Love over Lust: A shortcut to Sexual oppression?

The Family Education Trust will soon be distributing leaflets to hundreds of secondary schools, outlining the pitfalls pf casual relationships.

The Trust, established in 1971, warned that teenagers should distinguish between lust and love.

All good and well so far.

And then it declares that lust is ‘ugly and destructive’.

What?

Director Norman Wells, states that “The problem with so much relationships education is that it confuses love with infatuation, lust and mere physical attraction.

“The result is that it has become the norm for young people to embark on a series of short-term casual relationships that all too often prove to be a training-ground for divorce rather than for happy and fulfilling marriages.”

So those silly teenage romances we all enjoyed were actually a “training ground for divorce”?

Riight

Now I’m not an angry person but I can genuinely say that this piece of literature, created with the best intentions, has quite honestly made my blood boil.

While I appreciate the necessity for the reform of sexual and relationship education (what is relationship education?!) in schools, labelling lust as ‘ugly and destructive’ seems pretty destructive too.

We are taught from early on that sex is not something to be banded around. One should wait until the right person comes along.

This I agree with as it teaches teenagers self-worth as well as the ability to  build friendships with the opposite sex, improving social skills as well as understanding the basic health implications of sex.

But to urge teenagers not to have sex until marriage seems discriminative; in our modern society, many do not marry until much later in life. Being sexually active is an education in itself; allowing teens to learn about themselves as well as the emotions and feelings of others as they navigate these relationships.

All relationships begin with lust. The trust discusses the confusion between lust and physical attraction, and although that makes sense on paper, in reality the two emotions are one and the same. While I would never advocate choosing a partner for their looks, when you first meet a potential it is that physical attraction which is your primary instinct. You certainly don’t think ‘Wow, I’d really like to love them,’ do you?

To label sex as ‘ugly and destructive’ is an example of archaism synonymous with sexual education in the 1800’s when women were taught to suppress their sexual urges as they were sinful and that sex was merely for the enjoyment of men.

We want teenagers to understand sex not be scared of it.

We face the danger of raising a sex-fearing generation, under-prepared for the emotional implications sex can have on a relationship.

Yes teenage relationships are a training-ground, but certainly not for divorce. It is these silly crushes, first loves, first sexual relationships, and first experiences of heart-break that teach us the qualities we do and don’t like in a person; what is appropriate behaviour, as well as giving us a taste of what isn’t.

Your teens are about learning from your mistakes so that when you do eventually meet the person you are going to marry, you have the experience to know how to make it a ‘happy and fulfilling’ relationship.

So love away kids, and if you do give in to lust, be safe!

An Education in Crime

As the title suggests this week has been somewhat of an education.

– What can one possibly be educated about in crime?

I’ve never really had anything to do with crime, the police, or in fact anyone associated with crime.

I was once pulled over as part of a sting on drink-driving in my local town, Hertford. Despite it being the night before my A-level results came out, and having been drinking only water all night, I still drove away feeling very shaky after my (non) brush with the law.

As part of our course we were sent on an outting to the Old Bailey.

Interestingly I was not alone in my nerves. Meeting outside St. Pauls underground we all shuffled our feet, a little unsure what to expect.

We ended up sitting in on a murder trial.

At first none of us really understood what was going on, the case seemed to get lost in amongst the technical jargon employed by the members of the court. It was only after a physical description of the murder itself we realised the severity of the case we were sitting in on.

It was a confusing experience-We were glad to have found such a good case, but at the same time struggled with the reality of the things we were hearing. You wondered if the jargon used by the barristers allowed them to distance themselves from the things they were describing.

After a brief lunch break I returned to court to listen to witness statements at the same trial.

Again it was confusing, and almost disturbing to listen to the witnesses be cross-examined and match up each suspected crime with the men sat behind the plastic screen. Looking around the spectators gallery, I couldn’t help but wonder who there was family.

Then not days later, I became a victim of crime as I fell prey to a London pick-pocket.

While only my phone was stolen between tubes at a busy Underground station, I couldn’t help thinking that this was the side of London my limited experience, and perhaps naivety, had sheltered me from.

I’m never going to be one of those people ruled by fears over safety but let’s just say this week definitely taught me a thing or two.

And as my Mum said: “It’s not too late to go to Law School if the Journalism thing doesn’t work out!”

Cheers Mum!

A Love letter to Boris

What is it about Boris Jonson, Mayor of London that makes me swoon?

Leaving Mayor’s Questions at City Hall last week, I whispered to my classmate “I think I love him,“ drawing a gasp from my tutor who was stood behind us as she looked at me incredulously.

But on the journey home it emerged that I was not alone in my political crush.

There was something about that silly red-faced man with his silly floppy hair that seemed to have bewitched all the women on my course.

Yes we all agreed that his answers, whilst poetic, lacked some substance. At times he was even accused of using a tone close to “bullying” by Chair Dee Doocey.

Yet even she reprimanded him in a manner befitting a naughty schoolboy.

Scoffing at the mention of “Peace deals” with Transport For London’s union leaders; Visibly struggling to suppress yawns, and placating Assembly Members with purrs of “I do so love it when we argue,” Bozza seemed more like one of us mere mortals than a stuffy politician, and certainly not the Mayor of London.

But after the umpteenth repetition that he “would look into it,” and hollow reiteration that London’s Underground was “one of the safest in Europe, if not the world,” it became clear that Assembly Members were starting to tire of his charade with members apologising to the viewing public about the Assembly meeting’s descent into chaos.

When asked afterwards is meetings were always as classroom-esque as the one I’d just witnessed, Victoria Borwick, councillor in Kensington and Chelsea told me: “All of the Assembly Members were texting each other asking ‘why’s [Boris] being so obnoxious?’.”

Everyone loves a joker but perhaps time and place are key terms in this situation.

But for anyone still unable to understand my crush, just watch this montage of Boris’s “Funny Bits” at the Tory Conference, held in Manchester in 2009.

I’m not usually a blonde’s girl, but in this case..!

Pension cuts met with a stiff upper lip from British public.

Last week George Osborne announced his Pension cuts as part of the Budget review.

These include:

– State pension age is set to rise to 66 years of age by 2020

– Temporary cold weather payments for those over-75 are to be made permanent.

– Over-75’s will also receive free eye-tests, free bus passes and free TV licenses.

– Tax relief ‘allowance’ is being cut to £50,000 per annum

But how does this translate into practise?

Philippa Marsh, Gradute-21

Research by Scottish Widows states that women are well behind their male counterparts in terms of saving for retirement, with only 47% of women saving enough in comparison to 59% of men.

More shockingly, research carried out by GFK showed that fewer than a third of women aged 20 to 40 have a pension.

It seems that women fall victim to unequal pay, taking career breaks to care for children, bereavement and divorce and so saving for retirement takes a back-seat.

“The general feeling is just frustrated apathy really,” states graduate Philippa in response to Osborne’s proposals. “It’s not nice to think that we’ll be worse off for these cuts to pension schemes, but where do you propose cutting that won’t make anyone worse off?”

“It’s impossible. Some may think they’re worse off than others, but it’s difficult to judge.”

“The cut on the tax-free amounts you can pay in (£225k to £50k) looks completely ridiculous on paper, but considering I have never as yet experienced having £225k untaxed-how can I complain I’m getting a worse deal?”

“The alternative could be having such a terrible economy that I couldn’t spend as I wanted it anyway.”

“As far as I’m concerned as a ‘young person’, I’m better off than someone in their forties – I have a good few years to save for my own pension on top of any government fund, and to prepare for when I finally do get to retire.”

“I think you’ll find most of us are just resigned to it,” the 21 year-old adds “we’re not as good at marching and rioting as the French clearly are.”

David MacDonald, 47, Photographer and Business Owner

Stating that “the country is at a huge loss” David Macdonald acknowledges that the government “have to decide where the changes come in.”

“We all know savings have to be made, and on the scale of things this is actually pretty fair.”

Commending the government for not raising taxes, the photographer from Ware, Herts, stated “The government is not putting anyone out of a job, they’re simply asking them to contribute for an extra year.”

At 47, Mr MacDonald is not “on the countdown” to retirement, but some of his staff are.

But rather than feeling hindered with older staff and the cost of an extra years wages, David sees rise in retirement age as a positive thing: “Someone not retiring so early means you don’t have to replace them, which is costly.”

“You have to consider not only the cost of advertising, but also setting a competitive wage as well as then training that person up.”

Gill Wilson, 65, Retiree

“In theory if people are fit enough,” Mrs Wilson, retired Grandmother says “then it’s quite good that people are allowed to work, but being made to work is a different thing.”

Mrs Wilson’s husband John, was forced into retirement at the age of 65. Now 68, Gill comments that staying in full-time employment to 66 “would have had a negative impact on his health.”

Agreeing with George Osborne’s statement that the current pension system is “unsustainable”, Gill attributes the systems faults with the fact that people are living longer “rather than the state paying for just 10 years”. Similarly, “people taking early retirement” have a similar effect on the Work and Pensions deficit.

Mrs Wilson also expressed her concerns about the affect the rise in pension age will have on the job market: “There’s very little available for youngsters, the job market is too small for the number of people who are going to be out there.”

Instead Gill feels that utility companies should be looked into: “There’s a complete lack of standardisation amongst utility companies, the prices just seem to go up and up.”

So there you have it.

Changes have to be made, and the British public are ready to make them.