In Värmland, where I live, we house about 160 out of Sweden's 200 wolves. The first wolves were sighted in 1979 and they have been a hot topic for discussion ever since then. there are people out there willing to break laws in order to get rid of these animals. A well known saying in the woods is "Skjut, gräv,tig!" meaning: Shoot a wolf, bury it and keep your mouth shut. These people ted to blame everything on the wolves. But is it really the Big Bad Wolf hiding in our woods?
The first thing a wolf hater claims is that wolves kill sheep (raindeers if you're further up north). Yes they do. Wolves hunt in families. They can be 2-8 individuals in a family. Each family needs to hunt every third day which means that they come back to the dead animal one or two times before they hunt for a new meal. What happens when the family runs in to a heard of sheep is the same thing that happens to us at a Smörgåsbord. We get blinded by all the food and over fill the plate. The eye is hungrier than the stomach. The wolves kill more sheep than intended just because they're there and because they intend to come back. This would not happen if more farmers put up fences, specially constructed to keep predatory animals out or if they went back to keeping watch as they did a hundred years ago.
Another thing wolf haters like to blame wolves for is killing all the moose in the woods. Hunters complain that there aren't any animals left for them to shoot. What they keep forgetting is that the traditional moose hunt every autumn was once introduced because of the wolves being locally extinct in the area (by shooting). Therefore they had to keep the moose number on a steady level. This have been going on for a century,making it a tradition hunters won't give up easily. But, as I said in the first paragraph, wolves hunt every third day. This means that one family kills approximately 100 moose every year, and this is a high number since it postulates no other food is supplied in form of deers or sheep. Let's say there are around 10 families. Thenumber of killed moose would be maybe 1.000. it's a small number compared to the over 60.ooo moose shot by hunters. I would say there's enough to both parties, don't you? Another thing that speaks for the wolves is that they take the sick and weak animals whilst hunters kill the healthy, child producing ones.
Last, but not least, another reason for wanting the wolves dead is that they kill dogs and that they are dangerous to humans. Many editorial letters have been written about how parents don't dare to let their children play outside or let the dogs stay out because of the wolves. fact is that out of 1000 killed dogs the main part is killed by cars, then there are about 135 dogs shot by other hunters by mistake, and then we have about 50-70 dogs taken by wolves. This often happens when the dog comes in to a wolf's territory. If hunters would go back to the more traditional way of hunting - sit on stake-out - instead of hunt with dogs, this would not occur at all. When it comes to people being scared, I think we have read too much fairytales like Little Red Riding Hood. In 1821 there was ONE human killed by wolves. It was a child, weakened from famine who was taken. No other rapported casulties are known in Sweden.
As a conclusion I would like to say that predjudices are easily born and fed, but by knowing facts and serving it to anyone prejudgemental we can starve them to death. Instead of Shoot, dig and Shut up we could get a complex world where everyone, animal and human, have a place. The same thing goes for racist prejudges. Kill them too with facts. Make sure you are always well prepared and ready for discussion. i could give youa solid ground to stand on when it comes to that subject too.... but I guess that will have to wait 'til another time.
onsdag 20 maj 2009
onsdag 13 maj 2009
Is it 1984 in a 2009 version?
The new high tech society offers many possibilities and much danger. We have cameras everywhere, when we make a purchase it is registered and saved and we even invite people to keep an eye on us.
Cameras. Good or bad? Well, it depends on who you're asking. I'm not planning on doing something outside the law and therefore I'm not worried. I don't care if a camera somewhere happens to record me scratching some private parts or picking my nose. If the same camera one day will help the police to solve a rape or a murder, I can live with them seeing me in a precarious situation. (Insertion: Almost the very same minute I aired this text a girl was raped outside a funfair in Gothenburg. The perpetrators could soon be arrested because the whole thing was filmed by secuity ameras in the areas.) If I had been the bad guy I probably would have another opinion. Off course there are risks with all these cameras even for us law-abiding citizens. If the recordings end up in the wrong hands, like the hands of a power-mad politician, things could go awfully wrong.
The same thing goes for credit card registrations when buying stuff. I have nothing to hide but I can understand people who don't want anyone to know exactly how many bottles of vodka they consume in a week. Here I'm thinking about a murder case fron the north of Sweden where the police got access to the alcohole habits of a murder suspect. I don't think he was amused at all.
So, what do I mean when I say that we even invite people to keep an eye on us? It started with a new kind of shows on TV called Docu-soaps. Ordinary people was put in different inviroments having cameras filming 24-7. Remember Big Brother and Survivor (Robinson)? Baren? Now we don't need to watch TV to get close to others, we only need a computer. People tend to be quite naïve when it comes to this medium. Without a second thought do we share pictures, films and sound from parties, christmas at granmother's or a family dinner at home. I have Facebook myself but I'm very cautious with what pictures of me I want others to see and I never put pictures of my children out on the Internet. They haven't said OK and they're too young to make that decision and I'm not the one to make it for them. I have friends who put every single party picture out on Facebook, even though we constantly read about employers who look up future employees and who makes an opinion about the person based on these pictures. Who wants to employ someone who seems to have a drink in his/her hand all the time? Think about it... especially if you want to be a teacher.....
After racking my mind about my feelings toward an Orwell society I can conclude that I have mixed feelings.
Cameras. Good or bad? Well, it depends on who you're asking. I'm not planning on doing something outside the law and therefore I'm not worried. I don't care if a camera somewhere happens to record me scratching some private parts or picking my nose. If the same camera one day will help the police to solve a rape or a murder, I can live with them seeing me in a precarious situation. (Insertion: Almost the very same minute I aired this text a girl was raped outside a funfair in Gothenburg. The perpetrators could soon be arrested because the whole thing was filmed by secuity ameras in the areas.) If I had been the bad guy I probably would have another opinion. Off course there are risks with all these cameras even for us law-abiding citizens. If the recordings end up in the wrong hands, like the hands of a power-mad politician, things could go awfully wrong.
The same thing goes for credit card registrations when buying stuff. I have nothing to hide but I can understand people who don't want anyone to know exactly how many bottles of vodka they consume in a week. Here I'm thinking about a murder case fron the north of Sweden where the police got access to the alcohole habits of a murder suspect. I don't think he was amused at all.
So, what do I mean when I say that we even invite people to keep an eye on us? It started with a new kind of shows on TV called Docu-soaps. Ordinary people was put in different inviroments having cameras filming 24-7. Remember Big Brother and Survivor (Robinson)? Baren? Now we don't need to watch TV to get close to others, we only need a computer. People tend to be quite naïve when it comes to this medium. Without a second thought do we share pictures, films and sound from parties, christmas at granmother's or a family dinner at home. I have Facebook myself but I'm very cautious with what pictures of me I want others to see and I never put pictures of my children out on the Internet. They haven't said OK and they're too young to make that decision and I'm not the one to make it for them. I have friends who put every single party picture out on Facebook, even though we constantly read about employers who look up future employees and who makes an opinion about the person based on these pictures. Who wants to employ someone who seems to have a drink in his/her hand all the time? Think about it... especially if you want to be a teacher.....
After racking my mind about my feelings toward an Orwell society I can conclude that I have mixed feelings.
måndag 11 maj 2009
Grades make my day
I give A to the grades!
We need grades in school. Grades are a good way for teachers, students and parents to see progress in learning.
First, I want to point out the most important reason for grades, which is structure. By having grades hanging over your head you will focus less on "hanging" and more on studying hard. Also, by having grades in Order and Behaviour we will get a more quiet and calm inviroment in school. No one wants to come home with a C in that.
Second, I want to mention The donkey and the carrot. Students need something to strive for. They want to have a carrot to follow and the satisfaction when they finally get it. It's important for them to see the results of their hard work.
Finally, we have the future employers. They need a good tool to see how intelligent and capable their soon-to-be employee is. Without grades they would surely buy the pig in the sack,as we say in Swedish.
There are some communist scientists, teachers and politicians who claim that grades are bad, that they destroy more than they build. They also say that there are students with special needs like ADHD and other diagnosis that would be hurt badly, and even forgotten, if we have grades in Order and Behaviour. They go so far as to saying that students with dyslexia or dyscalcyli would not be seen as individuals but as one in the mass and therefore get lower grades because they can't keep up with the other kids.
I have to strongly refute to this. I have one answer for all of their accusations and that is: All they have to do is sit still in class, pay attention to what the teacher is saying, write it down without whining about letters being wrong or some other sad story from their pathetic lives and everything will be all right. It's not THAT dfficult.
// Jan Björklund
Blog owner comment: I'm truly sorry. I meant to write a good analysis on why we shouldn't have grades, you know all we have read about, talked about and discussed through our three years together. But, when I was about to start I got possessed by Jan Björklund's evil spirit and I could just watch how my hands flew over the key board and suddenly this text above appeared.
Anyone who knows the number to a good exorcist?
We need grades in school. Grades are a good way for teachers, students and parents to see progress in learning.
First, I want to point out the most important reason for grades, which is structure. By having grades hanging over your head you will focus less on "hanging" and more on studying hard. Also, by having grades in Order and Behaviour we will get a more quiet and calm inviroment in school. No one wants to come home with a C in that.
Second, I want to mention The donkey and the carrot. Students need something to strive for. They want to have a carrot to follow and the satisfaction when they finally get it. It's important for them to see the results of their hard work.
Finally, we have the future employers. They need a good tool to see how intelligent and capable their soon-to-be employee is. Without grades they would surely buy the pig in the sack,as we say in Swedish.
There are some communist scientists, teachers and politicians who claim that grades are bad, that they destroy more than they build. They also say that there are students with special needs like ADHD and other diagnosis that would be hurt badly, and even forgotten, if we have grades in Order and Behaviour. They go so far as to saying that students with dyslexia or dyscalcyli would not be seen as individuals but as one in the mass and therefore get lower grades because they can't keep up with the other kids.
I have to strongly refute to this. I have one answer for all of their accusations and that is: All they have to do is sit still in class, pay attention to what the teacher is saying, write it down without whining about letters being wrong or some other sad story from their pathetic lives and everything will be all right. It's not THAT dfficult.
// Jan Björklund
Blog owner comment: I'm truly sorry. I meant to write a good analysis on why we shouldn't have grades, you know all we have read about, talked about and discussed through our three years together. But, when I was about to start I got possessed by Jan Björklund's evil spirit and I could just watch how my hands flew over the key board and suddenly this text above appeared.
Anyone who knows the number to a good exorcist?
onsdag 29 april 2009
Why don't we see the seriousness? My theory!
We are clearly damaging our enviroment, there's no doubt about that. We are constantly seeing evidence of how our lifestyle changes the earth, and yet we won't change our behaviour. We react to the facts prestented to us but we hesitate to act drastically upon them. Why don't we see the seriousness?
First, I think we don't know who to rely on. Some scientists say it's the end of the world as we know it and that it will happen soon, whilst other scientists are more cautious in their doomsday predictions and claim that it is not as bad as the first scientists say. We tend to choose to listen to the least horrible scenario.
Second, I believe the reason we rather listen to the least horrible prognosis is that we are lazy creatures. We don't want to give up any of our benefits in life. We want to travel to Thailand, we want to have our flat screens and our big cars. Therefor this scientific version of the enviromental problem appeals to us. Also, I think it's our way to cope. As a survival meassure we refuse to listen with more than a half ear. I mean, who wants (or can) live with the end of the world on our shoulders?
Third, and last, I think that the doomsday scientists have somewhat shot themselves in the foot with their horror propaganda. When they tell us about all the terrible consequenses, we expect to see them the next morning we wake up. When they're not there, knocking on our doors, we relax and don't believe it anymore. You can compare it with smoking. In school we are fed with this horror propaganda about the bad effects on smoking, we see it every time we buy a pack of cigarettes (smoking kills, smoking is bad for your health etc.) but when we don't feel or see those effects immidiately we tend to ignore them. We know in our hearts it's dangerous but without hard proof in our immidiate nearness it's easy to shove our heads in the sand.
My conclusion is that we don't see the seriousness because we don't want to let go of our lifestyle and that the disunity between enviromental scientists gives us a reason to stay lazy, keeping our lifestyle.
First, I think we don't know who to rely on. Some scientists say it's the end of the world as we know it and that it will happen soon, whilst other scientists are more cautious in their doomsday predictions and claim that it is not as bad as the first scientists say. We tend to choose to listen to the least horrible scenario.
Second, I believe the reason we rather listen to the least horrible prognosis is that we are lazy creatures. We don't want to give up any of our benefits in life. We want to travel to Thailand, we want to have our flat screens and our big cars. Therefor this scientific version of the enviromental problem appeals to us. Also, I think it's our way to cope. As a survival meassure we refuse to listen with more than a half ear. I mean, who wants (or can) live with the end of the world on our shoulders?
Third, and last, I think that the doomsday scientists have somewhat shot themselves in the foot with their horror propaganda. When they tell us about all the terrible consequenses, we expect to see them the next morning we wake up. When they're not there, knocking on our doors, we relax and don't believe it anymore. You can compare it with smoking. In school we are fed with this horror propaganda about the bad effects on smoking, we see it every time we buy a pack of cigarettes (smoking kills, smoking is bad for your health etc.) but when we don't feel or see those effects immidiately we tend to ignore them. We know in our hearts it's dangerous but without hard proof in our immidiate nearness it's easy to shove our heads in the sand.
My conclusion is that we don't see the seriousness because we don't want to let go of our lifestyle and that the disunity between enviromental scientists gives us a reason to stay lazy, keeping our lifestyle.
tisdag 21 april 2009
Praise the TV
TV must be the best and the worst invention ever. It's the best because you can kill a boring moment like I have done today being home and ill. TV has allowed me to lie all cuddled up in the sofa watching whatever's on it.... Days of our lives.... Extreme make over- home edition..... sitcoms... you name it... TV's got it.
Also, TV is the worst invention ever because it makes us do bad priorities in life. Instead of socializing with each other as friends or family, we tend to wind up staring at the moving pictures on the screen. Why not play a game instead? Or read a story? Or just talk, ask each other how our day was?
I love TV. Especially since I got kids. When they're finally asleep I'm so tired TV is all I want. B.c (as in Before Children) I used to watch programs that mattered. Political documentaries, David Attenboroughs nature films, Historical programs about ancient civilizations, I ate it all. But now my standards have decreased a lot. With a brain full of English grammar and of shouting, arguing kid's voices I'm happy as long as there's SOMETHING on TV.
Therefor, my favourite programs are light TV such as "Dr. House", "Scrubs", "Lie to me", "Lost", "Let's Dance" and other similar shows.
First, I love "Dr. House" because of his evil tounge. second, I love Hugh Laurie as an actor. I've had a crush on him ever since he did "Jeeves and Wooster" back in the 80's. There's something about his kissable lips. Last, my love for this show have increased a lot during this second season when "Dr. House" has to pick out new staff and has made it a sort of Docu-soap-competition-thing where everybody tries to sneak, lie and play dirty.
"Scrubs". Has there ever been a sicker sitcom? It has it all but mostly it has Dr. Cox. He can really make my day. My absolute favourite episode must be the one where they're in a musical. One can wonder what kind of drugs the script writers used to come up with an idea like that.
Wednesday nights at 9 p.m. you don't have to bother calling me. I won't answer the phone. That's when "Lie to me" is aired. I'm so fascinated by body language and mimic and what they reveal so this is definetely a program for me.
Unfortunately, many people have given up "Lost". I guess it created too many questions without giving any answers so people got tired of waiting and of keeping track on everything happening in every episode. If you miss one episode you have trouble getting back in. I refuse to give up. i just have to know how it ends.
Last but not least, I have to mention a few British shows I like. Unfortunately, they are not aired right now but I always have them on You Tube. These shows are "Couplings" - a London set "Friends" sit com but without all the cencur that American "Friends" has. Then I love "Little Britain" - very sick humour just my definition of a good laugh. The old " Young ones" is also a favourite and off course "Monty Python Flying Circus" and and and and... I could go on forever but I will spare you the pain.
Though I've already said last but not least I still have to mention the next best (and worst) invention ever, namely : The Recordable Digital Box. Gee, has it saved me a lot of worries or what? No more agony due to clashing programs. Halleluja!
Also, TV is the worst invention ever because it makes us do bad priorities in life. Instead of socializing with each other as friends or family, we tend to wind up staring at the moving pictures on the screen. Why not play a game instead? Or read a story? Or just talk, ask each other how our day was?
I love TV. Especially since I got kids. When they're finally asleep I'm so tired TV is all I want. B.c (as in Before Children) I used to watch programs that mattered. Political documentaries, David Attenboroughs nature films, Historical programs about ancient civilizations, I ate it all. But now my standards have decreased a lot. With a brain full of English grammar and of shouting, arguing kid's voices I'm happy as long as there's SOMETHING on TV.
Therefor, my favourite programs are light TV such as "Dr. House", "Scrubs", "Lie to me", "Lost", "Let's Dance" and other similar shows.
First, I love "Dr. House" because of his evil tounge. second, I love Hugh Laurie as an actor. I've had a crush on him ever since he did "Jeeves and Wooster" back in the 80's. There's something about his kissable lips. Last, my love for this show have increased a lot during this second season when "Dr. House" has to pick out new staff and has made it a sort of Docu-soap-competition-thing where everybody tries to sneak, lie and play dirty.
"Scrubs". Has there ever been a sicker sitcom? It has it all but mostly it has Dr. Cox. He can really make my day. My absolute favourite episode must be the one where they're in a musical. One can wonder what kind of drugs the script writers used to come up with an idea like that.
Wednesday nights at 9 p.m. you don't have to bother calling me. I won't answer the phone. That's when "Lie to me" is aired. I'm so fascinated by body language and mimic and what they reveal so this is definetely a program for me.
Unfortunately, many people have given up "Lost". I guess it created too many questions without giving any answers so people got tired of waiting and of keeping track on everything happening in every episode. If you miss one episode you have trouble getting back in. I refuse to give up. i just have to know how it ends.
Last but not least, I have to mention a few British shows I like. Unfortunately, they are not aired right now but I always have them on You Tube. These shows are "Couplings" - a London set "Friends" sit com but without all the cencur that American "Friends" has. Then I love "Little Britain" - very sick humour just my definition of a good laugh. The old " Young ones" is also a favourite and off course "Monty Python Flying Circus" and and and and... I could go on forever but I will spare you the pain.
Though I've already said last but not least I still have to mention the next best (and worst) invention ever, namely : The Recordable Digital Box. Gee, has it saved me a lot of worries or what? No more agony due to clashing programs. Halleluja!
tisdag 14 april 2009
The koncept of waiting
It was all about waiting when I was a little girl.
There was always something to wait for, to look forward to. That is something I would like to pass on to my children. Children of today don't really know the meaning of waiting anymore. They live in a society that provides everything at any time.
Things that have changed since my days:
Icecream. I remember how they used to sell out all ice lollies and cones before winter arrived and then you had to wait until they returned in April. This feeling when I took my bike out, also for the first time since late autumn, and rode it to the store (zig-zaging between puddles of snow on the street) to buy the first real icecream of the year was priceless. To stand outside in the sun with one of the new flavours of the year in my hand, taking the first bite, was sensational. Now you can buy ice lollies all year round.
Cartoon on TV. Every Saturday morning I placed myself in front of the TV to watch "Gomorron Sverige" - a boring morning show for adults which also aired five or ten minutes of cartoon shows for children, I recall it being Woody Woodpecker.This and on "Lilla Sportspegeln", once a week, were the only occasions (except one hour of Donald Duck and his friends on Christmas eve) where we kids got to se cartoon series on TV. Today you have Cartoon Networks, Nickelodeon, Disney Channel and God knows what else, which provides us with cartoons almost 24-7.
The two things mentioned above are things I can't prevent. I can't really fight it just to give my kids the same feelings I once had because they are out of reach for me, nothing I have any influence in. But there are things I can do to teach them the value of waiting and to give them something to remember as adults, just like I have. It can be little things like longing for Friday when the family is gathered and we eat crisps and watch something on TV together, or it can be building up expectations for Christmas.... or as I did now during Easter when I talked a lot about the Easter Bunny for a few days and when the right day came I told my kids that the Bunny was too shy to come when they were around and then sent them upstairs to play while I went out in the garden to hide an Easter Egg full of candy. Then I draw a map, put i strategically where they could find it and then called them down. They immediately chased after the treasure with frenzy only children have. I think I managed to give them something to remember.
There was always something to wait for, to look forward to. That is something I would like to pass on to my children. Children of today don't really know the meaning of waiting anymore. They live in a society that provides everything at any time.
Things that have changed since my days:
Icecream. I remember how they used to sell out all ice lollies and cones before winter arrived and then you had to wait until they returned in April. This feeling when I took my bike out, also for the first time since late autumn, and rode it to the store (zig-zaging between puddles of snow on the street) to buy the first real icecream of the year was priceless. To stand outside in the sun with one of the new flavours of the year in my hand, taking the first bite, was sensational. Now you can buy ice lollies all year round.
Cartoon on TV. Every Saturday morning I placed myself in front of the TV to watch "Gomorron Sverige" - a boring morning show for adults which also aired five or ten minutes of cartoon shows for children, I recall it being Woody Woodpecker.This and on "Lilla Sportspegeln", once a week, were the only occasions (except one hour of Donald Duck and his friends on Christmas eve) where we kids got to se cartoon series on TV. Today you have Cartoon Networks, Nickelodeon, Disney Channel and God knows what else, which provides us with cartoons almost 24-7.
The two things mentioned above are things I can't prevent. I can't really fight it just to give my kids the same feelings I once had because they are out of reach for me, nothing I have any influence in. But there are things I can do to teach them the value of waiting and to give them something to remember as adults, just like I have. It can be little things like longing for Friday when the family is gathered and we eat crisps and watch something on TV together, or it can be building up expectations for Christmas.... or as I did now during Easter when I talked a lot about the Easter Bunny for a few days and when the right day came I told my kids that the Bunny was too shy to come when they were around and then sent them upstairs to play while I went out in the garden to hide an Easter Egg full of candy. Then I draw a map, put i strategically where they could find it and then called them down. They immediately chased after the treasure with frenzy only children have. I think I managed to give them something to remember.
Prenumerera på:
Inlägg (Atom)
