Titles and Outrage

As usual with all my rants, this story begins on a car journey to work.

Listening to Radio 1, the dj had a caller on line who said he was an engineer and on further questioning on what he did, he said that he unclogged toilet pipes.

I'm not sure if I need to write any more to show how incensed we were (bear in mind that our car had two engineers and a manager who was a software engineer).

Granted, if he designed the pipes then it requires a modicum of engineering ability but to merely flush out pipes and call himself an engineer?! The UK is a sad place for real engineers as the status has been dragged through the dirt... literally with the cases of civic amenities engineers, or bin-men as you and I would call them, whereas being a doctor or a lawyer is a preserved title for the deserving.

Have you ever called BT to have your phone line fixed and been told that they will despatch an engineer?
Have you been to a car garage and seen themselves being advertised as auto-engineers?
Or maybe rang up an 'electrical engineer' to wire your house alarm?

Our culture has come to such a state that work that is not popularised by the media need to become tarted-up so the pimple-faced boy in Subway now has the title of a 'sandwich artist' and a 'custodian engineer' for a janitor.
Over into mainland Europe, engineers enjoy an acknowledged status and isn't used by every Tom, Dick or Harry in an attempt to boost their ego's from their manual jobs. It's disappointing going to a bank and when asked for profession, you get bundled with mechanic whereas teachers, lawyers, doctors all enjoy their own division.

I think it's important to realise the distinction between an engineer and all the above mentioned (and more) pretenders. Engineers are those who understand the theory and science of objects in their field.
For example an automotive engineer will know how the driveline system works, the different components and how components such as a torque convertor works and what difference changing the oil or temperature in it will do and why... but not necessarily need to know how everything is physically put together. Now the local 'auto-engineer' garage will very likely not know any of this except the building of the system, how to change parts etc. - they are mechanics.
Similarly in a science or non mechanical field, you will have the scientist and then the technician.

So when I need my phoneline fixed, I want a technician to come around and fix it, not an engineer to analyse and deliver a communications system.
When I take my car to have it's MOT done, I want a mechanic to have a look at everything rather than an engineer modelling the car and giving me an optimum gear-map.
When I want someone to press some buttons on a manufacturing line, I want a shop floor worker rather than an 'assistant production engineer'!
And when I want my road cleaned, I would want a sweeper rather than a 'throughfare hygiene engineer'!

If you ever come across these pretenders, please kindly give them my utmost outrage and tell them to stop demeaning us real engineers.

Strawberry, cream, equality and Wimbledon

The end of the tournament was today and what a final! A 30game last set which never seemed to end! And now that it is all over, I have time to make a quick complaint (seems that's all I do here!).

Traditionally women were paid less in prize money than men at Wimbledon and it was justified by the organisers as men played more sets. The difference wasn't great (a £30k difference between Nadal and Mauresmo in 2006) but it was still lobbied for equal pay and had a lot of feminists up in arms at Wimbledon as the only big championship to have the difference.

But aren't they fighting the wrong battle? Do they really concede that the work done in the shorter womens game is equal to the mens?! If this was a normal working environment such as an office, you would expect a man and woman in the same post to be on the same payrate but if the man worked more hours that he should earn more... yet why is this not the case here?

If you want equality then become equal in all that you do!

Democracy and its dark secret

The recent elections in Iran has produced a wide variety of opinions and this has got me thinking about what democracy really means.

A lot of people are claiming that the voting had been rigged as there were suspicious circumstances and coincidences involved. These folk applauded the Iranian people for rising up against the government and holding a peaceful protest as a sign of their disatisfaction and longed for similar action in their respective countries against policies and directions their governments were taking. In contrast the others are admonishing the former as sore losers as Ahmedinejad was voted in by the majority and they should accept it... this is reminiscent of the Palestine elections where Hamas won, much to the shock of others.

Countries, the US in particular, have been the first to point out the greatness of democracy and have even invaded other countries to enforce this but is this what everyone wants? Democracy is a majority-rule based system where votes are cast to decide matters but there will always be losers, it's the nature of the system. At what point do you decide the will of the people? Is 2/3 of votes enough? I'm not sure I'd take action where a third of the people were against it.

Here lies the great weakness - us humans. Each and everyone of us is naturally selfish and want things our way and complain when it doesn't. This will create an inherent rebellion and you will find a loud minority voicing their disatisfaction which will affect the others. Democracy may mean the majority get their way but at the expense of others and no-one likes losing and chances are that you will lose at least once, is this really the ideal situation or just the best of the bunch to rule the people?

Maximising Perks or Unethical?

As you're no doubt aware, unless you've been stuck in a nuclear bunker and disconnected from the world the past 3 months, scandal has hit our fair shores in the form of government 'corruption'. A bastion of democracy with a rich history and the rise of parliamentary powers over monarchy by the common people only to now find itself revealed for what it has become - a self serving collection of elected officials.

The BBC did a survey where they found half the population thought at least half of the MP's were corrupt and most had lost faith in the officials that are supposed to run the country but I'm left wondering... are people really surprised?

I had always known that wherever there is a system, people will try and game it to their advantage. From simple things like loopholes in a supermarkets voucher policy, it is only a matter of scale as you go up the tree. Was there anyone really unaware that officials would try and get away with as much as they could? Or is the real anger that it's been bluntly exposed?

The MP's get a second home allowance and have many purchases repaid, some of which do truly feel inappropriate. I work and earn a factor less than MP's yet I pay for my own food and bills, should these people get their food and bills paid for by my tax money? But are they to blame for asking for a rebate or should the system be questioned for allowing them to do so?

Rather than question the integrity of the MP's, I would rather voice my anger at the system for allowing this to happen because in all honesty, I can see myself doing the same if I was in their shoes.

Remember... power corrupts and try not judging others without questioning yourself first.

Faith Misplaced?

Once again, this topic was started in the car journey to/from work... is there any topic that we don't cover?!

Several of my colleagues have young children and a number of them have sent their children to faith schools and the question was should kids be sent to a school based on the educational standard and in a mixed cultural/religious environment or a single faith based school which would tend to have a limited demographic.

Arguments put forward were that, irrespective of which faith, kids were brought up with morals and in better behaved culture but a counterpoint was that these kids would have a limited growth being around only a certain type of people and stunted development as 'kids just don't get to be kids' and are uncannily angelic.

My background was going to a Roman Catholic school and I can compare my junior school to one 2 blocks away which was a normal mixed state school and the difference was remarkable. We were in uniform, better behaved and performed better in exams. On the other hand, I had to attend all the Christian religious ceremonies, including several masses and even eating the wafer representing the body of Christ... despite being of a different religion!
Due to the confusion caused amongst children of other beliefs, other faith schools have opened up to cater for the different needs but are children going to these schools not having the best childhood?

One of my friends went to a mixed school and he claimed that he preferred it as from a young age he was in a multi cultural society and although it was less behaved, the lessons learnt from the social aspect was irreplaceable. Kids should be able to be kids and if they don't get to any trouble, they're not having a fun time. They should learn the boundaries of their behaviour and learn early on how to deal with situations like bullying, being with girls (some faith schools separate the genders) as well as understanding different cultures and becoming more tolerant.

If you have kids, where would you send your children? Or where have you already sent them and why?

Traditions of Stupidity

On the daily commute to work, my friends and I always have some long and thoughtful debates/discussions such as the consistency of poo and Thursday was no exception... we were talking about St George's day and the statement said by one of my friends was that all people who celebrate St George's day are stupid.

The other two passengers were taken back by this broad sweeping generalisation and were arguing against him but I couldn't help but agree, to some extent. Christianity is in a declining state with few people attending church yet everyone would celebrate St George's Day but would they know the significance of the man?

A brief history of St George... a man born from a Roman father and a Palestinian mother who had never set foot in England and died as a martyr for not renouncing his faith. Well, I did say brief history! Oh, legend also has it that he once came across a pagan town sacrificing a girl to appease a dragon and he slay the monster and all the people converted.

So why do the English celebrate St George's Day when most haven't set foot in a church? How many believe that St George was in England? Or that he had a Palestinian mother? The day is to celebrate the life of a man who died for his faith... and in this modern age, many people who do this are labelled as either nutters or terrorists.
Has the meaning lost got lost in translation through the ages and they celebrate St George's character of bravery in adversity? In which case, why not change it to someone else that everyone can relate to?

Can anyone name other traditions that are carried mindlessly?

Sequels and Disappointments

It seems many sequels and remakes walk hand in hand with a Raspberry... the latest instalment of failure to make me cry a little inside is Street Fighter: Legend of Chun Li.

The Street Fighter series has a rich background and lore which is quite interesting and much to explore and the game does well in teasing with snippets of the characters past or possible futures and there have been animés that continued this trend of leaving you hanging and wanting more and when I heard that they've made a new movie of it, I was struck with both trepidation as well as excitement... would it be like the cheesy Van Damme version or will the producers come out with the current trend of excellent remakes (Batman, Watchmen, X Men). I started sniffing around on the interweb and found Kristin Kreuk would be playing Chun Li (she plays Lana in Smallville, I think she's hot but not as much as Allison Mack - plays Chloe Sullivan) and began to start salivating... yes, I'm a bloke, what do you expect?

I've been waiting keenly for the UK release but haven't heard any rumblings and so I had another look and found out that it's been such a flop over the pond that they may not release it here! What... The...

So yes, I've been majorly disappointed again.

Thing with Street Fighter is that although it has a great story, it just may not work as a normal movie and perhaps needs to stick with being animated so you can enjoy the effects more. This is the reason I'm really looking forward to seeing Dragonball and seeing if they can actually pull off animation->movie conversions... bets on another disappointment?