Aitizaz Hasan, Hero

Aitizaz Hasan, Hero

“My son made his mother cry, but saved hundreds of mothers from crying for their children,”

Just Read.

James Pilant

Pakistani boy who died trying to stop suicide bomber is hailed as hero | World news | theguardian.com

A 15-year-old who died while tried to defend his school in Pakistan\’s troubled north-west from a suicide bomber has been hailed as a hero for saving the lives of many of his classmates. Aitizaz Hasan tackled the bomber as he stood outside as a punishment for being late to school in Hangu, a town in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, on Monday.His two companions fled the scene after spotting the bomb being carried by the man, who was trying to gain access to the school, but Aitizaz grabbed the bomber.Unable to stop him from detonating his bomb, Aitizaz later died of his wounds in hospital.Hangu has a large community of Shias, an Islamic sect which many militant groups regard as heretics who should convert to the majority Sunni faith or be killed.Aitizaz\’s actions are thought to have saved the lives of many of the 2,000 students who were believed to be in the building at the time.\”My son made his mother cry, but saved hundreds of mothers from crying for their children,\” his father, Mujahid Ali, told the Express Tribune newspaper.\”There are a handful of people in the world who are martyrs; I am now one of those proud fathers whose son is among them.\”

via Pakistani boy who died trying to stop suicide bomber is hailed as hero | World news | theguardian.com.

The Ethics Sage Discusses Sport Ethics

The Ethics Sage Discusses Sport Ethics

My friend, Steven Mintz, the Ethics Sage, has an opinion piece on sport ethics. I have here a brief excerpt. As always, please go to his site and read the whole thing. An excerpt does not do it justice, and you would be wise to bookmark his site and follow his posts.

James Pilant

Sport Ethics – Ethics Sage

The abiding values of sport include fairness, integrity, responsibility, and respect. Fairness requires that each player and each team should have an equal chance to play up to their abilities. The taking of steroids by well-known baseball players such as Ryan Braun violates the fairness doctrine because it gave him a competitive advantage over those who played by the rules, which ban certain substances.

Integrity is related to fairness and the other values because it addresses the whole of the person. Does each individual playing the sport truly believe in and practice the core values of sport? That is the essence of integrity or principled behavior in sport. In football, faking an injury at the end of a game to stop the clock lacks integrity and the offending team may lose time off the clock. In basketball some would say ‘flopping’ to draw a foul lacks integrity.

Respect deals with how athletes and coaches relate to athletes, teammates, opponents, coaches, and officials. Rutgers University Mike Rice was fired on April 3, 2013, after the coach was caught on video hitting, kicking and taunting players with anti-gay slurs at practice.

Responsibility entails accepting the consequences of one’s actions on the field including one’s emotions. On a Thanksgiving game last year, Pittsburgh Steelers coach

via Sport Ethics – Ethics Sage.

Yesterday’s Post Improved!

Yesterday’s Post Improved!

Should Professional Women Ever Get Married?

While this study has been criticized on both methodological and philosophical grounds, I believe it points out legitimate challenges faced by women in the professional world. One might expect that in the supposedly more liberal culture of higher education that there would be more income equality. However, as this study illustrates, women face hurdles in the academic world that men do not, or more accurately: Women face hurdles that men don’t. 

Sadly, as multiple studies have pointed out, women continue to be paid less and promoted at a slower rate in virtually every professional field.

It is important that the issue is being discussed in the public forum. Pretending that things are better or, worse, not even acknowledging the problem would absolutely ensure continuation of current practices. Successful sexism has always relied on a practiced acceptance of the status quo. Acknowledging a problem, recognizing it, is the first step in action.

The first question of our analysis: Do we want professional women to get married? The current statistics seem to indicate that we, as a society, do not expect professional women to get married. Conversely, some would see these numbers as action of the free market, and suggest that delaying or avoiding marriage is a natural phenomenon. Since every last detail of the problem is a human creation, I find free market naturalism- treating humanity like a slightly more sophisticated herd of wildebeests, a ridiculous assertion. What humans have created, humans can change. At its heart, this question is flawed. We already know that people can do well in society married or unmarried. Does encouraging formalized relationships make this nation a better place? There are good reasons to have doubts but the question is a difficult one. A question more subject to analysis: Do we want professional women to have children?

I believe that raising children to adulthood is a critical factor in the success of a nation. I think highly educated women are likely to make better than average parents. One of the basic tenets of Western Civilization is that education produces a more developed human being. The most used phrase in regard to this development is “well rounded.” Certainly this is the case with the academic women I know. If we value the child rearing quality of women, then we as a society should not penalize women for having children.

Employers tend to see women with children much like an employee who has a chronic disease. They don’t like giving maternity leave. They don’t like employees having to leave early or miss days due to children’s needs. They don’t like people who don’t make their work first and foremost in their lives. Children imply an emphasis on relationships as opposed to ambition and money making.

Men have an advantage over women in that raising children imposes no physical changes on them. Men neither carry children or are entertained by the hormonal changes accompanying the process. However, the actual period when women are unable to work is generally only a few days. The chief difference between a working married man and a working married woman is that when they have children, only one bears the chief responsibility for child care.

We have a vision of a good mother as one who sacrifices her career and much else for her children. Why don’t we expect fathers to give up the same things? We don’t because we don’t believe they should. The man is the breadwinner. The woman provides support from the background doing the routine tasks of child care and provides the power behind the throne. That’s our mythology – Ozzie and Harriet, Father Knows Best.

But reality has power too. We don’t live in that world anymore, and it’s not coming back. Women work. They have to. But social expectations haven’t changed. They still do the bulk of the housework, child rearing and a host of routine maintenance tasks. That’s not right but changes in the economy are only slowly being recognized culturally.

But we can change our culture. We can begin with laws. We can do this through subsidized and regulated, professional day care. We can do this through paid leave. We can do this by giving up stigmatizing single mothers and divorced women. The practice of slut shaming has outlived its purpose, keeping women in their place and regulating their sexuality. We can do better.

Women in this generation cannot escape the social pressures that serve to diminish their professional lives.  But we make a new world every day.  It is possible to create a world where professional parity is achieved. Maybe I won’t see it.  Maybe the current generation won’t see it, and maybe the one after that won’t either. However, we can lay the foundation here and now. We are not helpless. We have the power to recognize and battle  inequality.

Hope and action are not contradictory. The time for change is now.

James Pilant

Female economists penalized for getting married, married men rewarded.

According to a study that was presented earlier this month at the American Economic Association, women (who make up about a third of Ph.D students in economics) who got married in the first five years after they received their Ph.D.s had a 23 percent salary growth penalty—in other words, their salaries grew much more slowly— compared with their unmarried female counterparts. Men who got married in the half decade after they got their doctorates? They received a 25 percent salary growth bump—their salaries grew by a larger margin—compared to other men. Wendy Stock, a co-author of the study and a professor of economics at Montana State University, said in an email that among female economists, the penalty for having children was not statistically significant. “In addition, our estimates didn’t indicate that the impact of having a child was any different for males than for females,” Stock wrote. (If Ph.D. candidates have children while still in graduate school, they take longer to complete their studies, regardless of gender).

via Female economists penalized for getting married, married men rewarded..

From around the web.

From the web site, Don’t Marry Career Women.

http://dontmarrycareerwomen.wordpress.com/

Guys: A word of advice. Marry pretty women or ugly ones. Short ones or tall ones. Blondes or brunettes. Just, whatever you do, don’t marry a woman with a career.

Why? Because if many social scientists are to be believed, you run a higher risk of having a rocky marriage. While everyone knows that marriage can be stressful, recent studies have found professional women are more likely to get divorced, more likely to cheat, less likely to have children, and, if they do have kids, they are more likely to be unhappy about it. A recent study in Social Forces, a research journal, found that women–even those with a “feminist” outlook–are happier when their husband is the primary breadwinner.

From the web site, Lov-o-nomics.

http://dateconomics.com/?p=82

Why Professional Women Marry Late

“The timing of a first marriage is related to the attractiveness of the alternatives to marrying. When women value roles that provide viable alternatives to the role of wife, they delay marriage.”

(Allen, S. M. & Kalish, R. A. (1984). Professional women and marriage. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 46(5), 375-382.)

Dr de Bergerac is interested in this topic because she witnesses so many professional, attractive, intelligent women who are single and say they don’t want to be. They thrive in their careers, yet they do not seem to find The One. And those who do, do it much later than the population average. Why?

The scientific answer seems to be: they also have better things to do than the population average. If a date competes with a project at work that is fulfilling, bodes success and a higher income – then the date better be at least as fulfilling, easy-to-present-to-others, and liquid. Of course work and relationships fulfill different needs – but they also compete for the same, scarce resource: time. Professional women have less time and higher demands for relationships, given their alternative options. Both together are likely to keep them single.

Should Professional Women Ever Get Married?

Should Professional Women Ever Get Married?

While this study has been criticized, I believe it. Women face hurdles in the academic world that men do not, or more correctly and broadly, women face hurdles that men don’t. You would think that in the supposedly more liberal world of colleges and universities there would be more income equality.

It is important that the issues is actively being discussed. At least, we are not pretending that things are better or by far, worse, not even seeing a problem. Most successful sexism relies on a practiced acceptance of the status quo. Acknowledging a problem, recognizing it, is the first step in action.

The first question of our analysis: Do we want professional women to get married? The current situation mitigates against this but some would see this as an action of the free market, and suggest that delaying or avoiding marriage is a natural phenomenon. Since, every last detail of the problem is a human creation, I find free market naturalism, treating humanity like a slightly more sophisticated herd of wildebeests, little more than ridiculous. What humans have created, humans can change. I think that the question is flawed. A better question: Do we want professional women to have children?

Perhaps marriage itself is a social institution that needs re-examination. I think that highly educated women are likely to make better than average parents. Certainly this is the case with the academic women I know. If we value the child rearing quality of women, then we as a society should not penalize women for having children.

We can do this through subsidized and regulated, professional day care. We can do this through paid leave. We can do this by giving up stigmatizing single mothers and divorced women. The practice of slut shaming has outlived its purpose, keeping women in their place and regulating their sexuality. We can do better.

Women in this generation will not escape the social pressures like diminished professional lives that go with our current customs but a new world is possible where we achieve parity. I won’t see it. Maybe the current generation won’t see it, and maybe the one after that. But we can lay the foundation here and now. We are not helpless. We have to recognize our power and use it.

Hope and action are not contradictory. The time for change is now.

James Pilant

Female economists penalized for getting married, married men rewarded.

According to a study that was presented earlier this month at the American Economic Association, women (who make up about a third of Ph.D students in economics) who got married in the first five years after they received their Ph.D.s had a 23 percent salary growth penalty—in other words, their salaries grew much more slowly— compared with their unmarried female counterparts. Men who got married in the half decade after they got their doctorates? They received a 25 percent salary growth bump—their salaries grew by a larger margin—compared to other men. Wendy Stock, a co-author of the study and a professor of economics at Montana State University, said in an email that among female economists, the penalty for having children was not statistically significant. “In addition, our estimates didn’t indicate that the impact of having a child was any different for males than for females,” Stock wrote. (If Ph.D. candidates have children while still in graduate school, they take longer to complete their studies, regardless of gender).

Advertisement

via Female economists penalized for getting married, married men rewarded..

Obese Coffins?

Obese Coffins?

This is a must read article. It is wonderfully written and tells a story of great social significance. The story in a nutshell is that there is a lucrative market in the United States for “plus” size coffins. Often these coffins won’t fit in hearses, require purchase of a double plot and won’t fit through funeral home doors.

I get a vision of a funeral where the coffin is delivered by some kind of truck, hopefully black.

The implications for this society are scary.

Please read the whole article.

James Pilant

In death, as in life, one size doesn’t fit all | Al Jazeera America

Eating into an early grave

If anyone can do a snap survey of the fluctuating fortunes of overweight Americans, it’s Keith Davis. From the casket-manufacturing business he inherited from his father, he has a pretty good sense of how widespread the obesity problem is and how young those who die of obesity-related complications can be.

“We have a generation of people now, especially the younger ones in their 30s, who are going to die before their parents because of obesity,” he says. “As I travel around and deliver these caskets, the average age of these people is 40, 45 years old. And many of them are younger than that.

“I’ve delivered to people who are 25 years old, and it’s not because they died on a football field. They were just so big, their hearts gave out or their kidneys gave out,” he says. “We’re eating ourselves into an early grave, one shovelful at a time.”

Davis’ father, Forrest Davis, began building caskets for overweight people in the late 1970s and ’80s. As Keith Davis explains it, funeral directors would call their distributors and ask for bigger caskets. Because there were no established dimensions for the larger sizes, a carpenter or “someone who was handy” would make a box. Forrest Davis quit his job as a welder in a casket factory and began building his own extra-large caskets in an old converted hog barn on the family farm.

Now Keith Davis and his family sell several hundred oversize caskets a year, ranging from 33 to 52 inches wide. The 52-inch caskets are for people who tip the scales at 700 to 800 pounds, he says.

“We’re getting larger. One of the things we found is, people are not only getting wider, they’re getting thicker and deeper,” he says. “So the caskets have to accommodate the belly, and I don’t know how else to describe it.”

Those caskets are for people “who can’t walk or can’t survive outside a bed or a chair,” he adds.

One 37-inch casket he’s preparing is destined for a funeral home in Mississippi, Davis notes, for a person who is not only “wide but thick. That’s about the size of your desk. That’s a large, large person, probably weighs around 500 pounds.”

via In death, as in life, one size doesn’t fit all | Al Jazeera America.

Pope Scaring Rich People?

Pope Scaring Rich People?

The article goes into more explanation about how troubled the Home Depot founder is, but I am little concerned. I was raised in Christianity and well remember the teaching in regard to the rich. The bible does not hold them in high esteem, not should it.

James Pilant

Home Depot Founder: Pope Francis’ Criticism Of Capitalism Will Scare Away Rich People | ThinkProgress

The idea that possessing significant wealth inherently makes it harder to behave morally is a bedrock part of Christian ethical thought. In a well-known passage from the New Testament, a rich man asks Christ what he must do to fully follow God’s law. When Christ responds “sell your possessions, and give the money to the poor,” the man walks away dejected, prompting Christ to observe that “it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.”

via Home Depot Founder: Pope Francis’ Criticism Of Capitalism Will Scare Away Rich People | ThinkProgress.

Tar Sands Mercury

Tar Sands Mercury

This needs looking into. It appears to be similar in many ways to U.S. concerns over fracking. Of course, the Canadian government has promised an energy bonanza if the sands are developed, a claim becoming more dubious over time. I don’t believe that government will take any action that would endanger the development. So, there will have to be a reliance on private research to reveal what’s happening.

What are the business ethics here? It seems to me that we can have energy and clean air and water. If we can’t we need to have a discussion about what kind of priorities this society has. What we have now is the kind of closed political discussion associated with vast industry profits and a contempt for democracy. If we can’t breath and the water is contaminated, it may well happen before any effective action can take place.

James Pilant

Researchers find 7,300-sq-mile ring of mercury around tar sands in Canada | Al Jazeera America

Scientists have found a more than 7,300-square-mile ring of land and water contaminated by mercury surrounding the tar sands in Alberta, where energy companies are producing oil and shipping it throughout Canada and the U.S.

Government scientists are preparing to publish a report that found levels of mercury are up to 16 times higher around the tar-sand operations — principally due to the excavation and transportation of bitumen in the sands by oil and gas companies, according to Postmedia-owned Canadian newspapers like The Vancouver Sun.

Environment Canada researcher Jane Kirk recently presented the findings at a toxicology conference in Nashville, Tenn.

The revelations add to growing concerns over the environmental impact of mining the tar sands. Many environmentalists charge that extracting oil from the sands will lead to an increase in carbon emissions, the destruction of the land, water contamination and health problems for Canadians. The debate over the tar sands crossed over into the United States when energy company TransCanada proposed building the Keystone XL pipeline to transport crude oil to the southeastern U.S. for refining and distribution.

via Researchers find 7,300-sq-mile ring of mercury around tar sands in Canada | Al Jazeera America.

Occupy Wall Street Still Innovative

Occupy Wall Street Still Innovative

Occupy Madison provides housing for the homeless.

James Pilant

Homeless Couple Gets A Home On Christmas Eve, Thanks To Innovative ‘Occupy’ Group | ThinkProgress

For many couples, the thought of living together in a 96-square-foot house sounds awful. But for Chris Derrick and Betty Ybarra, it’s a Christmas miracle.

That’s because Derrick and Ybarra have spent the better part of a year braving Madison, Wisconsin’s often-harsh climate without a roof over their head.

They’ll spend this Christmas in their own home, thanks to more than 50 volunteers with Occupy Madison, a local Wisconsin version of the original Occupy Wall Street group in New York. The group, including Derrick and Ybarra, spent the past year on an innovative and audacious plan to fight inequality in the state’s capital: build tiny homes for the homeless.

via Homeless Couple Gets A Home On Christmas Eve, Thanks To Innovative ‘Occupy’ Group | ThinkProgress.

Eastside Catholic School and Business Ethics

Eastside Catholic School and Business Ethics

The school has fired its principal for being married to his partner, another man. I may not agree with their decision but in terms of business ethics, there is little to work with here, that is, until the school gives up the truth and decides to tell the world that the principal quit when he did not. At that point, we have entered my field of endeavor.

It is a serious violation of business ethics to directly lie to the public especially your own clients. And it is foolish to lie when your chances of getting caught are so high.

But then we find out that the school asked the principal to dissolve his marriage. I would regard this as another business ethics failing, a particularly eye catching one and I’m impressed at the lack of ability and judgment this implies. I might be able to understand the mind set that thought making that request was a good idea but the the mindset that didn’t consider the consequences, I don’t get.

Religious schools are not exempt nor should they be from business ethics. If you are going to fire someone for being in a gay marriage because it violates an article of faith in a religious institution, I regretfully say you can. But it you are going to do it, do it. Don’t lie. Don’t try to PR your way out. Just do it.

James Pilant

Catholic School Asked Gay Administrator to Dissolve His Marriage

http://www.slate.com/blogs/outward/2013/12/27/eastside_catholic_school_asked_gay_administrator_to_dissolve_his_marriage.html

Perhaps more shocking, Eastside has admitted to making a last-ditch effort to keep Zmuda in his position: School President Sister Mary Tracy asked him to dissolve his marriage in order to retain his job. Zmuda declined the offer. As his student explains, “I think that he would much rather share that love with [his partner] and get married than think about what the school was doing.”

 

Due to Eastside’s obfuscations and outright deceptions, it’s difficult to determine whether the fault for Zmuda’s termination lies with Eastside or the church itself. But the ambiguity of that question is overridden by the shocking revelation that the school presented Zmuda with the perverse and unconscionable choice of either getting fired or getting divorced. (Or perhaps Tracy hoped Zmuda could simply annul his union—which, at this stage, is likely impossible in the state.) That offer, made by the school’s president herself, isn’t just some well-intentioned but thoroughly misguided effort to hold onto Zmuda. It is a vile and morally repulsive act of iniquity. No straight person in this decade would ever face such a twisted dilemma, nor should they have to; no human, gay or straight, should have to choose between his spouse and his job. That Tracy placed Zmuda in this painful position suggests an alarming lack of ethics, a total blindness to basic morality on her part. For a church that speaks so highly of love, its mouthpieces at Eastside seem surprisingly eager to stamp it out for the crass purpose of avoiding a PR disaster.

Pushback!

Pushback!

The character glorified by the new movie, The Wolf of Wall Street, has a daughter and she is not impressed. I share her sentiments and regard these financial predators as criminals not heroes.

James Pilant

An Open Letter to the Makers of The Wolf of Wall Street, and the Wolf Himself

I believed everything my father told me. I believed it was the government’s fault he was going to prison and leaving his little princess, I believed it was your fault, Jordan Belfort. I believed that by taking out all those credit cards in my name, my father was attempting to save me. I believed him when he got out, and when he told me everything would be OK. I believed him until he tried to do the same thing all over again — until I was at risk of being arrested myself (and I’m saving that story for the memoir).

So here\’s the deal. You people are dangerous. Your film is a reckless attempt at continuing to pretend that these sorts of schemes are entertaining, even as the country is reeling from yet another round of Wall Street scandals. We want to get lost in what? These phony financiers\’ fun sexcapades and coke binges? Come on, we know the truth. This kind of behavior brought America to its knees.

And yet you\’re glorifying it — you who call yourselves liberals. You were honored for career excellence and for your cultural influence by The Kennedy Center, Marty. You drive a Honda hybrid, Leo. Did you think about the cultural message you\’d be sending when you decided to make this film? You have successfully aligned yourself with an accomplished criminal, a guy who still hasn\’t made full restitution to his victims, exacerbating our national obsession with wealth and status and glorifying greed and psychopathic behavior. And don\’t even get me started on the incomprehensible way in which your film degrades women, the misogynistic, ass-backwards message you endorse to younger generations of men.

But hey, listen boys, I get it. I was conned too. By. My. Own. Dad! I drove a white Range Rover in high school, snorted half of Colombia, and got any guy I ever wanted because my father would take them flying in his King

via An Open Letter to the Makers of The Wolf of Wall Street, and the Wolf Himself.