vector art

What's a poor Mum and Dad to do?

A couple from Kent, England, Sheila and Paul Garcia, had a problem. Their daughter was unhappy, so Mum and Dad did what they could to cheer the 16-year-old Alison up.

Ailson was sad over the fact that her parents didn't quite approve of her newest boyfriend of 4 months, Craig.

"I hate the thought of her sleeping with any man, because I think she is too young to understand the implications of a sexual relationship," she says.

"But I know she is 16 and I can't stop her. If I don't take the softer approach I fear she will take off with Craig and cut ties with us.

"If I forbid it or attempt to ban her from seeing him, I risk losing my precious child.

"Paul has managed to accept the situation far better than I have, because he believes we should let her make her own mistakes."

Even though Alison's Mum believed her 16 year-old daughter "too young to understand the implications of a sexual relationship", when Alison asked her parents if her boyfriend could move in so the couple could save up for flat, Alison's Dad figured the best way to handle the problem was to move Alison's boyfriend, 36-year-old Craig Wright, lock, stock and barrel into their home and daughter's bedroom.

Wright, a divorced double glazing fitter with one child now resides in the Garcia home as Alison's live-in bedroom lover.

Alison believes she knows best.

"I'm not stupid," she says stubbornly. "I know to the outside world such a huge age difference must seem weird and unnatural.

"My mum keeps saying it's a ridiculous phase and I'll grow out of it, but I won't.

"My dad is much more laid-back. He takes the view that it's my life and I have to do what I want.

"After all, I'm 16 and can make up my own mind. He recognises that I'm not a child any more, but my mum doesn't."

Alison likes the fact that Criag isn't "immature" like the boys her age.

"He's the fourth guy I've been with, but the others were all inexperienced teenagers - boys I'd been going out with for a few months.

"It was very different with Craig. He knew exactly what he was doing. He told me how beautiful I was and made me feel really special and cared for."

They met in a pub even though Alison is/was underage and dated for a few weeks when Alison and Craig decided to get a flat but the 16-year-old had a better idea: why not move in with my Mum and Dad and save up.

Sheila said she was horrified, but her husband, Alison's Dad, was okay with the idea of his daughter's older boyfriend moving in because the couple wouldn't have been able to "afford a decent flat".

Sheila made an astute observation about Craig which we doubt she's spent much time mulling over:

"What I can't understand is what a man of Craig's age sees in a girl who is so young. She can't possibly fulfil his emotional needs."

It's as if Sheila has removed herself from the situation with her decision to blame it on "society and not on her own parenting skills:

"Girls no longer get a childhood past about the age of ten when they are asked to make choices on what lipstick to wear or what jeans to buy.

"It's a sad state of affairs, and one from which I fear there is no way back.

"It seems we have raised a generation of children who believe they can do whatever the hell they like, without worrying about the consequences."

As for Craig, he's been set up as a peripheral character in this vignette. The scene revolves around Alison and her parents, of whom is responsible for this situation, the "too-liberal" Mum and Dad or the spoiled teen-aged Alison. But what about a 36-year-old man who feels it's okay to bum off his teenager girlfriend's parents and sleep with their daughter under their roof?

Alison has decided Craig's "the one."

"That will inevitably happen, because I do want to marry Craig and have kids, and he isn't getting any younger."

We not sure whether we should laugh or cry, "not getting any younger." We imagine once the "bloom is off the rose" in this relationship, Craig will begin to look older and older to Alison while she will have aged prematurely, stuck with babies while she's still one herself.


By LBG
Image - Wimpy Parents
Source - The Mail

The English school teacher who was imprisoned for allowing her class to name a teddy bear "Mohammed" is back home from Sudan.

Gillian Gibbons is relieved, but in a rather low-key English way.

Asked if she had been shocked by the punishment handed out to her, she said: "I am just an ordinary middle-aged primary school teacher. I went there to have a bit of adventure and got a bit more than I bargained for."

One group who was not happy about Gibbons' escape from Sudan was B.A.I.R. (Bruins Against Islamic References).

As was reported yesterday, BAIR spokesbruin, T.D. Bear, was still angry over Gibbons escaping with what he called "light punishment". He had call for Gibbons to be eaten by members of his group.

No word yet on BAIR's reaction to Gibbons making it home to the U.K. safely.

by Mondoreb
[notes & graphic: RidesAPaleHorse]
[top photo: AP]
Sources:

CNN - "Toy Row Teacher Speaks of Ordeal"
DBKP - "Teacher Pardoned: Unbearable Punishment Averted"

Death by 1000 Papercuts Front Page.

Good thing the British keep a stiff upper lip. Otherwise, they'd be laughing themselves silly at their schizophenic government's policies.

Talk about mixed signals.

The multiculturally-inclined are warning Brits not to offend anyone. Meanwhile, another division of the government puts "terror signs" on buildings and stadiums and pleads with citizens to "be vigilant".

More on the latest tool in the fight against terror from the Mirror's
Public Buildings Get Terror Signs:

Posters warning people what to do in a bomb attack are to be put in shopping centres and airports, it was revealed yesterday.

Senior security sources want the signs where they think terrorists might strike. The "target sites" also include sports stadiums.

They would be similar to the fire procedure notices seen in most public buildings telling people what to do in a blaze.

But instead they would advise people how best to act if there was a bomb - or chemical, biological or nuclear attacks.

How best to act in case of a nuclear attack? The Brown government could have saved a lot of pounds by just reprinting that old poster from the 60s and 70s: "In case of nuclear attack, put your head between your legs and kiss your ass goodbye.

But government bureaucrats are serious about protecting the country agsinst terror. How? By giving the potential bomb victims a list of instructions?

The emergency notices will have a list of instructions.

These include to stay inside if a blast goes off outside a building, in case there is a second bomb in the area, and to stay away from windows, lifts and outer doors to avoid more blasts.

The chemical, biological and radiological attack posters warn people about the dangers of contamination and how to avoid spreading it.

They will also remind people the best defence against terrorism is vigilance and urge everyone to report anything suspicious.

Be vigilant and report anything suspicious. Good advice it would appear.

But not too suspicious. The government is always on guard against potential backlash against Muslims. This occurs every time a British Muslim is caught with plans, bombs or both.

The signs the British people notice far more are those they see of increasing lawlessness and chaos They are warned against paying too close attention. Another name for the terror sign program may be familiar: CYA.

The government hopes the terror signs on buildings will make people feel safer.

Average Brits may disagree: last year nearly 400,000 fled England for safer, saner climes. The ones who left get their chance to start over in places where more common sense about terror prevails.

The ones left behind get terror signs.

by Mondoreb



Death by 1000 Papercuts Front Page.