Not tonight honey, I'm spending time with the dog.

Cav had is own Collingwood Guernsey for the AFL Grand Finals 2010

LONG suspected, now confirmed: Australian women prioritise their dogs over their partners. The PawClub.com.au surveyed over 80,000 dog owners and found 77 per cent of women surveyed spent more time with their dog than their partner. Four out of five female respondents admitted they devote more money to their dog than their partner also. You can view the results here.

The survey also revealed dogs are firmly ingrained in our psyche as another member of the family, with 52% of dog owners surveyed confirming they sign their dogs name on birthday and Christmas cards.

There would be seldom dog owners surprised by this survey.

So why do we love our dogs so much?

Studies show dogs make us both physically and mentally healthier, and therefore happier. They lift our spirits and help us relax. They motivate us to actually get some exercise because, rain, hail or shine, they are always keen for a walk. Dogs keep us company and make us feel safer when we are alone. They also put our minds at ease by safeguarding the house when we are out.

For children, studies have shown that growing up with pets (particularly dogs) during infancy helps to strengthen the immune system and reduces the risk of allergies linked to asthma. Teenagers who grow up with pets are more likely to have a positive outlook on life and report less loneliness, restlessness and boredom.

What's not to love?

There is another side to the story, and it won’t leave you feeling warm and fuzzy. Dog behaviourists argue that by treating your dog as equal, you are creating a myriad of behavioural problems. Your dog is less likely to be obedient when it thinks you are equal, and is more likely to display aggressive, jealous behaviours towards your partner if your actions place the dog on a higher pedestal. Canine experts also argue that assuming dog’s actions carry human emotions is one of the biggest areas to overcome. For example, when a dog is constantly leaning on you, putting his paw on you, using his nose to make you pat them, and always feeling the need to be touching you in some way, behaviourists argue this is not your dog loving you; it is your dog displaying dominant behaviours.  In the dog world, space is respect. A dog that is constantly nudging you and leaning on you, is disrespecting you, and being the alpha dog.

They argue the most important thing to remember is although we have domesticated dogs, we cannot rid them of their animal instinct.

Whether you agree with the behaviourists or the majority of Australian women, or prefer cats instead, one thing is for sure: life is better with a pet.

The experts may say  Cav is trying to be the alpha dog, but I prefer to think he wanted me to take him on holidays too.

Do you spend more time with your dog/s than your partner?

Vigilance the best prevention for "rock spiders"

THERE is a name that, when mentioned, conjures tremendous, intensive debate and hateful, vicious emotions in the hearts and minds of most Australians. 

Dennis Ferguson. 

Ferguson, arguably the most infamous paedophile in Australia, is being talked about again after the Queensland Police Service (QPS) and various media outlets yesterday tried to dispel rumours that he is residing on the Sunshine Coast. 

Although some minds may have been set at ease, the notifications caused mass debate and commentary, especially online. 

The QPS posted a "#Mythbuster" status around 1.30pm and within a few hours had received over 400 comments, and counting. The QPS was forced to sensor multiple comments due to their offensive or threatening nature. The Sunshine Coast Daily website and Sunshine Coast Facebook page may have to do the same (if they have not already). 

Dennis Ferguson is a vile creature, no doubt about it, but there is a bigger picture here. 

According to the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, in 2009-2010 there were over 48,000 reported cases of child abuse in Australia, with over 12% being sexual abuse cases.  However these statistics do not highlight the full extent of the issue, for a number of reasons.

Firstly, this data excludes abuse perpetrated by a non-family member or person known to the family (these are dealt strictly with police not child protection services). 

Secondly, these statistics only represent cases reported to child protection services (again, not police). 

Due to the confidential and personal nature of the crime,  Australian statistics for child sexual abuse are non-existent or unverified.  All sexual abuse statistics, regardless of age, are grouped together in State and Territory Police reporting.

Statistics from the United States are generally thought to be accurate for Australian society also. The alarming statistics are as follows: 

30% sexual abuse offenders are relatives of the child

60% are acquaintances (friends of the family, babysitters, neighbours, etc)

10% are strangers

Sure no one wants Dennis Ferguson or any other known sex offender to be living near them *cue the debate over accessible sex offender lists (like in the US) or “send them back to jail” arguments*.The sad, scary fact of reality is, however, the face of paedophilia is likely to be far more familiar to you and your children than Dennis Ferguson’s beady eyed, creepy mug. Don’t let the Daniel Morcombe tragedy make you forget that “stranger danger” is not the only danger lurking in the world.

The charity challenge: help a stranger

AUSTRALIANS and New Zealanders are renowned as the most charitable nations in the world. This was proven when the Charitable Aid Foundation (CAF) conducted an investigation into charitable nations, September 2010.

Using the Gallup World View World Poll for their investigation, the CAF found that, compared to 151 other countries, Aussies and Kiwis are (equally) the most charitable with both their money and their time. What might surprise you, however, is that the survey was not restricted to donations or volunteered time to charity/aid organisations. The survey also considered how many people had helped a stranger in need.

Remember the movie Pay it Forward? It is the story of a young boy who attempts to make the world a better place, one good deed at a time. The brilliance of this movie is the fact that it could work.

Believers of the “Six degrees of separation” theory or karma would argue that by engaging in one good deed, you will soon be rewarded with help from a stranger yourself. What have we got to lose?

A friend of mine once gave some international visitors the $2.50 they were short at Woolworths. She was lined up behind them and said that besides the fact that it was only small change, she wanted to prove a point to the woman behind her who was huffing and puffing "hurry up."

"I know how confusing money can be in different countries so I just wanted to help them out a little and give them a nice story to tell about Aussie kindness when they got home.  Can you believe the cow behind me sniggered at me when I did it! The incident was more embarrassing for her than the visitors I think."

Another friend of mine paid for an elderly lady's haircut one Sunday after he heard the staff tell her that seniors' concessions would not be honoured  due to increased cost of labour that day. He told me,

"I wish I could have stayed to watch her face when they told her."

Finally, a third friend recently received much praise on Facebook after posting her kind act of the day as her status. A little old lady had withdrawn a large sum of money at an ATM, then walked away without it. So this friend grabbed it and ran after her to give it back.

Whether it be an act of human decency, a kind gesture to make someone smile, or helping someone in need, when is the last time you did something selfless for someone you didn't/don't know? Imagine if we all went out and completed a random act of kindness. It may not make the world a better place but it just might make someone's day. What harm can it do?

Share your stories of random acts of kindness below, whether you were the giver or the receiever. Let's celebrate that there are still good people out there in the world.

 

Voice silenced with every cancerous puff

TOBACCO giant Philip Morris Limited, Australia has started a campaign on behalf of smokers nationwide to allow their thoughts and opinions to be aired. The “I Deserve to be Heard” campaign (IDTBH) involves information cards being put in all Philip Morris tobacco products, recommending smokers go online and have their say about issues affecting smokers. The issues in question are proposed “excessive” bans on smoking outdoors, heavy taxes on cigarettes and retailers unable to display cigarettes.

Firstly, let me make clear that I am a dirty, filthy, money wasting, cancer enticing smoker.  Yet in debates about smoking I normally take the side of a non-smoker. I find the biggest problem with smoking is that it is legal. Why?

 Smoking reaps no health benefits, no societal benefits, so why has tobacco not been banned?

Despite being a smoker, my view on the IDTBH campaign and “poor me” attitude of many smokers is simple:

No, you DON’T deserve to be heard.

Being a smoker and whinging about the public scrutiny is like getting a Mohawk and complaining about people staring at you. What did you think was going to happen? As a smoker you choose to single yourself out. Own it.

For those of you who haven’t checked it out, you can find the IDTBH website here. Below is my opinion of their arguments.

Excessive Smoking Bans Outdoors

There is nothing worse than being at the beach, or a park, or walking through your shopping centre entrance and getting caught up in a plume of smoke. Being outside does not make the smoke and associated stench disappear; it is just lessened.

We all know cigarettes are highly addictive, but if you cannot get through a mere few hours without lighting up, you may have a larger problem than just willpower.

Why should a non-smoker, young or old, be subjected to this? Their choice of clean, fresh air is taken away by the choice of a smoker to pollute the airways. The other side of this debate normally sees someone arguing that our airways are polluted anyway, or that minor passive smoking as you walk through a shopping centre entrance cannot be that bad. Valid points, but the real issue is choice.  

So why is a non-smoker’s choice more important than a smoker’s? Because the non-smoker does not afflict anything negative on the health, well-being and comfort of the smoker (unless they are a jerk, but this is off topic).

For the record, I do smoke on beaches, in parks and outside of shopping centres, but only in designated smoking zones or where it is legal to do so.

Heavy Taxes on Tobacco Products

The only thing legalised tobacco has going for it is the massive amount of tax revenue it brings in. About two-thirds of the retail price of a packet of smokes is government tax, but only one percent of this is spent of preventative health measures, such as anti-smoking campaigns.  So clearly the government do not want us to quit.

Smokers arguably cost our health departments a lot of money.  The tax revenue versus health cost debate is made all the more confusing by the fact that government don’t ban smoking. Again, if the health costs outweigh the tax revenue, why is tobacco still legal?

Governments seem to constantly create laws and regulations for the betterment of humanity and/or to save lives. Helmets for bicycles, seat belts in cars, and fences around swimming pools...the list goes on. None of these things have EVER killed or disabled more humans than tobacco allegedly has. Are these lives more precious than those of a smoker? Children’s lives may be, but adults?

Hidden Displays and Packaging Changes

The IDTBH campaign argues that hidden tobacco displays and packaging changes will negatively impact smokers in regards to wastage of time. They argue because retailers will take longer to find your desired brand, you will be forced to waste more time in queues.

Is smoking a cigarette not a waste of time? An example to ponder: when I clean my house (top to bottom, full, spring clean), it takes me an entire day. I encourage myself to clean by setting myself tasks with rewards for completion. By rewards I mean cigarette breaks.  Whenever I have (unsuccessfully) quit smoking, I could clean my entire house in a mere few hours. The moral of this story: smokers waste time daily, what’s a little extra queuing going to change?

So smokers, speak up if you want. I dare say you’ll run out of breath before you make your point.

Friends today, gone tomorrow

FRIENDS come and go, like the tides. It's sometimes a sad fact of reality and sometimes a blessing, depending on the “friend”. Not Facebook friends, real friends.

What constitutes a real friend? Facebook, and our ever advancing technologically savvy world, have definitely blurred the line.  

David Wong, Senior Editor of Cracked.com says scientists have coined a term for the test of real friends, The Naked Photo Test. The test is: imagine a naked photo of yourself. Not just any naked photo - one with you in an extremely compromising, perhaps even highly abnormal position. How many of your "friends" would you trust to look after the photo and keep it secret? According to the theory, they are your real friends.

So what constitutes a "real" friend for the rest of us?

Do you class real friends as people who impact your life?

People you actually have face to face contact with, or would stop and chat to in the street?

The people allowed to  see you without my make-up on?

The photo above is from one of my birthdays. It is typical of the type of stupid, fun, crazy stuff we all celebrated together (the girls front centre are NOT really kissing, by the way). They were my nearest and dearest circle of friends. I would have trusted them with my "naked photo", and they all saw me sans make-up multiple times. How many am I still close with? Not as many as I would like, because the tides changed and those swept out to sea found an alternate life and circle of friends elsewhere.

   

The poem Reason, Season, Lifetime has always helped me make sense of my ever changing friend list. Along with changing jobs, partners, houses, gyms, and so on, our friends rarely stay the same for any extended period of time. Or at best we lose touch, then reconnect months or years later, usually via Facebook.

Whatever your definition of "real" friend, and despite how you feel about friends coming and going, here's hoping that your friends make you feel as warm and fuzzy as the little characters in the clip below (what's not to love?).

ICE, ICE baby - it just might save your life

IMAGINE you were in a car accident, or fainted in public, or were involved in some other incident where paramedics, fire-fighters or police were called to the scene. Imagine you were unable to talk to the emergency services. How would they find out important medical information for you or let your next of kin know of the incident? ICE.

ICE is the name if the movement where your “In Case of Emergency” contact or contacts are saved in your mobile phone under “ICE” to enable easy identification of who to speak to in an emergency. 

The idea was allegedly conceived by British paramedic Bob Brotchie in 2005 and has gained worldwide acknowledgment and acclaim ever since. Brotchie, after noticing patients usually had a mobile phone with them when he attended incidents, reasoned that the ICE contact idea would aid all emergency workers.

Sound like a brilliant, simple idea? Yes? Not to everyone. There have been multiple criticisms about ICE.

Firstly, some critics argue emergency personnel on site are time poor, so next of kin wouldn’t be contacted prior to admittance to hospital. There is some merit to this criticism. Emergency personnel are extremely busy and time poor, especially at the scene of an incident. However I have personally been in a situation where paramedics called three contacts in a friend’s phone until they could relay the message of a car accident injury. I’m sure many people out there would have a similar story.

Secondly, critics argue contacting relatives about a seriously injured person is a sensitive task, making phone contact with next of kin inappropriate. There is merit in this argument also, however in this day and age society in general are prone to receiving both good and bad news via the phone. Furthermore, if emergency staff are too time poor and busy to call next of kin (as in above criticism), what are the chances they have the time to drive out to someone and relay information face to face instead.

Thirdly, critics have said that most people’s next of kin is their parents, whose details are normally saved in person’s mobile under “Mum” or “Dad” anyway. Again, definitely merit to this argument also, but (a big, whopping huge but), not true for all. If I were in any sort of incident where my next of kin needed to be contacted, the absolute last people I would want contacted would be my parents. For those whose parents are their emergency contact, what if they are saved under “pet names” for their parents? Are emergency personnel familiar with culturally significant names or foreign languages? Would emergency services know “Baba” is the Armenian name for “Dad”?

Whether you agree or disagree with the critics of ICE, ask yourself, what is the harm? What ill can come from having contact saved in your phone under ICE??

Have you saved ICE contact/s in your phone?

Pinch, punch and prank

UNTIL midday today I am not going to believe anything I read, hear or see. I'm gullible at the best of times so I figure it's better to be safe than sorry on April Fool's Day.

Unless you live under a rock you would know April Fool's Day is a widely recognised and celebrated day of practical jokes and general foolishness. The earliest recorded association between April 1 and foolishness was in Geoffrey Chaucer's Canterbury Tales, published in 1392.

Australia is amongst the countries who only celebrate April Fool's Day until midday rather than the entire day. The idea is if you fall for a practical joke or are subject to foolishness before midday, you are the April Fool. However, in Australia, if you play a joke after 12pm then you are the fool, regardless of whether the unsuspecting prey fell for your joke or not.

A quick Google search highlights the wonder that is April Fool's Day and how the biggest, most memorable pranks have come from some of the biggest corporations in the world.

Who could forget Burger King's "Left Handed Whopper" stunt in 1998 (which resulted in people ordering both left and right hand varieties of the burger for some time after the prank was revealed)?

Remember Dick Smith's iceberg stunt in 1983? For those unaware Dick Smith claimed he had towed an iceberg back from Antarctica into Sydney Harbour.

Dick Smith and his "iceberg" 1983

Arguably the crème de la crème of April Fool's pranks are from the BBC, most notably the Swiss Spaghetti Crop stunt of 1957 and the Flying Penguins prank from 2008. An update for the confused and gullible - spaghetti does not grow on trees and no penguins can fly (but the BBC videos are pretty convincing). 

So today it's not just pinching and punching you need to be wary of until midday. Someone could be trying to make an April Fool out of you.

1957 Spaghetti crop prank: BBC

2008 Flying Penguins prank: BBC