“The next person I see with a heroin problem will probably be working class. They will probably have gone to the sort of school which is itself tragedy, and will have come from a family environment, such as a run-down council estate, which is a sink-hole. There’s a very strong relationship between depravation and drug use in many western cultures. It’s not the sole reason- you do get the rich and mega-privileged using drugs… You can’t go shouting from the rooftops that it’s all about depravation… a lot of it is… but there are other social factors, personal factors, genetic factors and economic factors - all mixed into the pot.”—
Here on the op-ed desk, we’re familiar with readers taking serious issue with our pieces, although encouraging informed discussion and debate is our job, right? But after reading this article on the rise of “hate reading” we wonder if any of our readers actively seek out the writers they dislike for a bit of mental self-flagellation.
Ever deliberately read a Comment is free article knowing you’ll disagree with every word? Followed someone on Twitter just so you could take issue with every microblog they send? Or found yourself turning to your least favourite newspaper columnist first? In short: are you a hate reader?
“The NYPD has had a long standing history of bad policing in black and Latino communities. In 2010 alone, the NYPD engaged in more than 600,000 stop-and-frisks searches; 84% of those stopped were of black or Latino. Time and again, police officers have used force when stopping them. Half of these stops have been cited as “furtive movements”, a label that portrays black and brown people as clandestine. The stop-and-frisk widespread problem that is racially discriminatory under the ostensible excuse that the practice is necessary in fighting crime. Sadly, this procedure has not proved to reduce crime or make the city any safer.”—Debbie Almontaser on the NYPD’s ugly history of racial profiling
Giles Fraser, Church of England priest who resigned over the possible eviction of Occupy protesters at St Paul’s cathedral in London, talks about how working in the bustling Guardian newsroom differs from the quiet of St Paul cathedral.
The huge salaries and bonuses, we are told, are essential if we are to prevent this tiny percentage of selfish, hoarding arseholes from moving overseas. Imagine if they flew to Singapore and started selfishly hoarding things over there instead. Drained of their expertise and reassuring presence, how would Britain cope? Within days we’d be walking on all fours and devouring our offspring for food.
I don’t want to panic you, but that’s the reality. Never mind weeping over the size of their bonuses: we should be dropping to our knees and giving them blowjobs, tearfully imploring them to remain seated each time we come up for air. Treble their wages. Form a human ring around Britain’s airports to prevent them from leaving. And for God’s sake don’t ask them to share anything. That kind of talk merely angers them.
Sharing is for the rest of us. Not sharing money or bison meat, but personal information. Where we are. What we’re doing. Share it! Make it public! Go on! It’s fun!
The three minutes in question are a clip from Morgan’s interview with Santorum on the former’s CNN talk show. In it, Santorum declares that even if his own daughter were raped – a hypothetical scenario both men manage to discuss with remarkable calm – the Roman Catholic presidential candidate would maintain his adamantly pro-life position regarding abortion.
I sincerely feel a tiny, grudging mote of respect for that degree of consistency. As anti-choice zealots go, those who will take the “baby killer” argument to its extreme appeal to me slightly more than those who can say with a straight face that abortion is murder, except when the woman didn’t want to have sex.
I would like to see a populist’s vision for President Obama’s State of the Union address. So, in play form …
"I stand here tonight in front of the American people to say that the page has turned on corporate rule in the United States. It is time to get money completely out of politics. Time to end the congressional insider trading and lobbyists’ revolving door.
"We, from this moment on, will disallow private contributions to our public campaigns. We will insist that the richest people in this country pay their fair share of the taxes, no loopholes, no offshore bank accounts. They have enjoyed all the things that government has to offer to make their lives safe and to pretend they have done it alone is a lie. They could not have done it without a safe, stable government …
[ACT 2] “We will put into action our belief that climate change is a reality by creating an energy policy that will put us at 100% renewable energy by the year 2050. By doing so, we will bring jobs, lower healthcare costs, lower defense spending, better our quality of life and create true energy independence – while safeguarding our precious resources of water, land and air. We will take away subsidies from the fossil fuel industries, so that we see what we are actually paying for this dirty energy and understand that renewable energy is, indeed, cheaper and safer.
"It’s time for the country to invest in the future, not in the past. The future is one free of fossil fuels and free of corporate greed. It is time that corporations stop leading the decisions of this country. It is time that the well-being of the whole, and not the few, becomes the pumping heart, the teeming mind and able body of this nation, quickly carrying us all to a better brighter more peaceful world: one that can be enjoyed by the many and not the few!"
“The 70,000 women who die annually as a result of unsafe abortion didn’t just die because abortion was illegal in the country they live in. They died because their lives were seen as dispensable by those in charge.”—The complacency over unsafe abortions must end
“I doubt that I was in the majority among my classmates in choosing to abstain from sex. But since almost all of us received the same sex education, I’d be willing to bet that the rates of pregnancy and STDs at my school were below average: because our health educators did their best to teach us to value and understand safe sex. And we were taught to value and understand it together: co-ed sex education sent the message that everyone was responsible for making smart decisions about sexual activity – not just the girls. Most of us ended up having sex with members of the opposite sex, so it made sense that we learned about it together, too.”—
Saddam's buttock, Michael Jackon's underwear - what's the most odd thing you've ever bid on?
Photo credit: PA
We’re used to the odd artefact popping up around the UK; think Anglo Saxon ruins, ancient Roman baths, unexploded World War Two bomb - yeah that sort of stuff happens all the time. But a piece of a modern day dictator’s backside? Now that’s news!
A friend recently said to me, of another friend’s photography: “She’s so talented!”
This was, of course, meant as the highest of compliments. She makes such great photos, and she makes it look easy.
It’s not easy. This woman has quit her job and moved to a wretched town and gone into debt and clocked countless hours focusing on her craft, sharpening it. To call it talent is to erase these sacrifices. To call it talent is to erase her debt, her hours, her choice. This is not the result of natural aptitude. This is the opposite of a gift.
“Wearing a tie. I think it means “gentlemen, doing things properly”. It means decorum and a stiff upper lip; it means the empire; it means a good spanking on the bottom with a cane fashioned from a single piece of birchwood. Sorry, I may have got a bit carried away there.”— Paul MacInness writes about why gentlemen like to wear ties
Clay Shirky explains why Sopa would create a consumption-only internet
Sopa and Pipa are, quite simply, an attempt to create a privatised form of international censorship, and because the censorship would have to be nearly total to be effective, they would have a profound and chilling effect on any form of public conversation among ordinary citizens. It would render the internet a place where the only content to be seen or heard or read is produced by professionals, with the rest of use relegated to the role of pure consumption.
As Congress continues to push the bills through, this side-effect of a “consumption-only” internet is starting to look like the goal of the bills in the first place.
For Muslim women, marrying men from their country of origin is rarely considered an option as they tend to want social, economic and intellectual equals or superiors. Men from their country of origin tend to have different mindsets and struggle to find jobs no matter how well qualified they are, thereby leaving women as the main breadwinners. This situation can often create a strenuous dynamic in relationships with men from patriarchal cultures.
Muslim women, unlike men, are restricted as to whom they can marry. Marrying men outside the faith is only considered permissible in most communities if the men convert.