The Question is who can stop them?
They can show their love to each other in their house or any hidden places, but y in a public one? I guess they want to copy euro and I guess they did it in a wrong way. This is the new Kuwait so cheer up ;)
 

In a different direction.. some claim that smoking steers them away from binging-- one addiction masking another-- might as well get flat abs in return for the yellow teeth and dying lung tissue.

PDA-- I'm sorry I just can't imagine it in the M.E. lol.. all I get is a vision of a stocky Muttawwa chasing a teenage couple with a stick.. ah riyadh-- permenent emotional scarring.

and Amazing layout, Love it!
 

What bothers me most is the stigmatization of certain life choices…be it drugs, alcohol, smoking, the love of food, PDA, etc. ALL of these life choices have been seen as fine in some society at some time, yet some current societies (or powerful sectors in societies) have chosen to villainize certain lifestyles right now. I am only categorizing these in the same box because they are all stigmatized. I realize they are vastly different. As with politics, though, once a state is declared an enemy, it becomes stereotyped and generalized, just as these life choices or lifestyles are. These "issues" are all targeted by "Big Brother" now. There can't be hate between smoking and obesity because remember, "the enemy of my enemy is my friend", and in this case, that enemy would be Big Government.

Where do we, as citizens that need liberty (freedom from) our governments, stop and say "This is getting ridiculous!" Where do we draw the line?

We must act soon before they take away our desserts, our music, our loving glances, our videogames, and our sodas. Who knows if the next "project" the government will take on will be caffeine?? Perhaps I am a bit paranoid, but coffee is not coffee without caffeine!

Therefore, be it our fight, or our friend's fight, or our neighbors fight with obesity, we must stand up against "Big Brother" and remember Martin Niemöller's words:


When they came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.

When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.

When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.

When they came for the Jews,
I did not speak out;
I was not a Jew.

When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.

We must speak out now before it is too late.

Our pictures are censored, our music is censored, our affectionate actions are forbidden, and now our foods might be taxed ("junk" food in the US), "don't do this", "you can't do that"…it's like living under a strict parent for LIFE. And this is NOT a benign paternalistic relationship. As adults, we need our choices, and we need our liberty. It is with choice from which we learn what is best for ourselves. Our lives cannot be dictated by some organization that has taken on a life of its own.

Pass me the chili cheese fries, please.
 

zizo> Kuwaiti's copy Euro and US with everything so I guess it was only a matter of time before this happened...

7> WOW! U learned a new word! :P and it's actually a word! :P

So, you think that if the gov't can stop americans from stuffing their mouths, then its their duty to? If that's ur case then I refer you to caff's argument! ;)

leen> Boy Riyadh does provide some stark emotional scarring... u poor thing :P

Good point about the eating vs. smoking thing... i agree with you... i guess its a lose/lose situation huh?

Caff> You rock girl! Seriously, I love how organized and comrephensible your thoughts are and I totally agree with you.

I guess those life choices (drugs, alcohol, cigarettes, food..) were fine at some point b/c either (a) The true effects of the choices were unknown like cigarettes and drugs.. or (b) Those life choices were enjoyed in relative moderation like alcohol and food. Its when those choices got out of control and started infringing on the rights and freedoms of others (like a drunk drivers killing someone or a drug-induced raping .. etc), then the gov't felt they had to step in and regulate i.e stigmatize.

If they start a war on caffeine, someone is getting bitch slapped! That's all I can say :D

So, in light of your argument, what would you propose to be the next step? in fighting it I mean? Any ideas?

You have to admit tho, caff... it could be worse :P we could live in Iran or Saudi or something :/

"Pass me the chili cheese fries" LOL! You are good! :D

Cheers, peeps!
 

comrephensible = comprehensible

obviously :P
 

Well, better "comrephensible" than "reprehensible"! I understood what you meant ;)

You are absolutely right, Krispy Dixie, moderation is key when it comes to all life choices. When those life choices begin to affect others, that is when I think some sort of authority should step in. This was a harder point to address, because then you get to stickier points that are harder to tackle (let us use the example of obesity): What about obese children? Is the parent's fault? The schools? What about the fact that junk food is cheaper than "real" food (in the US)? And as you had mentioned in a previous comment, what if certain cases of obesity is genetic (How do you gauge that with cases of child neglect or food addiction)? What happens when an adult who is obese becomes a "burden" on society because they cannot work or leave their house or have high medical expenses? Those puzzles are quite difficult, and cannot be solved by an overly-generalized government statement / law / action. On the issue of obesity, we must remember that to be "clinically obese" now was to be "pleasantly plump and beautiful" a few centuries ago.

What is the next step? With obesity, I am in favor of removing candy vending machines from schools and / or replacing the "junk food" with snacks that are healthier. I am also in favor of the government subsidizing healthier foods, which they happen to do in this country. Continuing on that path (for Kuwait), there should be an ad campaign started up as an educational tool for parents: Something similar to the food pyramid. As children, we may remember that there used to be ads on TV that would teach us safety inside and outside the home: "La2, la2, la2! Hatha Ghalat! Hatha baladna ma tabee!" Sure, it appealed to our patriotism, but there were important messages in those short ads. Essentially, we must educate the parents and children. And since TV is a great medium for this, I say, use TV ads. There can be cartoons for kids and more serious messages for adults. There can be ads in the newspapers, as well, reminding those who can to join a healthier eating style. This "positive campaigning" should be linked to a "negative campaign." The "negative campaign" would consist of educating the public on diabetes, high cholesterol, and high blood pressure: What those diseases are and how they can be avoided (though I realize those can be genetic as well).

On the issue of PDA, I would say we are quite backwards on that one. We would have to start with the preliminary issue of co-education in schools. The Ministry of Education is cracking down on schools, segregating males and females, thus creating a further strain on male-female relationships in any other parts of life: in the home and the workplace. We need comfort between the sexes before addressing any other higher issue. Therefore, especially for private schools, I would push for true co-education, where classes are mixed WITHOUT dividers. We want males and females to be comfortable enough to get along with one another in any sort of atmosphere they find themselves in.

How do we do this? Well, as women, we vote. The connection is this: The Parliament is moving forward for sex-segregation of schools NOW, and are trying to make serious ground before women vote. When we vote in 2007, we can overturn those rulings. Right now, though, if we don't want to wait until 2007, we can even stage a protest outside the Parliament. I am sure there is one member of Parliament whom we all want to throw tomatoes at (his last name rhymes with "scrub my body"…hehehe).

I am quite grateful to be living in Kuwait as a Kuwaiti and to have more space within which we may voice our opinions. In this comparative respect, Kuwait is progressive. This is exactly the reason why this country CAN pull itself out of this "backwardness," and move forward to fostering healthier lifestyles for all of its inhabitants.
 

Caff> You know that comment could work as an article! :D very well written.

I think obesity has been stigmatized for longer than people care to admit, but at this point, in the US at least, it is just out of control. I agree with what you said about the campaigning.. altho I believe it will go largely ignored by the parents who swing their kids by McDonalds after school every other day... Another thing that should be more encouraged is exercise. The Phys Ed courses in the public system are a joke... I think we did maybe one jumping jack in four years of high school... Its rediculous. And Mr. "Scrub my body" (good one by the way! :D) said in the newspaper today that girls' phys ed activities in school should be restricted to 'lady-like' activities.... (?!) Lady-like, caff! Can u believe he said that?! He didn't give any examples of lady-like activities, but I'm guessing they revolve around knitting or... braiding hair or something along those lines.. what a pain in the a**!

As for the PDA thing, yeah we all have to deal with the segregation issue.. i'm kind of immune to it by now 'cos i was in the public system, but i think that all of the problems we have now (the whores running all over the place chasing down boys, the guys following girls around, tossing out their numbers like confetti) all of this can be traced to the act of segregation... Guys look at girls like they're aliens from another planet or something... to the point where open dialogue is not even possible... its sad.

I think Kuwait will inch its way forward, slowly but surely... it has to.. the citizens will force it.. the economic and political situation of the world will demand it... its inevitable
 

It's about time that PDA's have taken Kuwait by storm...a little huggy huggy...a little kissy kissy here and there wont hurt anybody!

Yalla...group hug! This way...all the islamists can get an eye full and then try to come up with a new law to ban it...just like how they enforce segregation and ban school graduations and proms...

tsk tsk tsk
 

I like the post, and I like the back and forth between Krispy and Caff...

Interesting. I think it is human nature to stigmitise, stereotype, generalise and group together as many aspects to life as possible.

Remember, the brain itself works in a way where thoughts are stored electronically as a collection of neural weights. Our intelligence stems from the ability to collate information and make associations.

To remove this aspect from life would be forcefully going against a centric tendancy within us. It would require everyone to agree to the notion, accept responsibility, and act collectively to enforce a change.

Judging on our oh so "prided" individuality as human beings, I dont think this will ever happen. In fact, this "collective" motion to dismiss these generalisations and stereotypes actually requires homogeneity itself - in the uniform belief that corrective action is warranted.
 

jazz> you have a unique solution to the problem, my friend! :D

Entre'> Yes, the article did produce some interesting ideas.

I understand your point about human being's natural tendency to generalize and therefore stigmatize (note spelling :P)

There is kind of an inherent contradiction there though. You said that to remove generalization would require homogeneity itself. It would, but only insofar as a group of individuals banding together to produce change. i.e a group of homogeneous people who believe action against stigmatization is warranted versus another group of homogeneous people who actively stigmatize. Do you see my point?

B/C if all actions or protests against a certain ideology required complete homogeneity, then there would be nothing to rise up against. 'cos everyone would already believe the same thing. So, following that train of thought, I think a group of people could, consciously or not, affect change within a society.
 

A group can affect change... but then THEY are the status quo. They are the "majority" and hence the minority will i'm sure band together and attempt to louden their calls for further change, perhaps backward. :) Dont u think?