List of Previous Titles

Sunday, September 30, 2007

Who Giveth this Man to this Woman?



Is this a ridiculous title for this posting?

The trouble with Custom and Tradition is that we continue to make the same mistakes over and over again without anyone even questioning whether it is right or wrong. We simply go along with the crowd. When the occasional person comes along and wants to do things differently, we all say in unison, “You can’t do that. It goes against Tradition!”

This is really more about the tradition of expecting the bride to change her surname, rather than the act of someone, usually her father, “giving” his daughter to another.

It was only until I came here to Spain that I began to notice the things that are different between this culture and the one that I am accustomed to. Most notably is the custom whereby in marriage the bride does not take the surname of the groom.

I once attended a wedding in my country in which the bride kept her name intact. She did not change her surname to his, nor did she add his surname to hers. It was topic A, while we drank their champagne and ate their cake. We huddled in little bands and predicted that this one would surely not last. She won’t even take his name. She is definitely not committed.

Let’s consider for a minute what would be involved if we men changed our surname when we wed. I know, it’s ridiculous, but humour me, please.

So, let’s see, we have gone through the ceremony and now we sign the wedding register with our brand-new surname. First we have to get used to responding to being called Mr. Something else than what we have known all our lives, up until this point. Secondly, we have to remember to sign correctly, and perhaps get used to the spelling.

Now comes the hard part: Where do we start to change our name on all those legal documents. I suppose we might go along to the bank with a copy of our marriage certificate and change our name on all of our bank accounts, including investments, mortgages, safety deposit account, cheques, credit and debit cards, etc. Have you ever tried to simply change your address on all of your accounts at the bank? I moved three years ago and for some obscure reason I had to write to the managing director to get the various departments to make the change. Periodically the address on one or another of my accounts will revert to the original.

Got life insurance, or insurance on this and that? Those are legal documents and they all have to be changed. Don’t forget your driving license. Be sure to set aside the day that is necessary to deal with Trafico.

Don’t forget the Post office, the utilities, your voter registration, your medical records, and last, but certainly not least, your Will.

Probably the easiest part is to get friends and family to use your new surname, if they remember what it is or can properly spell it. Then you have to get your employer to change all his records; all your charge accounts have to be changed. Man! This is hard work! Is it really necessary?

Where does this practice come from? In patriarchal societies it was a form of branding. This is my wife, my chattel. It has been sustained through common usage for the sake of uniformity. In my country all people named Carmichael are identified as one family. It has also been used to get rid of an unfortunate surname. I once knew a young girl by the name of Susan Death. It was pronounced Dee-ath, but that didn’t fool too many people. She couldn’t wait to get married to get rid of that last name.

After you’ve done all that, there is the disturbing prospect of becoming one of the unhappy statistics joining the divorce march. Can you imagine? No wonder women get so mad at their former partners. I would be mad too!

Then we have the ancient practise of the giving away of the bride to the groom. I do not take a hard and firm position on this, although it does seem to be a little outdated in these modern times. However, families seem to feel that there is an integral place for this involvement, and there are sometimes nice little twists like both parents giving the bride away, or both sets of parents giving their offspring to their chosen life partners.

I suppose it can be said that it does underscore the milestone when children cross over the line definitely into a life of their own. However, when both bride and groom are presented to each other would seem to be a little more politically correct and in tune with modern times.



Copyright © 2007 Eugene Carmichael

Sunday, September 23, 2007

O J Simpson, or America the Polarised










By comparison with Europe, America is a very young country, and it has a whole lot of growing up to do. Of the most important nations, it is perhaps the most divided, both along political and racial lines. Generally, things are seen through the prisms of the Democrat or Republican eyes. Trying to get a straight answer on the facts is almost impossible.

The other polarisation is along racial lines. America is racially split among White, and Others. That tension is always there and comes rushing to the surface at the mere drop of the proverbial hat.

The thing that has prompted this topic from me at this time is the arrest of O.J. Simpson. For those of you who have been away on an extended visit to the moon, Mr. Simpson is a former NFL football star. He is most infamous, however in that he was charged with the murder of his ex-wife, and a man who had the bad fortune to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, and he was controversially found not guilty.

The circumstances of the case were so super-charged with tension that the case would most likely have earned the title of “The Trial of the Century” anyway. However, add the elements of murder victims who were white, and accused who is black, wealthy, and a movie super star, and the script was a guaranteed best seller

The jury in the criminal case acquitted Mr. Simpson because they were convinced one of the detectives manipulated the evidence against the accused, and therefore they felt that it was unsafe to convict where there was such indication of tampering. They used the time honoured directive that it is better that a guilty man be set free than to convict an innocent man where there is convincing evidence of illegal manipulation.

Vocal black people in the United States went out of their minds with joy that a black defendant in a case involving white victims was set free. Usually the black man is put to death. White people throughout the country reacted in utter astonishment, then in rage of the injustice, because the only reasonable doubt that they saw was that anyone other than O J Simpson did the crimes.

The interesting thing is that up until that time White America had taken O J within its bosom. He was this fantastic football player, and movie star, and that was cool. He married a beautiful white woman, and that was cool. He belonged to white clubs, and went everywhere in a circle of white friends, and that was cool.

When trouble came, and most of White America turned their backs on O J, the black community felt the need to formally conduct an event whereby O J was welcomed back into the Black American community as “our prodigal Son.”

In a civil case he was found to be liable and a judgement was handed down for compensation of Thirty-Three Million Dollars against him. So far, he has not voluntarily paid one cent towards satisfying that debt. In fact, he has lived quite well. (He also has the worst golf swing that I have ever seen!)

White America wants O J in jail. Now he seems to have gone out of his way to give the people what they want. He has been involved in an armed robbery, being concerned together with others, and has been charged with eleven counts in connection with that incident. The Media have been falling over themselves talking about this one man, sometimes to the absolute exclusion of real news, and this has been going on for almost two weeks. The program hosts have not even made any attempt to cover up their own personal views against him. How unprofessional is that? Fair and balanced? I don’t think so! They claim, “We report, you decide.” Not any more!

Incredibly, with practically a confession by O J made before the cameras of his involvement and wrongdoing, many vocal Black Americans are now saying that they think he’s innocent of this incident as well. Equally, many non-vocal Black Americans have no problem accepting that he is guilty of the murders and this latest incident.

My prediction: O J Simpson will be found not guilty in a court of law, if the case does actually make it that far. This is a case with an all-crooks cast and no-one is to be believed.

I cannot even begin to imagine the fiesta-like celebrations that will take place across America in certain quarters, and the utter disillusionment in others. I would also like to hear and see what the media will have to say.


Copyright © 2007 Eugene Carmichael

Sunday, September 16, 2007

MISSING MADDIE!








So much has been written about the missing child, Madeline McCann, I cannot resist adding my own two cents. Everyone has an opinion.

Firstly, I highlight the conduct of the Press. I bought the Daily Mail because of the blaring headline :” Maddie killed by Sleeping Tablets.” Well, that is how newspapers are sold. They added in much smaller print, “a new extraordinary claim.” The deliberate impression given to passing members of the public is that they are announcing fact, when it was really only theory. So yes, I was suckered into buying the paper.

The media has been so supportive of the family, but now they seem to be rounding upon them and ready to believe that they have harmed their own child. This is the classic rush by the herd to judgement.

The facts as we know them are as follows: (a) The McCanns´ as a family of five, left their home in England and went to Portugal on holiday to take up temporary residence in a holiday flat.

(b) The parents met with friends in a restaurant a little way down the road from their apartment on the fateful night in question.

© They left their children sleeping alone without the benefit of a babysitter.

Here, the question arises did they leave two or three of their children. No member of the public, or, apparently the police actually have proof of the answer to this question.

(d) During this evening the mother declared that Maddie was missing.


(e) The family that went out as five have returned to the home in England as four.


Those are the only facts in the public domain. All else is speculation and rumour, and nobody actually knows anything.

I have had a problem with this entire case from the very beginning, because I do not believe in coincidence. I would like the answer(s) to the following question: Using mathematical probability, I would like to know what are the chances that the family, who left their habitual home in England, where the children spent most of their time, to go on holiday in Portugal, (where presumably they were not so well known), and on the one night that the parents left their children on their own, that a stranger would come and take one of them.

We can be reasonably certain that the police have consulted the odds-makers. It was most probably the opinions from these people that caused the police to take up “discreet observation” of the couple, and that would likely have included specialists in reading body language.

My strongest opinion at this time is regarding something that the parents are quoted as having said: “We thought we were being reliable and responsible.” This is supposed to have been said by two practising physicians in whom members of the public place their faith, and rely on their judgements.

Many, if not most parents of very young children do not go out and leave the children home alone. Many, if not most parents of very young children install a listening monitor in their children’s bedroom while the parents are in the next room. That, in my opinion, is being reliable and responsible!

Well, they do admit to their mis-judgement, and so we move on.

I choose not to rush to judgement. I simply do not know what happened, like everybody else in the world except (as has been suggested) the McCanns’ themselves; or as they say, the person who took Maddie. In the fullness of time this will play itself out.

If the McCann’s harmed their own daughter they will have to live with that. If someone else has harmed her, the McCanns’ will have to live with that.

What could be worse than having your child suddenly go missing in the still of the night? Being brought under suspicion yourself of having caused the disappearance. How bad can this nightmare for the family get? It is far from over, I’m afraid.

The best outcome would be for little Madeline to be found alive and well. I would especially like to see that happen for many reasons, including the look on the faces of all those who have been so quick to say that they know what happened. One of the most important reasons would be that the McCanns’ have been so successful in enlisting the financial ,and other help of so many people in keeping the matter in the public eye. Should it all turn out to be a scam, the next time that someone’s child goes missing members of the public will quite naturally be sceptical, and that would be the most tragic outcome of all.


Meanwhile, I will continue to be vigilant and hopeful.

Copyright © 2007 Eugene Carmichael

Sunday, September 9, 2007

Divorce-Property Settlements:50% Always Fair?




As I write this the battle rages on between the businessman and his ex-wife, the magistrate. At a particular point in time he was said to be worth One Hundred and Thirty-One Million Pounds. He wants her to have Twenty Million Pounds in a full and final settlement. He says that is more than enough for her to live on for the rest of her life. The interest alone would bring in about Five hundred Thousand Pounds a year.

She wants Forty-Eight Million Pounds. She feels she is worth it. “We’re equals” she insists. So why is she not demanding Sixty-Five million, Five-Hundred Thousand? And why is that amount not enough for him to live on? Meanwhile, the press is asking whether any wife could possibly be worth that much money. They seem to have completely overlooked the judgement in the late Anna Nicole Smith’s favour of $475 million from the estate of her deceased husband.

Granted, that is a somewhat different circumstance, being the probate of a Will, but if a wife can be worth half of her husband’s estate in the event of his death, then why not in the event of divorce?

The principal difference is one of the lack of goodwill, or more specifically, the presence of complicating factors such as who did what that brought about the divorce.

The American comedian, Eddie Murphy, did a whole routine around the theme of “Fifty-Percent!” He asked the question, how does a person, who never actually worked in the business to produce the fortune justify their demands for half of it in the event of the marriage breakdown? Another US comedian, Richard Pryor, when confronted by his wife’s demands for half, said, “woman, you have never ever told a joke, except this one!”

What about the man who has been married three times? How many halves are there!

Eddie Murphy’s logic went along these lines: If a woman is the wife of a mega rich man, what does she actually have to do to support him. She does not have to wash the dishes, clean the house or be concerned about the laundry. She does not have to make the school run, she has a chauffeur to do that and other people to do everything else.


A man can get to be the head of a successful business group without the absolute need for a wife. However, if he had a wife who put him through higher learning that led to his success, we now have a basis upon which to begin working toward a sensible formula for the distribution of assets in that specific case.

It is noteworthy that this type of problem is only important in those cases where a lot of assets are concerned. At the lower end where the only thing of value that the couple has is the house, the courts do not seem to have any difficulty in awarding the entire house to the wife, especially if there are children.

In the case of the businessman and his magistrate wife, he says that he didn’t even begin to make strides in his business until after the subsistence of the marriage was over. He stayed to keep the family unit intact because of the children. His point being that his wife’s claim that she helped him to succeed is false, as he asserts that he succeeded in spite of her. But the difference between what he wants her to have and what she wants, he has earned many times over in the meantime.

At the end of the day, “A man who dies rich, dies disgraced”.(Andrew Carnegie, 1889)

Coming right on the heels of this case is another bitter contest involving the singer and the lady whom his friends warned him about. He listened only to his heart and now he wished he had been wiser. But what’s a fella to do? If you have loads of money and a grand country pile you do need someone to help keep you warm at night. Wherever lots of money is involved things have a nasty habit of getting very complicated.

I think that when the split comes it’s all about providing the other person with the means to maintain their lifestyle in the manner to which they have become accustomed as a result of your largesse and efforts. It’s not a question of how does a person get to be worth the amount. You as the purse-holder conferred that right and value upon them.

This formula works both ways, regardless of who holds the purse strings. It is the curse of the rich that unless they associate only with those as wealthy as themselves, if they invite in an outsider of lesser means they may have to pay to be rid of their unwanted appendage.

Copyright © 2007 Eugene Carmichael

Sunday, September 2, 2007

LOVE SCAMS








I was contacted by a family member who is being driven crazy by their elderly and very lonely father who is being scammed by someone who says that she is lonely and in the same boat as he. The story so far is that he went on-line to find a soul mate following his wife’s death, and was immediately contacted by someone who says that she is a widow.

She lives in Africa but would dearly love to move to the West, but her husband left her deeply in debt. She would love to come to him as soon as she can clear away what is owed. He is besotted with her and has been sending her large sums of money. Someone, who was concerned for his welfare alerted his daughter, and now it has become a family nightmare.

No doubt there are a great number of success stories of genuine love found on the Internet. But I am equally certain that one has to be super cautious, even more so than when meeting a complete stranger in person.

Fundamentally, something is wrong when someone you have never met in person is asking you for money. That sends up very big red flags. Should it happen to you, the proper thing to do is at least discuss it with someone whose judgement you trust.

Although no one is safe from the scammers, I’m particularly concerned about the most vulnerable, the elderly. The professionals know exactly the signs to look for and to exploit. Such people are on their own, their families are getting on with their own lives, and even those who have the benefit of living with sons or daughters are still at risk, because this part of their lives are private. Children cannot help, other than to arrange meetings between people locally, if that is possible.

The modus operandi of the scammer is to get a dialogue going and to turn up the heat. When the mark is expressing undying love then they move to spring the trap, gently at first, but their script is pure theatre, and they won’t stop until they have bled their mark absolutely dry.

Here are some of the classics:
· The actor (for that is what they are), says that they have traveller’s cheques but no bank account. Could you please cash these and send them the money. The cheques will be forgeries, but of a very high quality. Once you cash them and send the money it will be from your bank account that restitution will be made to the bank.
· They will find themselves in some kind of difficulty requiring an urgent infusion of funds, and they cannot think of any other source of help than you. Please wire the funds immediately or the most dire consequences will happen to them.
· Even where you travel to meet with your on-line lover who is in some far off land, and you become engaged to her with the intention of bringing her to be with you, if she is asking you for money she will most probably have a whole string of men to whom she is doing the same thing.
· Younger men, or people who say they are younger prey mercilessly on older women whom they hope have money. They send all sorts of pictures of their tanned bodies that are not even their own. Because of the mix of emotions with common sense, often emotions win out. People really do suspect that they are being scammed, but they need to hear the words spoken that make them feel good.
· It is a fact that absolutely anyone can be conned, even people who are savvy and who should know better. However, if they are caught in a weak moment when they are vulnerable they can be sucked in just like the rest of us. Keeping this in mind you should know that it is no shame if you become an unwitting victim. Do yourself a favour and use your commonsense and cut your losses short. Trust your instincts.

The profile of a scammer is that of a sociopath, someone who is entirely anti-social. Both men and women can fall into this category, and they are utterly heartless. Half of the conning is for fun, because they can do it. They love the manipulation, and the grander the scheme the better.

Best advice, if you’ve gone on-line seeking romance and the person purporting to love you starts asking for money, know this, they are probably out to break your heart and your bank account. Beware!


Copyright © 2007 Eugene Carmichael