Skip to main content

Labels...not just for food anymore?

I listen to podcasts. A lot of podcasts. I get podcasts from all over. Some of my favourites are from the BBC. I love the 'unemotional' assessment of world events from a European perspective. I also lived in Ireland for a few years and along with RTE, the Irish national broadcaster, I came to love the BBC.

As they have been navigating financial strains in Europe, the British Parliament is looking at ways to save money. One of the things I heard discussed on a podcast was possibly eliminating the winter fuel benefit for wealthier pensioners. Basically all pensioners can receive some government funds to help pay for their heat in the winter. Homes in Europe are not heated like Canadian ones. Here in Canada we set the thermostat and our heat keeps our home or office heated to the temperature of our choice. In Britain (or Ireland) you set the heat to go on at certain times. Usually just when you are home but not all night. You have a timer that allows you (if you remember!) to have the heat come on before you wake up. This also provides you with hot water to get ready for work in the morning as many homes do not have constantly heated water. It is just too expensive to heat your home constantly in Ireland/Britain.

Anyway, back to the podcast. The politicians were discussing the notion of eliminating this benefit for those who are wealthier and do not need it. Being the open-minded and interested person I am, I wanted to hear both sides of the discussion. The first was saying why not eliminate it and save the rest of the nation money. The other side talked about the potential problem of the benefit eventually being labelled a 'poverty benefit' and with it, the greater possibility of eliminating it altogether at a later date. If it became a benefit for 'just the poor' then the day would come, the politician argued, when people saw fit to get rid of it completely.

It started me thinking...well re-started me thinking as it was early in the morning, about those living in poverty. I often think about those living in poverty. I live in a neighbourhood where it is all around me. And I choose to live here. Because I believe all people matter equally. I believe we will not solve the 'problem of poverty' by seminars, workshops or government alone. Surveys, focus groups, round table discussions, websites, policies are all well and good but they only do so much. But I'll hop up on that soapbox another time.

Back, again, to the podcast. I started thinking about labels as well. We seem to have a growing need to label people around us. Each of us create our labels and design what we believe each to mean. We then attach these labels, and subsequent meanings, to people. From there we seem to put people in to categories. People I will talk to. People I will avoid. People I care about. People I need to be around. People to avoid. People who will make me look good to others. People who might embarrass me in public...and so on. Maybe I am over simplifying. Correct me if I'm wrong. Please.

I then started to wonder about labels I might put on others. Most days I think I do a good job of not assuming too much. I try to accept people. I prefer to let them tell me who they are. I have been amazed, humbled and surprised by the stories I have heard. I have been blessed by many who have opened up to me and shared some of their journey.

Living in an area where poverty is not only common but evident has taught me there is SO much more to a person than first glance. I do not fear poverty. I do not avoid people who are 'poor' because I know they are sometimes very, very rich in spirit and in life. It upsets and angers me when I hear about others who do. Maybe if we spent less time labelling people and more time coming alongside them, life would be a lot better for a lot more people.

Let's leave labels for food and other items, not people.

Comments

  1. I agree. I have had an issue most of my life with the labels we put on people. Daughter of a suicide, troubled teen, can't have her own children (in whispers), widow, immoral......and that's just the one's that have been applied to me. If only we COULD have labels only on food!!!

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Safety

I should be doing homework. I have to give a presentation on Dorothy Day in class next week and she lived a large life. I also have to submit a 15-18 page paper on her. Yet I had to stop after reading just a summary of her life. She did a lot. She lived what she believed without fear. She went to prison on a few occasions for the causes she believed in. It got me thinking about my own life and where I am currently. I do not go out often anymore. People do not invite me out much. Only a few people text or call me regularly or message me on social media. Often when I have made plans over the past year or so I have changed or cancelled them for one reason or another. I can see why people do not automatically think to invite me out. (Ha ha.) Yet I also see how I got to this point in life. During Covid, I almost thrived being home a lot. A part of me was tired and the introvert in me needed time away. It was safe. Now that life has returned to a normal of sorts, maybe a new normal that is n...

Hmm...how's this for an intro?

Well here is my first blog post. I thought the title 'B S' is great considering those are my initials. No hidden meaning there either. I have no idea how often I will post on here but I hope those who read it enjoy. My life is certainly never dull. The potential for great conversation is immense. I also hope to inspire and encourage others through this... Thanks for joining me!

Pick your battles...

Apparently I have chosen yet another battle. Although can it be a battle if the other side simply dismisses you? Maybe not. I saw PETA's banned Super Bowl ad purely by chance. I was on a web site showing all the ads as I did not watch the game. When it first came on I thought it was a Victoria's Secret commercial. Then I see vegetables in the ad. It was PETA. So I sent an email. Scantily clad women performing mock sex acts with produce is not my idea of intelligent advertising. It lowers the bar. It is exploiting women. I sent them an email expressing that opinion. They disagree. It seems it is ok to demean women (at least this is my opinion) for the sake of animals. Yet I do not see that ad generating more support for the cause of animal rights. Is it controversial? Yes. Does it get people talking? Clearly. Yet it does not get people talking intelligently about the real issue - that of preventing cruelty to animals. Why don't they raise the bar in advert...