South East Asia Tour Insanity

Avid readers,

I spent the whole weekend trying to come up with a smart and witty blog entry. We’re out of luck, it didn’t happen. The truth is, I actually spent the whole weekend looking at South East Asia itineraries for our next trip.

I’ve done the independent travel thing in China. I slept with rats and cockroaches. I spent hours figuring out a train schedule. I ate gross food. Check, check, and check. I am old now and I just want a comfy tour.

Requirements:

-30 days

-Thailand, Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia

-Thailand beaches
-Good sh*t food
-Decent accommodation
-An elephant ride

Sounds easy enough? Think again *roll eyes*. I found a company offering great stuff. However, my other half is worried that the accommodation will be below princess standards (for him of course). Fine, then find a better one honey. Wishful thinking.

I’ve looked up every single googleable tour companies. I am losing it!

Canada’s Dark Ages

Canada, welcome to the Dark Side, buahhahhh. Hey, I recognize a couple of familiar faces: Bush, Rumsfeld, Rice. Hey folks, we’re here too!!!

Ah ah *insert sarcasm here*. I can’t say I am surprised. I’ve had about three weeks to get used to the idea. Somehow, I am still stunned. It seems surreal.

Am I the only one who thinks that the Conservative party doesn't represent Canadian values? Let's take a look at Canada's Newcomer Guide. This document provides information about the Canadian way of life to newcomers. I have some news for Citizenship and Immigration Canada. They will have to seriously revise the Newcomer’s Guide. I couldn’t help but have a chuckle when I read about our ‘shared values which guide and influence much of our everyday life”.

Let's see:

"Fairness, tolerance and respect. Canadians want fairness and justice for themselves, their children and their families. And most are fair and just to others, no matter who they are or where they come from."

Harper’s Note: Our government will “preserve and protect the family unit “ Newcomer, we have a very narrow definition of ‘family’ in our country. It certainly does not include homosexual families. We're also giving a big $1,200 a year to each child for daycare. It's $5 per day. It's not nothing.

I support a private health care system. That's best for families.

“Immigrants are choking welfare systems, contributing to high unemployment, and many cannot read.”
- Art Hanger, Conservative

"Diversity and cooperation. Canadians understand the value of cooperation. In a country as large and diverse as Canada, people must be able to learn to resolve or ignore small conflicts in order to live happily and peacefully."

Harper’s Note: Newcomer, please ignore my behaviour at the House of Commons during the past year and half. Under exceptional circumstances, Canadians are allowed to be aggressive and uncooperative.

Quebec is also an exception. They are welcomed to separate.

One more exception, the Prime Minister only speaks to the media on his/her own terms. Right now, I just don’t feel like it.

Finally, we should have been involved in Iraq.

"Equal opportunity. Canadians believe in equality. Each person is equal before the law and is treated equally by the law. Women and men have the same opportunity for success. Canadians let people live as they wish, as long as they do not limit how others live."

Harper’s Note: Women, not so much Newcomer. We don’t support abortion. My wife who kept her maiden name went by Harper during the campaign according to my own party’s recommendation.

“There's a particular reason why Jesus called men only. It's not that women aren't co-participators. It's because Jesus knew women would naturally follow. Men, on the other hand, had to be called.” -David Sweet, Conservative MP

When comparing abortion to beheading: “We saw that young American having his head cut off. What's happening, what is happening down there no different.”
-Cheryl Gallant, Conservative MP.

"Civil responsibility. Canadians appreciate their rights and freedoms, which are the same without regard to gender, race, or ethnicity. Most also want to contribute to our society."

Harper’s Note: This is a bit tricky. As a Newcomer, you have to understand that all Canadians are equal, but some are more equal. For example, gays and lesbians are equal to all Canadians, but I am opposed to same-sex marriage. Know what I mean?

I also believe that the nonwithstanding clause should be used, but ONLY to overwrite the rights of minorities.

"The fact don't matters"
-Rondo Thomas, Conservative candidate

"Environmental responsibility. Canadians are especially conscious of their natural environment and the need to both respect and protect it for the future. Canadians believe that economic growth should not come at the expense of a healthy environment and social well-being."

Harper’s Note: Newcomer, I agree with all of this, except when it comes to Kyoto.

Harper’s Final Note: The Newcomer Guide definitely needs an update. My government is currently working on the New Newcomer Guide. In the mean time, I suggest you read about American values. It will give you a good head start.

*Quotes are courtesy of Rick Mercer's blog.

*Sigh*

Make some room in the Bible Belt, Alberta is on its way! Make more room, Saskatchewan and Manitoba are coming too! Déjà vu? The demographic MTV effect is now political: No Conservative MPs have been elected in Montreal, Toronto or Vancouver. The three largest urban centers (12 million people) are not represented by the party in power. Creepy.

I am actually not too scared about the damage Harper can cause with a minority government. Nothing concrete will ever be achieved, but he can’t do too much destruction. What terrifies me is the next election. He is going to play Mr. Nice Guy for as long as he is in power. Why would he even bother bringing up any controversial issues such as abortion and gay marriage? With 60% of the House being left-wing, he is fully aware none of his outdated policies would stand a ‘free vote’. His hypocrisy will gain the confidence and votes of the masses. Next election, he will win *gulp* a majority. And then BOOMMMMM!!! His true colours will show.

Since I can’t leave my readers disheartened, I shall end this entry on a positive note. Hmm… hmm…*thinking*….*thinking harder*… Eureka. This situation should provide enough time for the Liberal party to do a clean sweep. Being the majority of the minority (ah!?), they are going to call the next election. Hopefully, they’ll pick a strategic time.

Keep your beliefs to yourself, woman

How the hell do these ‘Bible Studies’ people get your phone number anyway. And what makes them think it’s ok to call you at 10am on Saturday morning?

Here’s how our conversation went:

Her: Hi. I am X from Bible Studies Something.

Me: Ya.

Her: Do you have a positive outlook on the future?

Me: Yes.

Her: (Surprise!) Ah, ok because with all the wars, world hunger, etc most people are not positive. The Bible says …. *insert bull shit*.

Me: I don’t believe in this fictional book. It’s like a movie.

Her: Oh is that what you think?

Me: Ya.

Her: The Scriptures were written thousands of years ago.

Me: Who wrote them?

Her: Man.

Me: What was man’s hidden agenda when he wrote that?

Her: Why do you think there was hidden agenda?

Me: Because all men have a hidden agenda. The US were almost going to allow intellectual design in biology books. It doesn’t mean Adam and Eve is a proven event, does it?

Her: The Scriptures were written thousands of years ago.

Me: Egyptians wrote stuff thousands of years ago so did the Romans. It doesn’t mean it was true.

Her: The Scriptures predicted events 7,000 years before they happened.

Me: Like what?

Her: The birth of Christ.

Me: The person who ‘decoded’ the Scriptures after the birth of Christ interpreted that.

Her: The Scriptures were written thousands of years ago.

Me: If the facts don’t fit the theory, change the facts (That’s Einstein).

Her: The Scriptures were written thousands of years ago.

[Woman, I believe we have entered into a circular argument. Here’s a surprise. That’s what happened when you try to argue fiction.]

Me: Ok, I don’t have time for this.

Believe whatever you want, it’s a free society. However, calling me on a Saturday morning and wanting to change my belief system is a plain invasion of my privacy. Please, keep your beliefs to yourself; I don’t want to be saved. If Heaven is full of people like you, Hell is probably much more fun anyway!

Harper, his two faces, and the Senate

Early this week, Harper attempted to reassure Canadians that a Liberal-dominated Senate would be a check on Tory power. In other words, a Conservative government would be unable to implement extreme right-wing policies due to the fact that the Senate and the Supreme Court judges are largely Liberals-appointed. Suddenly, I got this warm fuzzy feeling inside that maybe a Tory government would not be the end of the world after all.

Then kaboom. As we say in French, “Chassez le naturel, il revient au galop” meaning “once a thief, always a thief” or even better “once a liar, always a liar”. Two days later, he claimed that a Senate rejection of a bill restoring the definition of marriage to “a man and a woman” only would be an “obvious abuse of power by the Senate”. He carried on saying that the Senate should be elected, not appointed.

Canada's first Prime Minister, John A. Macdonald described it best. According to him, the Senate is a body of "sober second thought" that would curb the "democratic excesses" of the elected House of Commons (Wikipedia). Further, he believed that the primary purpose of the Senate was to “calmly consider the legislation initiated by the popular branch, and preventing any hasty or ill-considered legislation which may come from that body” (Parliament Library).

Historically, the Senate rarely opposes the House of Commons. In this sense, its role is one similar to an insurance policy. You hope you’ll never have to use it, but you’re glad it’s there if something goes really wrong. You’ll have to excuse my lack of faith in the masses. In an ideal world, all voters would be smart, non-prejudiced, and informed. In reality, it’s not case. A democracy is not only about the ruling majority, it’s also about minority rights. So what if 47% of the population is narrow-minded, against human rights, and gay marriage (43% is not and 9% is unsure (Leger Marketing,2005)? The Senate may be the only chance that Canada has to compensate for its bigoted majority. If it decides to block the bill, it wouldn't be an 'abuse power'. It would only be performing its role!

The Senate is populated with well-rounded individuals who would make a well-rounded decision in this hypothetical situation. They are not solely appointed on the basis of their political affiliation, but on the basis of their achievements. They are wise, intelligent, respected individuals with an array of expertise. It’s worth taking a look at the biographies of each Senators (Librairy of Parliament)

Electing the Senate would go against it’s raison d’être. I would prefer to abolish it rather than wasting money on another mass-driven institution.And seriously, who needs another election when we know it costs 200 million dollars?(Election Canada)

What’s the rush woman?

The median age of women at first marriage rose from 21 years old in the early 1970s to 28 years old by 2001 (VIF, 2004 ). Similarly, the median age of women at the birth of their first child rose from 23 years old in 1976 (VIF, 2004) to 28 years old in 2003 (Statistics Canada, 2003). Not only do they have their children later, but they also have fewer of them. The fertility rate declined from 2.33 live births per woman in 1970 (Statistics Canada, 2002) to 1.53 in 2003 (Statistics Canada, 2003). Childfree households increased from 34% in 1981 to 41% in 2001 (Statistics Canada, 2002). “The changed age-pattern of childbearing, or the delay of fertility, has largely been associated with women's increased education and labour force participation” (VIF, 2004).

I am not interested in demonstrating the benefits of delaying childbearing from 16 to 20 years old. The impacts of childbearing during the teenage years have been well-documented: lower educational attainment, fewer job opportunities, lower income, and likelihood of separation/divorce single parenthood. There are also direct impacts on the child him/herself: prematurity, low birth weight and the problems it may lead to such as blindness, deafness, chronic respiratory problems, mental retardation, cerebral palsy, mental illness, and infant death, lower performance in school, higher likelihood of misbehaviour, delinquency, and school suspensions, abuse/neglect, and repeated teen pregnancy (Berglas, Brindis, and Chohen, 2003). What I am really interested in is the impact of delaying childbearing in later years such as 30 years old and over.

Research has demonstrated that delaying childbearing is beneficial at several levels. First, women who delay childbearing have higher incomes. “Women who delay childbearing have fewer children and are significantly better off economically than average-age childbearer. And by retirement age, the delayed childbearer with only one or two children appears better off than all other women” (Hoffert,1984; Riblett Wilkie, 1981). More recently, Statistics Canada estimated that women who postpone having children earn at least 6.0% more than women who have children early, but the gap erodes slightly overtime (Statistics Canada, 2002).Others suggest a 10% to 20% gap (Amuedo-Dorantes and Kimmel, 2003 and Times Onlines, 2005). Not a big deal, right? Or is it? Think compound interest. After 30 years, you tell me if it matters*.

Of course, children are so important that you are willing to sacrifice your standard of living and your career for them. What really counts is the little buddle of joy. Lets move on to the really important things then: the impact of mother’s age on children. Levitt and Dubner demonstrates that children of mothers who were at least 30 years old at the time of delivery and had higher education do better in school (Freakonomics). Arguably, having a child after 30 increases the likelihood of success in his/her adult life.

You’re almost convinced, but what about biology: the fear mongering factor. We know that fertility starts to decrease in early twenties. Most sources agree that fertility decline rapidly over 35 years old. However, the impact of waiting from 20 to 34 years old before getting pregnant is not that significant. “If you're in your early 30s, your pregnancy risks differ little from those of a woman in her 20s.” (Health Discovery, 2005). What may differ is the time it may take to conceive. Between 20-24 years old, the likelihood of a woman getting knocked up is 86%. This percentage decreases slightly to 78% between 25-29 years old, and 63% between 30-34 years old (Babycenter, 2005). This difference is marginal. And by the way, even though women are most fertile between 20 and 24 years old, they are also at higher risks of preeclampsia (Health Discovery, 2005). This means that unless you want a dozen kids, there’s no need to start early.

So? What’s the rush woman?

*Just in case I got you curious. A woman makes 50K per year. 6% of 50K=$3,000 per year. Let’s assume she invests this 3K in her RRSP (7% interest rate) every year she delays childbearing. She will only withdraw the money in thirty years when she retires. Assuming the highly unlikely event that her salary does not increase, one year delay = 23K, 5 year delay = 100K, 10 year delay=172K.

Spinning

Oh.My.God. I threw up, ‘nough said!

My colleagues thought I was unhealthy. Somehow, they convinced me to spin with them three times a week. I thought it would be fun. Today was my first day. I got up at 6 o’clock, ate a toast and half, and was on my bike at 7am.

The first 15 minutes were bearable. The next 15 minutes, not so much. I had to leave, throw up, and come back. Very embarrassing.

Granted, I am completely out of shape. I haven’t worked out once since I got my appendix surgery in November. Regardless, spinning is hard stuff. I am gonna stick to it because it’s good for me and it’s kinda of fun too.

And I forgot my hair accessories so I am currently using a paper clip. Très chic.

Cuba, Communism, and everything

Disclaimer: The following statements are those of the author only and are not necessarily those of the scientific community. They are opinions and should be interpreted as such.

According to Wikipedia, “Communism refers to a theoretical system of social organization and a political movement based on common ownership of the means of production. As a political movement, communism seeks to establish a classless society.” Although it may have been in the case in 1950, Cuba is certainly not a pure communist state anymore.

Cuba has been invaded by tourists. Varadero is a nice artificial stretch of land specifically designed for tourists full of hotels, beaches and sun. Two million people visit Cuba every year. Recently, the Cuban government took over the administration of all establishments in Cuba. That could perhaps explain the low quality of maintenance, food, and service received at our resort, Breezes. Being all managed by the government, it really should not matter anymore which resort you pick.

A couple of years ago, this was not the case. Breezes managed its own resort. Our snorkelling guide even won a “best employee” of the year award. Breezes gave him 150 pesos to buy clothes and a whole week at Breezes Montego Bay. Five years later, he was still excited about that week! There are currently no incentives for workers to go above and beyond. Consequently, there are definitely not a costumer-pleasing culture. The buffet restaurant tables were not cleaned promptly. You had to ask them for cleaned utensils.

Foreign investment is common. Of course, it’s called a ‘joint-venture’. Canada and Venezuela operate ‘joint-ventures’ in the oil industry. Shocking, isn’t it? I, for one, did not know Cuba had oil. When I found out, it all came together. I was suddenly able to explain the American interest for Cuba. Oil, so close from home *drooling*. Right, it’s about communism, this evil political ideology… god forbid oil even crossed their minds.

From ~1500 to 1898, Cuba was under Spanish control. Cuba was liberated after the Spanish-American War of 1898. Until 1956 when Castro returned to Cuba with 82 fighters, Cuba was under an American puppet government. Castro established a communist-like party, and the rest is history.

Havana (or Habana) is divided into two parts: “Old” Havana (1800) and “Modern” Havana (1950). What happened economically since 1950? Not much. Same old cars, same old buildings. Then there is the U.S. embargo used as an external locus of control for everything i.e. an excuse for the poor economic performance. The embargo didn’t help, but there is only one person/government/political system responsible for Cuba’s economy falling so behind and it’s not the US. It’s communism. Cuba’s economy has been doing much better since the government relaxed its isolation policies and let tourists in. With the government involved in tourism to the extent that it is, I predict that the quality of the food and the service will eventually keep tourists away. I know I ain’t going back.

Are the people doing better? It’s all relative I suppose. There is no extreme poverty like one can witness in other South American countries such as Brazil and Peru, but no one is rich. They have nice paved roads probably a result again of the American influence of the 1950s. Their education system is good. They are renowned in South America for their doctors. Venezuela sends medical students to Cuba for training.

All good isn’t it? No, not all good. If communism was so good, Cuba wouldn’t be moving towards ‘joint-ventures’ and tourism. Someone took Marx literally. Communism remains an ideal. Can communism work in practice? Not in this lifetime, never as far as I am concerned. It goes against human nature. It doesn’t reward ideas, motivation, inventions, and hard work. Think about all the things that could be accomplished by 11 million people but that are only achieved (or not) and controlled by one. How can one brain be as effective and productive as 11 million brains. Not possible.

Has political correctness gone too far?

Children learn the rope of political correctness (PC) quickly. Lawrence Kohlberg’s theory of moral development (1981) was heavily inspired from Piaget’s theory of cognitive development. Kohlberg believed that moral development occurred in stages. Through different stages (pre-conventional, conventional, and post-conventional), children learn right from wrong. According to him, it is during the teenage years that individuals begin to understand “right and wrong in terms of what pleases parents and what is consistent with broader cultural norms“(Macionis, Clarke, and Gerber, 1997). This stage is also marked by the assessment of intention as opposed to mere imitation. On a side note, has anyone ever witnessed the look of shame on parents’ faces when their little angel still in the pre-conventional stage tells Uncle Ben he is fat? Très comical.

As defined by Wikipedia, “Political correctness (also politically correct, P.C. or PC) is a term used in English-speaking countries to describe real or perceived attempts to impose limits on the acceptable language, terms, and viewpoints in public discussion. While it usually refers to a linguistic phenomenon, it is sometimes extended to cover political ideology or public behavior.”

I am hardly concerned with the linguistic aspect of PC aimed at making the language more inclusive (e.g. police officer instead of policeman, canine citizen instead of dog). What disturbs me is when PC starts guiding ideologies and behaviour. In this context, PC is purely regressive.

Let me pause for a second. I am not referring to sexism, racism, ageism, otherism, labels, stereotypes, and unfounded generalizations. Some remarks are clearly untrue, degrading, and mean. Where I draw the line is when some verifiable scientific findings are contested because they are ‘offensive’ (Think Freakonomics’ abortion/crime theory). Worse, when research is not even conducted because it is considered ‘offensive’ (Think stem cell research).

The controversial Doc Mailloux (psychiatrist) in Quebec is a good example of science and PC or lack thereof. On a popular TV show, Dr. Pierre Mailloux cited a study: “ Les Noirs vivant en Amérique étaient le résultat d'un processus de sélection artificielle et par conséquent ils ont un legs, un léger désavantage sur le plan intellectuel. En anglais, « Given that Blacks in North America are the result of ‘artificial selection’,they are intellectually [IQ] disadvantaged [compared to Whites]. Surprise, surprise, that kind of statement doesn’t fly in Canada.

Many people were offended and dismissed the statement. They didn’t critically assess the study to come up with a scientific reason about why this statement is incorrect. They dismissed it because it was oh so unpolitically correct.

I am saddened that PC has gone so far that we cannot even consider the idea that perhaps oppression, slavery or genocide have long term social impacts on generations of people. I don’t know if this particular statement is true, but I refuse to reject it just because it is not a PC thing to say. J. Philippe Rushton’s theories found in his book Race, Evolution And Behavior: A Life History Perspective were scientifically dismissed by other academics. That kind of rejection I am eager to accept.

“It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.” - Aristotle (384 BC - 322 BC).

Starting from the end

Isn’t there any better way to start the New Year and a brand new blog? Please allow me share some 2005 highlights.

December
After all this medical drama, the year ended quite well with a trip to Cuba. Cuba is not a country I will return to. While the sun and the beach were great, the food was mediocre at best (and rest assured I was not expecting a culinary experience). Everything was so... blend. The staff has a habit of watering down condiments such as ketchup, sauces and lime juice (so much for avoiding tap water) making the drinks/food tasteless. The wine tasted like vinegar, but made for some pretty good sangria. The evening shows were not exactly top quality. On the plus side, TV had many channels including HBO which compensated for the poor live entertainment at night. Cuba has oil fields. There was a bad gas smell at night (just at night). The staff was polite, but hmm... blend, ya know? Swimming with the dolphins was the highlight of the trip. Our day tour in Havana was also interesting.

Cuba Pictures

November
I was in Victoria for work when I started having heartburns. "No problem" I thought, it must be heartburns due to the stress caused by my two upcoming presentations. Then I started throwing up. On the flight back, I was dying of pain. I finally made it home and went to bed. I woke up agonizing in the middle of the night. We went to the emergency. I fainted as soon as we arrived. They put some IV in me. I got some gravol and morphine (that stuff is good, I highly recommend it).The CT scan I had first thing in the morning revealed that my appendix was infected. They scheduled a surgery right away. Meanwhile, I am still agonizing and taking morphine every 3 hours. At 4pm, they operated. I was ‘lucky’ it hadn’t burst and infected other organs.

I had an extremely bad experience with the health care system, but that's for another entry on class analysis (stay tuned). Among other things, the mediocre quality of the broth, both beef and chicken, was appalling. And where's the 'care' in the health care system? Somebody needs to educate service providers about holistic health.

October
Lots of business travelling from Frederiction to Victoria en passant par Quebec City

September
Most wonderful trip of all time. We spent 2 weeks in South Africa, Swaziland, and Lesotho.Our adventure in South Africa was a blast. Highlights included a close encounter with the wild (i.e. safari, petting chittahs, face-to-face with wilderbeasts), horseback riding near the Gates of Paradise in Lesotho, the beautiful Garden Route, a swim in the India ocean, wine tasting, and amazing scenaries and dining in Cape Town. Needless to say, South Africa is definitely a country we want to visit again in a near future.

South Africa pictures

July
We had the brilliant idea of going to California from July 1 to 5. That’s right, Canada Day and Independence Day weekends. It could not have been busier! We spent our first day in Hollywood. Frankly, I was expecting more. Just another big city, but this one with stars on the sidewalk. We went to Koi (Jessica Simpson’s favourite sushi restaurant, oulala) for dinner where I am convinced with we saw Bruce Willis.

On to better things, we hit the Sideways Trail in Santa Barbara Country. The beauty of California never seizes to amaze me. For two days, we drove around, wine tasting at various vineyards. I tasted my favorite white wine of all time : 2003 sauvignon blanc Reserve - Santa Ynez Valley.

As usual, the food was delicious. Baguette, cheese, grapes, and wine. What else can a girl possibly need?We finished our trip with a day at Venice Beach. It was sunny, but windy. In the evening, we attended our first Independence Day fireworks like 'local's do.

California pictures

California June 2004

California November 2004

June
We're doing this home ownership thing again. We bought a condo downtown. Family Wonderland was just not for us. We don’t have kids, we don’t own a minivan, and will definitely not fulfill neither of these two elements in the next little while (minivan never). The fence episode did it for us. We do have a life beyond our backyard. We can’t talk about the fence everyday for 3 freakin’ months! Most importantly, we see no point in paying $60/foot for a fence with a LATTICE. Aren’t these things ever ugly or what!

March
Bronchitis followed by a quickie in Vancouver to visit the in-laws.

February
Ski trip to Mont-Tremblant

First wedding anniversary. It was a year ago, on February 11 2004, that we tied the knot in Jamaica (ya mon!)

Wedding Pictures

January
I started my dream job. In short, I am working on an exciting, groundbreaking research project aimed at defining, operationalizing, and measuring quality of life. Not a small task, but très fascinating!

Jumping into the blogwagon

This blog is a combination of my two passions: sociology and travelling.

It is about “people”, not the individual kind, but the collective kind. Collective behaviour is predictable to varying degrees and significance. Fear not, I hardly want to bore you with macro-sociological theories. You should, however, be prepared for a small dose of friendly statistics occasionally.

At home, I discuss the regular annoyances I experience largely due to irrational mass behaviour. On the road, I compare and contrast different ways of life. And given that “une image vaut mille mots”, I hope you enjoy the pictures posted throughout.

Warning: My intent is not to be politically correct, but scientific. Sensitive hearts should cover their virgin eyes.

"Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored." Aldous Huxley