Showing posts with label choice. Show all posts
Showing posts with label choice. Show all posts

Friday, 3 November 2017

Celebrating

I just caught a YouTube video that reminded me of a story I heard at work - told to me by a co-worker. One of the joys of retail is dealing with customers' strange expectations, this one struck me as strange at first but this video made me realise it's really not and needs to be acknowledged.

A lady came in looking for a very specific card. It was a major wedding anniversary but it was not to give to a couple, parents or a spouse (all available), it was for herself. She wanted to mark her anniversary when no one else would because she had been widowed some time before. Death did not negate her love, her marriage, her wanting to mark the milestone. We didn't have a card for that. 

And she should mark / celebrate the occasion imho. We all should mark / celebrate whatever milestones and anniversaries that are meaningful to us, positive and negative.

I don't think forgetting a wedding anniversary should be a catastrophic thing. Marriages are every day weddings are a one time deal...I know which I think is more important. Honouring your marriage EVERY DAY is more important than an annual thing the way I see it. If you don't want to mark your birthdays that's cool too (I have that line from the Twilight Saga running through my head about Bella, aged all of 18, not wanting to celebrate her ageing...just wait until you're pushing forty grumbles the old lady). It's all about CHOICE. Celebrate / don't celebrate. Mourn / don't mourn. Commemorate / don't commemorate. Choose how to honour your experiences and how to continue your life.

The YouTube video I mentioned was about an approaching first wedding anniversary after the death of a husband but it makes me think of other videos and comments I have seen - like ridiculing loss parents for marking their 'angelversaries' - the anniversary of the loss of their child. Excuse you, internet trolls, what is it to you if or how people mark that day? Do you honestly think anniversaries like that can or should be ignored or forgotten?! For me it has been 23 years but I still think of Jake every 27th July; which is not to say I don't think of him at other times. Nor do I make an EFFORT to remember, it just happens. If should an anniversary pass and I forget that's okay too but you can't force it. Time doesn't heal exactly, but it does change things.

On a different note: when I was dieting I marked EVERY milestone I could think of. Every half stone, every 5lb increment every 5% off my start weight. Multiplying the milestones makes the goal seem more attainable. Same, I think, with addicts taking it one day at a time. Each day is its own achievement. And my god, it you WANT to buy a 'Well Done' card or a helium balloon or a bunch of flowers to celebrate then just DO IT!!! For your parent, child, sibling, partner...or yourself.

I don't think we celebrate OURSELVES as much as we should. It's seen as prideful or selfish but you know what? A lot of us have low self esteem. A lot of us don't have families who celebrate us or our achievements. So yeah, celebrate yourself, love yourself.

Saturday, 31 March 2012

No Smoke Without Fire

Before I start I just want to say a few things. I am not a smoker. No one in my family is a smoker. Nor is any of us employed in the tobacco industry or otherwise affected by it.

This morning on BBC News, just before 7:30, a pro-smoking campaigner was speaking out against a new anti-smoking television advertisement and surprisingly I agreed with him whole heartedly.

The advertisement in question shows smoke creeping throughout a house and wreathing around a child - the point being to not smoke around children. Well, obviously I agree with the sentiment, as indeed did the pro-smoking campaigner, but he made several really important points:

Asthma in children has increased whilst smoking rates are decreasing. Blaming smokers for their children's health problems is not necessarily justified. Plenty of children of non-smokers suffer asthma and other illnesses "associated with smoking".

The same advert could have been made for any other pollutant - such as dustmites or the chemicals that impregnate our carpets, sofas etc. The interviewer's come back was that those pollutants are unavoidable. This is simply not true. Admittedly the alternatives can prove impractical and expensive - hard floors, washable rugs, alternative furniture and air-conditioning units are all potential solutions only really worth considering if someone in your home has a severe allergy.

The 50s and 60s babyboomers were a generation largely raised in smoky homes and yet people are living longer and healthier lives. No one is suggesting smoke is good for you but can it really be as dangerous as it's made out? I was raised in a smoke free home and yet I am asthmatic; I know people who were raised by chain smokers who are perfectly healthy. Hardly conclusive but certainly suggestive.

But the most important point is this; how far are the Government going to go in dictating people's actions in their own homes? We've already had cases of parents being prosecuted for allowing their children (subsequently taken into care) to become obese and yet strangely drug addicts seem to regularly retain custody of their offspring.

In my OU course I've recently been looking at the Communist dictatorships of Russia (via Stalin) and China (via His Holiness The Dalai Lama) and I can certainly see a parallel between those dictatorships and the increasing interference of the state in our supposed democracy. How much more control does the Government want over what people choose to do in the privacy of their own homes? Whilst I don't think parents should smoke around their kids should having children mean you no longer have freedom of choice? Perhaps children should be offered freedom of choice - and be able to leave smoky homes...or neglectful homes, drunken homes, homes with parents who fight all the time? Why is it that a child can't get away from any number of bad - but not criminally so - situations until they are at least 16 years old?