Women's Football

The FIFA Volunteers signed shirt.

Have you been watching the FIFA Women's World Cup? I am a FIFA Volunteer in the Mönchengladbach stadium so I have seen one live game so far and a number of others on the TV. I have also been following the whole thing in the news as well as observing how the people in my town are reacting to it all.

The thing that strikes me most is the inequality of the way the German public are supporting the German team compared to the way they supported the  male team, and I wonder how it is in your country? In 2006, when the men's World Cup was held in Germany and again in 2010 when it was held in South Africa, almost every car  and house sprouted flags. Since I live in Germany I decided to wholly support the German team and was one of the first to hang a flag on a pole from my balcony and, something I did not do in 2006 and 2010, placed two flags on my car! Few members of the general public have done the same, though the atmosphere in the stadium was, to my mind second to none.

What also disturbs me is the way most men view women's football. They generally denigrate it in comparison to the male game, as well as come out with chauvinistic expressions which they assume are jokes and so we should all laugh. I for one do not. 

FIFA Volunteer Team 7

The women, at best are sadly only semi professional as there is not enough money (yet) in the game to support them professionally. That they nonetheless show great fitness and skill on the field, while holding down a day job as well, is a credit to them. Yet somehow it seems expected of women, just like wives and mothers are expected to be a nurse, child minder, housekeeper, cook and bottle washer and when the lights go out a concubine as well. Where do they get their determination and energy from? 

We should remember that women's football, compared to the male version, is still in its infancy. Many countries do not have many league teams, or systems in place to encourage and train young women. But it is on its way. Already this year I have noticed a marked improvement in the way women play the game compared to last year, at the U20 Women's World Cup.

Clearly the male version of the game in all our countries serves as a role model to boys and men alike. In many cases the professional footballer, (David Beckham for example) is also a sex symbol to young women and girls. This is perhaps why it has a bigger appeal. The women though are equally tough (just witness the way Nigeria tackled Germany) and are equally good role models for our girls and young women. As fathers we should perhaps encourage our daughters to watch these games more and even to play the game. The determination, fitness, and the robustness needed to play the game will stand our women in good stead in the game of life.

So come on chaps, before these championships are over, get behind the women of your country and  support your team and stop the male chauvinistic jokes and reporting in the newspapers.

Some Mothers

The expression, “some mothers’ do ‘ave ‘em!” is a more or less derogatory expression meant to indicate a weird or odd person is the off spring of the mother. It was also the title of a popular sitcom on BBC TV in the 70’s staring Michael Crawford.

I have been reminded of this expression by my observations of certain mothers over the years and especially recently and the manner in which they educate and bring up their off spring, but especially their sons. The relationship between mothers and sons was even a subject for a recent BBC radio series. Sadly they only touched on the positive aspects and not the negative ones where mothers do their damndest to mould and control their sons in all things the whole of their life. A “mother’s boy” is also a derogatory expression for a boy that is timid and weak, always clean and obedient. Mother’s boys are made and not born that way.

All of us are the product of our parents and their upbringing, plus the sum of our experience. We are fortunate if we do not have a heavy baggage of upbringing to carry through life.

Some people believe that a baby is born as a blank sheet of paper, upon which we adults write. To me this is only partly true. I believe that children are born with their inherent nature, which is the sum of their parents’ genes within them. If their parents are introvert, timid and shy, socially inadept, the chances are the children will be too. On the other hand if the parents are extrovert, brave as lions, intelligent then the child should be as well. I further believe that development of a baby's character starts in the womb. If the baby is subjected to loud noise or music, if the mother is prone to fits of shouting and screaming when arguing, then I believe this will affect the character of the child even before birth. Should the birth be traumatic for either mother or baby, then I think that too will affect its character. Then there is the matter of the actual upbringing which does not make all things equal either. We parents carry around with us the heavy baggage of our own upbringing and more often than not, end up instilling it into the new born.

Children are not born with a value system in their genes. They do not know the difference between right and wrong, hot and cold, good and evil, black and white. Children do not know what prejudice or hate is. This all needs to be learned. But they are I believe, born with an infinite capacity to love, though again they need to be shown how to love someone.

The Jesuits said with truth, “give me a child until it is seven and I will give you the man” because they understood that small children until they are seven are like blotting paper. They are so trusting they soak up every little detail of their upbringing and their environment. This is the time when the value system is learned. It is the most critical stage in the life of any person. If we adults get it wrong, it can lead to the formation of trauma and other deep problems, such as the development of prejudice and hate, the child being good or bad, or prone to violence, all of  which will take years to correct, if it can be corrected at all.

I have watched mothers incensed with hygiene continually scrub their little ones for fear they may be dirty. And to have a dirty child is a reflection, they think, of them as a mother! I have seen fathers incensed with a desire for discipline treat their children like soldiers, to be obedient in all things especially trivial things, from a very young age. I have seen fathers duck their small child continually under the water, “teaching it to swim”. Hanna was all set to do this particular large Russian bully father physical harm, but fortunately for all he stopped in time because he was hungry!  I watch mothers who are timid and insecure themselves, hover around their child when playing on the playground apparatus, making it doubly timid in turn. Were it to stumble and fall they are there immediately to worry it and they seem unable to differentiate between a harmless scratch, for which a child can be hardened and a serious injury. Yet at the same time they seem incapable of teaching their child to love or show any form of affection. Some mothers even think their child is their personal possession, and forget that it is a small human being that is merely on loan to them.

Each child is unique and there are consequently no user manuals on how to bring up any particular child. Countless books on the subject do abound of course, but they are all generalisations and a guide at best. All new parents are treading for them, new ground. They wish to do their best, to even correct what is perceived as the faults in their own upbringing and so mistakes are made. Some will have long term consequences and we can only hope that as these children grow into adults they themselves can overcome the majority of them. Insha’Allah!

An eye for an eye!

One of my father’s favourite expressions was, “it’s humans that have stuffed up this world!” Slowly I am coming to agree with him. Man is a violent animal and the only one on earth that harbours hate and revenge in his heart. Many prophets down the ages have also known this and by giving man laws and regulations have attempted to try and regulate him. Moses tried his best. In Exodus Ch. 21 verses 21 to 25 he attempted to regulate the violence by advocating a like for like style of punishment. An eye for an eye. I think the point many of us have missed is that here he is advocating that within the social system of the time it is like for like.  Should a slave holder poke out the eye of his slave then he must be given his freedom, not that the slave may poke out the eye of his master. In Leviticus Ch. 19 verse 18 Moses advocates to “love thy neighbour!” Something that gets forgotten until Jesus tells us in his Sermon on the Mount. (Mathew Ch. 5 v. 44) to, "love your enemies". Moses qualifies his eye for an eye rule later in Leviticus Ch. 24 verses 19-22 to include one’s enemies as well. The idea here is to limit the retribution, not to increase it.

Mohamed in the Qur’an (Sura 5 verse 45 to 47) repeats more or less what Moses said before him. To my mind he is also attempting to limit man’s quest for revenge, to keep it within bounds. Yet along the way they have all forgotten the fifth Commandment, “thou shalt not kill/murder!” Jesus in his Sermon on the Mount (Mathew Ch. 5 v. 3 to 48) gave man a better system of justice and compassion, for not only did he remind man not to kill but to turn the other cheek, perhaps the hardest thing of all to do.

Since the Munich disaster in 1972, Israel has pursued a policy of, “an eye for an eye”. Their going after the terrorists that planned and executed the Munich hostage taking took state condoned violence to a new level and was clearly the example for America to handle the way they did with Osama bin Laden. That these terrorists deserved to be punished is not at dispute here. Nor do I dispute the need to go after them wherever they may be. There must be no hiding place for terrorists. I mentioned in an earlier Blog that terrorism is a crime against us all and we must hunt these terrorists down wherever they are and bring them to justice before proper courts of law. That is the only way for a civilised society to respond.

To my mind the “eye for an eye” policy of retribution merely breeds more hatred and desire for revenge and then into following generations, which is why we are hardly ever to have peace in the Middle East.

I am caused to make these remarks by the horrid thought that the Judges in Iran have given Ameneh Bahrami the right to pour acid into the eyes of the man who did the same to her. That they have placed Majid Movahedi, the man in question, in a state prison hospital and that there are doctors who will assist or even carry out this (new crime) punishment horrifies me. What about the doctor’s Hippocratic Oath? As I write the authorities have thankfully postponed the punishment. That crimes against women often go unpunished in many cultures is a shame on that society and should not be condoned. That Majid Movahedi committed a heinous crime which must be punished severely, also as a deterrent to other men who contemplate such acts, goes almost without saying. But that we should descend into barbarism to do so must offend all civilised men and women.

I fear that Ameneh Bahrami has added fuel to the fire of hate and will herself become another victim of revenge and retribution by the family of Majid Movahedi. She will need to be looking over her shoulder for the rest of her life.

Mahatma Gandhi was right when he reputedly said that, “an eye for and eye makes the whole world blind.

Osama Bin Laden

So America have finally killed Osama Bin Laden, but as usual I think they have gone about it all wrong. The World is not the Wild West and America has no right to go trampling on the sovereignty of other nations. Yes they have killed a man that deserved to die, but by shooting him in this manner they have given him not just a martyrs death, but have raised him to be a hero in the eyes of young muslim fanatics. They can now say that Osama died fighting the Great Devil America, that he never gave up.

I believe that terrorism is a crime against humanity,  it is a crime against all of us, whether the bomb goes off in New York, Marrakesh, Bali, Baghdad, Madrid or London matters not, we are all involved. We all have the right to travel where we will and so could be involved whether we like it or not. Hanna and I once missed being killed in a terrorist attack by  less than 24 hours. We had stood in the same place where later French tourists and others were killed.

Terrorists are therefore criminals and MUST be treated as such. They should not be treated like enemy soldiers in a conventional war. Doing so gives them an honour they do not deserve, for they tend to hide behind innocent people,  and they use and kill women and children. America should have copied Israel, for here they showed the way when they kidnapped Adolf Eichmann in Argentina and took him back to Israel to stand a public trial. Osama Bin Laden was a criminal and should have been captured alive, taken to New York and put on trial for his crimes there. Found guilty he should have been hanged by the neck until dead and then buried in the prison cemetery in an unmarked grave. This is they way one deals with criminals and it is not a martyrs death to die in this way. Yes he would have been able to speak his mind, but should a great democracy fear rhetoric? I say no. Remember how sad Saddam Hussein, and Adolf Eichmann looked at their trials, they did not look like martyrs or heros, they looked exactly what they were criminals, deserving of the full punishment of the law.

It is sad and pathetic too, to watch people dancing in the streets at the killing of one man as if the war is over. It is not over, it is perhaps, as Churchill might have said, not the end, it is the end of the beginning. Insha'allah!

Teddy Bears' Picnic

Katie a rather sweet Australian bear living in Melbourne has invited us all to join her for a picnic. http://thehouseonthesideofthehill.blogspot.com/

This caused quite a stir in my house since a decision had to be made as to who was to go. I nearly had a mutiny as they all wanted to go. Since there are well over 60 bears in my house, and I have to say, not all of them are well behaved and can be trusted not to get into mischief, we had to come to a workable solution. Since Pippa and Squeak the matriarch and patriarch of my family more or less entertain friends to tea constantly in their under the table cave, and are now far too old to go off gallivanting in the woods it should not be them.

After a lengthy discussion it was decided that three bears should go. The eldest, on the right, is  Wagner, who is a Kiwi (note the passport he is holding in his paw) and was made for me by my mother. He is a circumnavigater since he sailed around the world with me. He is wise and can be trusted with your last piece of chocolate. The one in the middle with his "KARMA" hat is called Fred. He comes from Aitutaki in the Cook Islands and was  given to me by my friends Norma and Clive. Norma felt I needed a bear with a roughy toughy name since she felt most of mine had sissy ones! The bear on the left is also a Kiwi and he is an Americas Cup sailor who joined me in Auckland and so is quite a tough chappy. He is called Bongo.

These three bears are great friends, and though they can be trusted not to tell tales or eat your last piece of chocolate they are awful womanisers, so be warned.

Bags

My every day shoulder bag.

I had occasion today to want something I had in my bag. Since when I started my circumnavigation in 1998 I have been carrying some form of bag to hold my things, since pockets alone were not enough. I started with a small rucksack, but in 2006 when Hanna and I first visited South Africa I have been carrying a shoulder bag which I bought there. My first shoulder bag was a small black one, but a few years ago I bought the one you see here. 

I surprised myself today when I opened it to find I seem to carry a lot of stuff. Is it all necessary and how does my bag differ from that carried by other people?

The more or less every day contents of my bag!

In Morocco Hanna and I formulated the rule that we never go out without a camera, sunglasses and an umbrella! That is because the sun always shone, but it did surprise us often in that it also rained. In fact if you look closely there are two sets of sunglasses in their cases. I fancy myself as an amateur photographer who as a travel and street photographer, must be ready for anything. Hence I do carry my camera more or less regularly. I had the flash in it over Easter as well, just in case. My Leatherman tool lives in the bag, as does my passport and the wallet with my driver's licence and the car's documents. A torch is a must, as is spare batteries and memory cards for the camera. A handkerchief, is a hangover from my cub scout days, since today I use paper ones, which are also in the bag. Next to the handkerchief is a red lens cleaning cloth. Then as I am older I need to carry anti diarrhoea pills and something to settle an upset stomach. One does not want to get caught out, it can be embarrassing. Matches are also a left over from cub scout days, since I do not smoke. A nice new cotton carrier bag, a gift from a friend, is a must since one never knows what one may buy, and then how do you carry it? A set of visiting cards, supermarket coupons, a gift voucher and peppermints were found too. Last but not least is a pen and my diary. What you may ask was a I doing with a workman's ruler? Well I have been out a couple of times to buy new window boxes and I wanted to make sure I got the right size.

When I go about by bike, then I change the bag to my bike one and most things then get put in that.

My bike bag

One bag I should perhaps mention, is one I used to carry in the 70's and 80's when I smoked a pipe! It was a small black leather men's handbag, in which I kept up to 6 pipes, a tobacco pouch and other pipe smoker's accoutrements. I carried that every where, even in uniform! However, while I served in Uganda, after Idi Amin, I only had 2 pipes in it, as it then also contained my fully loaded 9mm Browning pistol and spare magazine.

The one other item  I did not mention about today's bag is my mobile phone. It does not tend to live in the bag during the week. I carry it in a pocket most of the time. When travelling in foreign parts I carry it attached to me, or when cycling attached to the cycle bag as you can see here. There are a couple of things missing which every good boy scout my age will know. Fourpence for a phone call and a piece of string. Well with a mobile phone the need for fourpence has been superseded, but the lack of string means I'm a lapsed boy scout. I promise to do better next time.

Civil War

One hundred and fifty years ago this month the American Civil War started and four years later ended. It was the  first modern and total war and cost 2% of the American population in lives alone. By to days standards that represents over five and a half million men. I say total war because it also involved for the first time, the destruction of the civil populations infrastructure when Sherman's soldiers raped and pillaged and burned cities and farms, on his march to the sea. In the beginning Europe looked on, but when Lea started winning battles, Palmeston, the then Prime-minister of England, together with France considered recognising the Confederacy. However, when Grant also started winning battles they decided to do nothing of the sort. Had they done so I am sure it would have prolonged the war and been even more costly in lives. 150 years ago it was the right thing for Europe to do, to sit and watch and await developments.

Do we ever learn the lessons of history? Today Europe is involved in the Civil War in Libya. The Prime-ministers of England and France are active participants here, but I feel they have not understood the nature of the conflict, which is a true civil war as it is between the western coastal tribes and the internal tribes which support Gaddafi. The Europeans and the Americans have never really ever understood the concepts of tribalism, as history has shown. Or else why are we involved in Iraq and in Afghanistan? These leaders want regime change and think they can bring it about by bombing. Bombing nations into submission was tried by Hitler against England's cities and failed and also by Bomber Harris against German cities and failed. Both only caused wanton destruction and needless bloodshed. Bombing alone has never won wars, only ground forces can win wars. Without Forward Air Controllers (FAC) on the ground in the front line between the forces in the conflict, to coordinate and direct the bombing, it will not be successful.

That Gaddafi is an evil despot who is clinging to power, and that his days are numbered goes without saying. But by getting involved in another nations civil war will only prolong the conflict and add further fuel to the fire of the hatred of some Muslim extremists towards Europe. America has perhaps understood this, or else why is she trying hard not to get further involved and hoping NATO will solve the problem and that NATO should get the flack when it comes, as it will.

What Europe and America has not understood about the uprisings in Arabia, is that it is not all about democracy. It is about young intelligent people, across the tribal system, seeing the corruption in their countries and wanting to change it, but more than that, they want the freedom to work, to feed and clothe their families. These young people have all been infected with the thought  "that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." This may not mean that they will have democracy as we know it, in the future, but it will mean they will be come a freer fairer nation. Of course we must support them in getting there, but that does not mean we should get embroiled in their civil wars.

Happy Easter