted sheep dog style-

I have one major problem with these various takes on the "i lost my hair brush" look which is that surely spending 3 hours arranging, salt spraying, back combing and curling your hair to achieve a "just rolled of bed" appearance is a bit... well... a bit of a waste of time?

The other style i could attempt is tresemme chic- 

This is also known as impossibly glossy hair arranged into flat panes of hair perfectly surrounding your face and is designed for a studio, NOT for walking down a very busy London road on a windy day.

The next style is weirdly structural/ GaGa-esque.

I like to call it Hair-chitecture:

 Now whatever this style aims to do it isn't worth it. It usually goes one of two ways- the wig (in which your hair looks separate from your body and therefore wig-like) or the unfortunate unicorn (in which your hair represents a damaged unicorn horn).

The final look is... well it is what it is I suppose...

RAINBOW.

 Sometimes, i'll admit, this looks awesome. Sometimes, however, it looks like you are either a terrible decision maker, colour blind or completely blind or like you have just been involved in a serious incident involving a paint shop and some dynamite.


So there you have it- 4 ways to, or not to, style your hair. If i had to choose one i would probably join the matted sheep dogs- at least you could disguise it as being the result of a genuine loss of a hair brush or lack of time in the morning.... couldn't you?

A little Tip: wear your hair however you like and if you discover a way of styling your hair that actually works and is 100% risk free i would LOVE to hear from you.

Cameron's Kitchen Table #1

Let's set the scene...

*The Cameron Family Home*

A comfortable, cream, "shabby chic" country kitchen with a view of a vast, green garden peppered with chairs, geraniums and evidence of Cameron spawn's play time... Samantha Cameron lounges on an arm chair flicking through a 'thinspiration' magazine and considers trying the fasting diet. David Cameron reads the economist and the financial times and chortles with relish at the idea of a 'triple dip recession'. 

David: Triple dip? recession? damn those impoverished people with their needs and rights. 

Samantha: I'm afraid you rather rely on those serfs and beggars for your votes... How are you going to sort it out?!

David: calm down dear! I suppose i'll have to cut something.... What about the NHS? Do we need that?

Samantha: Well we don't. We go private anyway...

David: and quite right too! I'd never be seen dead, or alive for that matter, in one of those peasant institutions! Right- let's cut that then. Which hospital first? 

Samantha: well a few have fallen already...

David: That's true... Think of a letter.

Samantha: L?

David: L... L... L... Lewisham! Lewisham A&E is absolutely full to bursting with snotty, dirty, poor people. urgh. Consider it gone.

Samantha: very good dear.

David: Now what about education..... let me just give Michael a call.....

And thus i have discovered how conservative policy is developed! On a less sarcastic note: The privatisation and destruction of the NHS is unforgivable. If there is one thing that England is allowed to proud of it's that we provide everyone, no matter how rich or poor they are, with access to free healthcare.

TIP: fight for the NHS and the education system and for our rights as people of the UK. Fight for what shouldn't have to fight for. We can't afford not to. 

The Yummy Mummy Problem

I'm a feminist. And no, that doesn't mean i shave my head but not any other part of my body.

What it means is that i actively oppose sexist stereotyping and oppression of women and believe that women should be allowed to be and do whatever they want and not be made to feel like they have to fulfil society's female ideals. That doesn't mean that i don't think women should be allowed to be housewives. It just means that i don't think any woman should be forced to be a housewife if she has other ambitions.

What I am amazed by is that there are many girls my age who are unaware that they do, in fact, somewhat force other women to be housewives. For example when i say the words "no. i don't want more than 2 children and i certainly don't want to stay at home and look after them for all eternity", a group of girls turn their heads slowly, look me up and down and say "WHAT?! you mean to tell me that you don't want 18 snotty, dribbling toddlers to climb out of your womb and then hang around your shoulders and chain you to the kitchen sink for the rest of your life whilst being a perpetual drain on your pocket?! You mean to tell me that you would rather work than commit yourself to a life of cooking, cleaning and catalogue browsing?!" I thought we, as a society, were past that. I thought we had got over women not wanting to wear a frilly apron and dedicate their lives to making cheese sandwiches for packed lunch boxes. I thought we had moved on. But clearly we haven't.

Personally they don't make me want to rethink my future. I stand by my choice: Never shall i, while wearing a greige pashmina and sitting in an organic cafe with around 12 million bangles clinking on my wrist, a husband sitting in an office somewhere in canary wharf and a toddler called Jasper drinking a babychino, utter the words: "Aren't you so glad that you get to be with your little darlings all day every day? I'm so glad I found my Hubby so fast!" Never.

But i know not everyone is so determined not to be converted. Yes i will never join the "PTA" or be involved in "mummy and baby low fat coffee mornings" but that doesn't mean i won't be a good parent- and it doesn't mean that you won't be either. It doesn't matter. If you choose to stay at home and become part of the yummy mummy army then that is your choice, but please don't impose it on someone else! Think of it this way- the queue in that organic cafe will be a lot shorter without all us hardened careers women trying to get our hands on your tall, skinny, blonde cappuccino with no chocolate.

So another TIP: don't return to the dark ages of women's rights when we barely got a say in who ran the country let alone whether we worked or not. let us be what we want. After all why do you care if i go out to work instead of staying at home?

By Gove, he hasn't got it!

Michael, Michael, Michael... tut, tut. 
You've really done it this time. 

Let's just recap what Gove has done so far for our education system that we love... *tumble weed roles past* 
oh dear.

Now what about what we don't like so much... 

1: EBacc. now what is that all about Govey? Ofqual doesn't seem to like it very much having said that it "may exceed what is realistically achievable through a single assessment". English, Maths, science, a language and either history or geography is all very well if you are a student who is academically gifted but if you aren't and are better suited to more vocational qualifications well... if we're honest... you're done for. Making things harder doesn't make students more motivated it actually does the opposite and crushes self esteem. So that was well thought through wasn't it?

2: Terminal exams: NO, NO and NO. Modular exams track the development, progress and offer a much better, more rounded image of the student's ability. According to Gove if you muck up one exam you are basically a failure all round and deserve no qualification at all. Thanks for that. 

3: Let's get rid of arts subjects: Oh that's nice. Let's just destroy that whole group of educated, interesting, creative people because they aren't as important as people who like multiplication. After all artists don't have to think about art work, do they? It's ridiculous- the arts require both intelligence and motivation to achieve success and you can't just stop promoting them as core subjects because your weren't very good at them yourself! I agree with Anthony Gormley- let's lock Gove in an Art Gallery until he understands. ( http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/art/9707265/Antony-Gormley-lets-lock-up-Michael-Gove.html ) 

now i could continue but i think you get the gist.....

SO another Tip (mostly for Gove and his supporters): get educated about the education system and what your bad decisions actually mean for the normal people you are imposing them on. 

I'm officially a Twit.

I recently joined Twitter.

Why did i do it? your guess is as good as mine.

I have, until recently, been opposed to twitter- the strange, bird themed, stalker-encouraging social networking site that started the hateful 'hash tag' craze. BUT i have been converted. It's rather fun. I do enjoy "tweeting" and "re-tweeting"etc.... 

I still have one issue with it: Tweeting comes front the verb 'to Tweet' not 'to Twitter'. But other than that it's all hunky-dory. 

So I have welcomed twitter into my life and it hasn't been too bad.

You can follow me on twitter if your wish: @vidaadamczewski

Maybe this post's #tip could be along the lines of not being afraid to be a bit of a #twit? i don't know- that's probably not very good advice.

Blonde Jokes: taking the laughing out of lol.

I'm female.

I'm also blonde.

But one thing i'm not is dumb. 

I HATE blonde jokes. I mean really HATE them. And what i hate the most about them is that people tell Blonde jokes in front of me and they think it's ok. They think it's ok because it's only a joke, it's only a bit of fun and it's not 'personal'. 

It's like the phenomenon of saying 'no offence' before an insult to make it less hurtful- since when did that work? if anything it just alerts the victim to the fact that they could take offence if they wished. 

What i wonder is if we, as a society, are ok with people making jokes about hair colour because it's only a joke, can we allow people to make jokes about skin colour? Or sexuality? Or gender? Where do you draw the line? If you can target blondes and hide beneath the mask of humour who else are you capable of targeting? 

There are people who do make jokes about gender, sexuality and race. Those people disgust me. And, if we're honest, they're just an extreme form of the blonde joke makers. Blondes are not sub-human or dumb. Neither are women. And to be honest neither is anyone- except possibly some of the jokers themselves.. 

Blondes are not sluts. There are blondes who are slutty but there are also brunettes who could be considered to be a bit "fur coat and no knickers". I think all forms of stereotyping are wrong. People are individuals and should not be labelled as being either blonde or clever- why can't they be both? either a careers woman or a home maker- why are those incompatible? I don't understand why society has to box people up and file them away under a series of traits and characteristics. Why can't we just all accept that we are all human? That we all deserve equal rights and opportunities and that none of us should be made fun of because of something we can't change? I could dye my hair but i will always be blonde underneath. I won't dye my hair because i love seeing the shock on people's faces when i make a valid, intelligent point and they realise that my hair colour doesn't affect my brain function. 

We shouldn't make any kind of prejudice or stereotyping into a joke. By doing so we normalise it, make it ok, make it funny. We turn it from something to be ashamed of into something that doesn't matter. But it does matter. 

I have a sense of humour.

It just doesn't rely on making other people feel bad about themselves. 

I don't have a sense of humour at the expense of other people.

Because, really, what is the point of making someone laugh if you are making someone else cry?

So... my tip for today is: Think about the jokes you make. Maybe you haven't realised that you say "no offence" too much. Maybe you haven't realised that you often laugh at women or blondes or people from another race? Maybe you haven't realised that actually you stereotype people a lot? Think about it. If you are someone who jokes about people's hair colour then maybe you should stop. It's really annoying.