Archive for May, 2009

A Report: Changing Gender Roles in the World

The aim of this report is to present the findings of a survey into male/ female opinions about changing gender roles in the world. The information was collected via a survey of 20 students (10 male and 10 female) aged 18-35 at E.O.I. Mieres.

The first part of the survey dealt with female/ male views about roles  at work.  All the students male or female said that nowadays women have more jobs but when they were asked about the type of job only a 5% of female and 20% of male said that women do same jobs as men. A very small number of the females interviewed stated that there are more women bosses whereas over 80% of the males said that there is less sexism in the office.

In contrast, when the survey discussed about the changes at home, only a small percentage of males said that men do the housework and look after the children. The reasons given for this were the lack of time, traditional education and that women do this work better than men. Almost all the people interviewed said that there had been significant changes in how men and women discuss their personal problems and today their involvement in this aspect of the relationship is the same.

In the last part of the survey the students were asked about the changes  as regards social life. In this part was where we had the highest percentages of matches between the views of female and male students The overwhelming majority of students said that women are more self-confident and independent and about the way in  which men and women spend their  leisure time, both groups said there is not much difference between their preferences.

In conclusion, the survey suggests that the views of both sexes agree on issues  regarding changes in social life and they are very similar with respect to changes at home. The main differences of opinion arise when students were asked about the evolution of women’s work and especially in the type of work they do.

The Boy in the striped Pyjamas

Wow…what to say about this film?? :$… I should know what to say but, to be honest, I don’t.

In the last month I’ve watched it twice and in two different languages, in English in the EOI and in French at school, but I haven´t been able to understand it all yet. Don’t misunderstand me, I’m not four and I know what the film is about, but every time I watch it I can feel that there’s still some secret i inside it I cannot get to comprehend. I think that apart from a moving and  tough* story there is also a message in its background that is put in our subconscious, probably without us noticing.

The film takes place in Germany, at the beginning of the Second World War, so it´s  set in the late 1930s. The main character is a little german boy, Bruno, who is still  unaware  of the world’s tragic situation. Those spectators who haven´t previously read the book may imagine an  inconsequent  children’s story just for the viewer to enjoy himself for a couple of hours.

Living in the darkness?

Living without electricity would obviously be quite difficult to assimilate, at least at first, however we could think ,even expect ,that science ,which has advanced to the point where anything is possible, would be able to produce some technological devices which could allow the human race to forget about what electricity used to mean for them.

It can be thought that in this utopian situation, welfare which nowadays citizens are able to enjoy would be reduced, which at first it would be undoubtedly true, although not for ever. As a human can be defined as someone who is capable of logical thought, humans would try to satisfy their  necessities in order to get more satisfaction and in this process, resources which nowadays are not useful at all, because are more expensive than electricity, for example, or even because they haven’t been invented yet, would be used  on a daily  basis.

However it could be thought that we could go back to the Middle Ages,where light was possible thanks to candles. Saying that would represent in fact complete ignorance of human achievements and also  of human condition which has demonstrated  that is able to overcome all kind of situations.

So bearing all  these in mind,although living without electricity would represent an  inconvenient problem,human ingenuity  could solve it, however, it is true that a long time would be needed, while the process of searching for another energetic source comes to a satisfactory end.

May 25th

We did the following listening comprehension:

Then we did a vocabulary activityfrom Onestopenglish, permission to lie:

And we practised a little bit for the oral test. I gave you a handout with useful phrases for the oral test, that you may use in order to play for time. This useful handout was written by my friend and collegue María Valdés, and if you didn’t come to class yesterday you can download it from her blog:

Women, the strongest sex

We know that  over the years, there have been lots of changes in the consideration of male and female roles or stereotypes, for instance nowadays there is even a minister foe equality who tries to get a more equalitarian society, but do you think it is true?, do you think all these changes, these new rules, even the minster  are necessary,  or more important,  are they useful?

According to scientists, I will try to explain which are  the real differences that are only physiological differences.

First of all, we have to admit that women’s brains are smaller than men’s, it weighs ten percent less. In the past it was thought that cleverer people  had a bigger brain. Nowadays we know that the clue for that, it is what there is inside the brain that  that counts. The brain consists of ‘grey matter’ (the part of the brain that helps us think)) and ‘white matter’ (the part that helps transfer information). And while men have more of the latter, the amount of ‘thinking’ brain is almost exactly the same in both sexes.

At the same time scientists discovered how a smaller brain also mean s  a ‘more efficient’ brain, perhaps because the two sides of the brain appear to be better connected in women. That’s the reason why little girls tend to learn to talk earlier and then when she is an adult she can absorb all sorts of information from different sources at the same time, she is completely adapted to ‘multi-tasking’. So I am used to see my mother talking on the phone with a friend, while she is cooking dinner and keeping an eye on the television!!!

Another physiological important difference is’ the grey matter’, that’s the key to spacial tasks, that’s why we are more conscious of where we are and where the things are in relation to the others. That’s the reason why normally, men are better  at sports, perhaps because he can be conscious of where the ball is, or the other footballers for example, how much energy he needs to move the ball in relation with the distance…Another curious thing, is that this grey matter is the responsible of why men never ask for directions, they can understand a map better, while women often need to ask.

All these differences started in the womb.  In about nine weeks  of pregnancy, differences in testosterone levels mean that male foetuses begin to develop a male brain and females a female brain. The differences are shown in behaviour at the age of one year…

In adult life, these physiological differences continue, we can examine the percentage of boys and girls in their career choices: for example 85 per cent of the architects in the USA and 90 per cent of the mechanics are men (good spacial skills), meanwhile, 94 percent of speech therapists are women.

Finally, I would like to do  a final reflexion: all these physiologic al differences are in relation with our ancestors, in prehistoric times, women needed verbal and emotional skills to control and educate their babies, while men needed spacial skills  for hunting. But all this has changed completely nowadays, so we have an old brain in a fashionable society, a society that despite all the initiatives, changes, ministers…is a sexist society. In my opinion, there can be lots of  things responsible for this sexism, our history, our costumes for years…but one of the best solutions is time: the new generations, we are far more conscious of the equality between sexes, that each one needs to be considered and paid in the same way for instance, if she can do the same job  as a man, why should she  have a lower position, with a lower salary… There are men who cook much better than his wives!!!

(I’m half-joking!!)

Ecotourism? Not as ecological as they say

by oneVillage Initiative

by oneVillage Initiative

One effect of globalization is tourism. In the past people spent their holidays in the nearest areas but nowadays fast communications are  causing an  authentic revolution of tourism.  Everybody wants to travel to the  remotest places, not only in their own country but also around the world. But how  does mass tourism affect the countries and local people? Is it possible to reach a perfect balance between mass tourism and environmental conservation or do we need to promote ecotourism. Is  it as sustainable  as it is said?

If we have a look to the poorest countries which receive thousands of tourists from  all over the world, we’ll discover that most of the local people work in the tourist industry but this does not seem  to improve their way of life, in fact they are working like slaves  for the big tour operators and hotel chains. The money spent by the tourists in  those countries hardly ever profits native people.  And moreover the massive building of hotels is negatively affecting the environment, destroying   the rainforest, polluting the soil and water and killing the native fauna. Even the coral reefs are increasingly disappearing by  careless scuba-diving, snorkeling, cruises and speed outboard navigation.

And this occurs both in developed countries and in the poorer countries which are imitating the bad ways of the richer ones. You should only  compare most touristic locations around the Mediterranean Sea, the Caribean or the Pacific. You will see everywhere a  long line of high buildings running next to the seashore and main beaches. However in some tourist countries buildings are smaller, frequently built with local materials and scattered in resorts mixed with gardens and trees. But even if this is the case hundreds of tourist are there, so you can´t forget the negative impact  on the environment.

Lastly some people worried  about conservation are claiming a different kind of tourism, the eco-tourism. Tourism that can support indigenous population and tribes by letting them show their ancient environmental knowledge. In the end they have preserved nature so far in the remote areas where they live. The idea is good but people want to spend their holidays on this places and at the same time they are not prepared to forego the facilities of five or four star hotels. Even the natives, observing the tourists’ wishes and way of life, are starting to copy the same bad manners, losing, in many cases, their own culture. Market rules.
Finally I think real eco tourism is not possible, except perhaps just for an  authentic adventurer, . The solution could be a mixture of traditional tourism (not mass tourism) but letting the local people  take part in the  decisions which affect them and their  environment, and of course, good  tourism policies from the governments taking into account that you can’t get a profit from everything and everywhere. We will have to promote  ecotourism by protecting special areas (like natural or national parks) organizing sustainable tours. Costa Rica, which  has many National Parks and a big part of its country protected, is the best example, although despite the Government´s care about this issue,  lately ecologists are claim ing  that the environment is being damaged there too.

More listening practice

For those of you who have asked for more listening practice, you can go to Javier’s English Corner and give these activities a try:

The Boy in the Striped Pijamas, the movie

pajamas

If at the beginning of the film it seems we are going to enjoy a delicious film about childhood pranks, this is only an ephemeral impression. The atmosphere immediately changes when a minute later we watch German soldiers starting to throw the Jews out of their houses, leading them rudely somewhere we still don’t know. At first the movie emphasizes the contrast between the luxurious home where Bruno lives in Berlin with his parents having parties with friends, and the sad and cold house (forming part of a headquaters camp) located on a far place in the country where his father is sent. There are no children, no joy, nobody to play with. Bruno is not allowed to speak to the strange doctor, who despite having cured him, has to peel potatoes or to the other people and children he discovers through the window, on the other side of the fence, all of them in striped pyjamas. So it is not  surprising that Bruno’s lively mind tries to escape from this kind of prison searching for the adventures every child needs. In this way he makes a secret friendship from the forbidden side, Shmuel, who gradually becomes a close companion.
The end of the film is so hard that, for a couple of hours, it remained in my mind, leaving me a bad  feeling as if I had had a recent argument with a close friend and I was still blaming myself for it. This is, for me, the big difference between the film and the book, because the movie -like cinema in general- appears to be so real that grasps your emotions still stronger than reading.
Obviously is not possible to tell the whole book in an 90 minute film, much wider and detailed, but the movie appears to be instantly more real. It’s harder to swallow the picture of the innocent and naked boys entering the horror chamber of the concentration camp, surrounded by a crowd of skinny Jewish prisoners walking all straight to death, their crying drowned by a heavy closed door and the wide walls of the evil place. I was more uncomfortable and shocked than when I read the book. I felt the tragedy was round the corner when Bruno’s father, mother and sister, running desperately, searching for him, realise how their worst  premonitions become more and more real. This makes you share the same emotions, to see what they see as if  you were one of the  characters. And the most heartbreaking scene, when Bruno’s mother and sister discover the hole under the fence and his clothes near it; the mother crying and asking why while looking at the sky.
Paradoxically, despite being surrounded by all this horror, I experimented an unhealthy feeling of revenge when the father arrives to the camp too late, watching the empty hut as a soldier, wearing a gas mask, has just finished releasing the mortal load inside the chamber. Bruno’s father heartrending cry and anguished expression summarise the horror of having his son killed and how deeply it hurts, like anarrow thrown to his heart.  He has tasted his own horrid nazi medicine. Only then does he realise that he has assassinated his own innocent son, and he probably realises the monstrosities they were doing to the prisoners.
Finally I would like to highlight the final scene, the striped pyjamas scattered in the empty hut, waiting for new Jewish bodies to put them on.  The senseless massacre that will be repeated again and again.

Bartleby.com

imagen-3