The rise of solo living

The movement of solo living was  born in Sweden in the 60's and slowly but steadily has spread to Southern Europe. It is not only a women’s movement but also a way of life towards greater autonomy. At present, women are studying, working, struggling to earn a place in the sun. More and more women are living alone and they prefer their loneliness than share their life with another person. Based on the findings of social scientists it can be argued that one in four women live alone.

More specifically, according to sociologist Jean-Paul Kaufmann, who has devoted a book to the question "The only Woman and Prince Charming", women live alone promoting the model of independent and successful woman. The fervent supporters of solo living go out with their friends and have lovers without commitments. Consequently, they live solo, but not lonely. They are happy as well, fully engaged in the active life, without men.

Contrary to this, the social pressure is unbearable for solo women. It is believed that women’s place is at home and the ultimate goal of life is to get married and have kids.  They love their freedom and autonomy and feel uncomfortably when they apologise for their personal choices.

The dilemma becomes less bearable when their biological clock start ticking. They feel alone when their girlfriends betray them and get married. The dilemma is to compromise or not to compromise? To follow the social rules or to wait for  the right guy? Even if the image of Prince Charming has never forgotten, they are not ready or eager to  give up their independence at any price.

To summarize, Kaufmann believes that even if some women prefer freedom and autonomy and the solo living movement has started well the truth is that women want to be loved and secure. 

Greece urgently needs the kiss of life

• 1 million people live under the poverty line
•  the unemployment rate has increased to 27.6%

 The economy in Greece goes from bad to worse and the economic crisis is getting stronger and stronger. While the International Monetary Fund  is insisting that Greece needs to adopt new austerity measures to the tune 6.7 billion Euros from 2014 to 2016 bearing in mind that should 1 million people live under the poverty line. According to the Hellenic Statistics Authority (ELSTAT), Greece’s unemployment rate is continuing to increase, reaching 27.6 % percent in July 2013. It is very sad that 21,000 people are homeless,  the vast majority of them is young people of working age. According to Kiel Institute the unemployment in Greece will be augmented reaching the 31% in 2014.

 Sociologists and political scientists argue that a country with this percentages goes to chaos and social turmoil. Moreover, the increased number of suicides in Greece in the three-year period between 2009 and 2011 represents a trend that shows no sign of economic development. Tragic dimension takes the phenomenon of suicides in Greece  because of the crisis, according to official figures from the Ministry of Citizen Protection during the period 1.1.2009 - 28.8.2012 the activity carried suicides and attempts amounted to 3,124 nationwide. However, it is worth noting that, despite the new negative inflation,   the market basket will be heavier from 1 January 2014 while thousands of our fellow citizens are unable to buy basic consumer goods. Although new taxes to be imposed have been voted out last year and calculated the new state budget, it does not exclude the possibility of increases and new taxes or , if not met the fiscal targets or has not been voted in its entirety the budget.

Citizens try to survive in a blurred economic and political scenery and they claim that is not fair for a country which is in the 28^th place of Gross National Product to suffer from such an  economic crisis. According to Mahatma Gandhi poverty is the worst form of violence and sure it is. I am afraid that there is no light at the end of the tunnel and that for Greece the development and economic growth is still an utopia, a  far dream rather than a reality.    

The value of play

Nowadays children do not have enough free time, due to their rigid school program. Children enjoy playing and learning through different games but why children are nowadays more anxious and depressed?

The majority of children in modern societies suffer from anxiety and depression and lack of imagination and creativity.  Children need time, love and devotion and their parents or teachers  must not underestimate the importance of play. According to the American Journal of Play children's play time has declined but free play is of paramount importance for a child for many reasons.  Children need to play because through this process they develop their creativity and their imagination. Moreover, children feel happy and pass their free time insouciantly, without worries and responsibilities. Additionally, game gives them the opportunity to escape from their routine and is  beneficial not only for their health but also for their emotional development.

More specifically, play is undoubtedly beneficial for every child because does not entertain himself through play but also develops his social skills and psychological needs. For instance, children who have speech impairments can improve their difficulties via playing because they do not feel stressed and they are free of any adult supervision. Additionally, children trough playing develop their social skills and learn how to behave. Needless to say that minors become more sociable as they play with their peers with whom they have so many things in common. Furthermore, children who do not have siblings learn how to share their things with others and how not to be the centre of attention. Children become more tolerant to any kind of difference. For instance, children can play together without caring if  their playmate is black or white, discrimination and racism are two words completely unknown to them.

It has been shown that play is the best preferable way for children to spend their free time because through play they relax, feel more happy and create lifetime memories. 

Yes or No this is the big question

After months of negotiations, Greek Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras called a referendum on the country’s bailout programme, asking from people to  vote yes or no to austerity and economic measures, but Europe insists that “No”  could not bring a prosperous future for Greek people and will lead the country to political and economic isolation.

On the one side Greek government expressing overtly a “No” strategy believing that it is the right time to put an end to austerity and poverty. As Alexis Tsipras said Greece is calling to vote for its future and that he will respect every democratic decision, but he says that if Greeks approve the EU’s aid plan, Syriza will resign. “Democracy deserved a boost in euro-related matters. We just  delivered it. Let people decide”, wrote in his personal accounts on Twitter, Greece’s finance minister Yanis Varoufakis.

On the other side, ECB and IMF argue that the fear of Grexit is more eminent than never and urge yes vote. They put the blame on Greek government saying that the Greek team was insufficient during negotiations in Brussels. Moreover, European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker has said he feels betrayed by Alexis Tsipras and believes that Greek will say yes to Europe yes to development. Additionally, Great Britain, Germany and France have a common stance on Greek crisis and try to imagine the best plan for the safety of Eurozone.

The truth is that the Greek economy  goes from bad to worse and the economic crisis is getting stronger and stronger and people have done many economic sacrifices for a stronger tomorrow, but this has never come. While the International Monetary Fund  is insisting that Greece needs to adopt new austerity measures, more than one million people live under the poverty line. According to the Hellenic Statistics Authority (ELSTAT), Greece’s unemployment rate is continuing to increase, reaching 27.6 % percent in June 2015. It is very sad that 21,000 people are homeless,  the vast majority of them is young people of working age.  According to sociologists and political scientists a country with these percentages goes to chaos and social turmoil and they argue that a social change is needed. Moreover, the increased number of suicides in Greece in the three-year period between 2009 and 2011 represents a trend that shows no sign of economic development. However, it is worth noting that, despite the new negative inflation,   the market basket will be heavier from January 2014 while thousands of our fellow citizens are unable to buy basic consumer goods. Although new taxes to be imposed have been voted out last year and calculated the new state budget , it does not exclude the possibility of increases and new taxes or, if not met the fiscal targets or has not been voted in its entirety the budget.

Even if the banks are closed and after the imposition of capital controls, the majority of people are confused, afraid and they do not know how to vote, but they try to take the best decision not only for the present but also for the future generations. A major political compromise from all sides is needed in order to remain Europe united and strong. 

The future of European Union from a left perspective

Capitalism has proved as an inadequate economic and political system in many European countries, but could a left perspective be salutary for the European Union? There is not a straight answer to this question and this issue must be  subjected to further analysis. 

The opponents of leftism argue that a communistic or a left perspective is baneful and disadvantageous for Europe and is against the development and productivity. Moreover, the rise of left parties in Europe is considered by many right governments as hostile and antipathetic and they allege that this rise could put at risk European stability. According to them, capitalism creates a climate of innovation and economic expansion. As a consequence, a right perspective leads to the increased wealth and enables a higher standard of living. As Winston Churchill said “the inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries”.  Even though  capitalism has helped in the development of Western countries in general, but as a coin has two faces plutocracy has created  inequality between those who have and those who have not.

The proponents of left assert as true that the right perspective is an inadequate policy and Europe needs a more socialistic and human governmental model. From their side, they ascribe the rise of Syriza in Greece and the strong influence of Podemos in Spain to the major economic and political problems that nations face. In addition to this, the fervent supporters of leftism believe that Europe is a coalition of countries, where all of them must be equal and free to act their own governmental policy. Furthermore, they asseverate that European countries must not close their eyes to poverty, inequality and injustice in the union. They strong claim that there is not a two- paced European economy, even if the Southern countries face severe economic and social problems. They claim that austerity measures are unpopular and all the members should share the same economic policy because these measures have the diametrically opposite results.

The impact of economic  liberalization on social, economic and cultural rights is tremendous as by the beginning of the 21st century, capitalism had become an ecumenical economic system. Even if the European Union has fallen into a trap and lives in a fallacy of unity, equality and economic development it is time to rethink the initial goal of the European alliance. According to European agreement Europe means participation, collaboration among nations, and mainly an exchange of opinion and ideas having the same aim the European prosperity. What is more socialistic movements could be used as an alternative option, helping in the transformation of modern society.

Taking everything into consideration, a left perspective could redefine and reprogram the European policy producing positive changes for the future of the union and pave the way for a more democratic and equal European policy. If not the social and economic imbalances could cause  insurmountable that would be impossible to overcome. 

The impact of advertising on society

In this day and age advertisements are considered to be more influential than in the past and marketing uses a variety of strategies, which have a negative impact on consumers. .

First of all, it should be examined the psychological factor as advertisers use subconscious techniques in order to sell their products. This factor is very important because marketers know how to set a successful promotion using these ways of promotion. Consequently, it is not a strategy it is a very profitable business. Additionally, they create false needs and an insatiable appetite for consumption. The paradox is that people in the last decades used to be happier that modern people. According to surveys the latter focus on other things, as they believe that they are of paramount importance for them. For instance, the status, the social rank and the lifestyle are more important factors.Moreover, it should be useful be underlined that advertisers use a plethora of techniques in order to approach their target group. For instance, in the morning where a large majority of women is at home, TV commercials regarding cosmetics or house products are screened the one after the other. Similarly, during the Christmas period or Easter a common theme in many commercials are the toys because children are at home and watch television.

Therefore, official institutions who have understood the negative role of advertising try to control the content of advertisements. Additionally, governments in Europe and USA have allocated people who overlook carefully advertisements and not only forbid their screening if an advertisement has an insulting or inappropriate content but also give fines to the television stations. In other words, TV regulation is used widely nowadays, due to the fact that the law is the only barrier to the extreme deregulation, which prevails in media industry.

Taking everything into consideration and for the above measures and examples advertising have a negative impact on consumers and advertising regulation should be beneficial for the consumers and they will not be bombarded with false needs and messages.

Children and television

The issue, that television is good for children, is highly controversial, that has stirred significant debate in recent years. On the one hand, the proponents of television claim that it is good for children, but, on the other hand, its opponents believe that it is detrimental for minors. The truth is somewhere in the middle as television is not negative per se, but analyzing its content it is compelling that has at the same time positive and negative characteristics.  
The truth is that children are not passive recipients of media messages. They do interact intellectually and critically with the media. As they grow up, children begin to differentiate between fantasy and reality and begin to develop critical ways of evaluating messages over the media.  Additionally, the technological development is used also for the benefit of children, for their entertainment or educational reasons.  For instance, television can hone their imagination, cultivate their skills or enhance their vocabulary. . To put it, in a nutshell, TV5 Monde offers a new program “Apprendre le francais avec TV5 Monde” and children can ameliorate by this way their French easily. 

On the contrary, television is one of the most favorite activities since 1960’s and it is of paramount importance to examine its impact on children, More specifically, as  Buckingham (1996) noticed children spend more time at home watching television than studying or any other extra- curricular activity. Therefore, a specific attention should be given to children, who are a large subgroup of the television audience.However, Guersney L. (2012) underlines that scientists analyzing media’s impact on children they garbled in translation because they based on flimsy sources. She proposes that parents and educators must acknowledge the importance of media in their lives and assess their choices. Overall the various hypotheses about the effects of media violence remain as public concerns which receive a little empirical support. In addition to, Heike vom Orde (2012) claimed that only some products are ideal for children. Moreover, the American Academy of Pediatrics report (2011) rings the bell of danger because according to its researchers and data the educational value of television for children under two years old is unproven.  What is of paramount importance is that TRUCE (Teachers Resisting Unhealthy Children's Entertainment)  organization which is constituted from educators, try to reduce the harmful impact of media and marketing on children and trigger the public opinion. According to,  their campaign: “Facing the Screen Dilemma: Young Children, Technology and Early Education”(October 2012),  preschoolers spend on average with screen media range from at least 2.2 hours to as much as 4.6 hours per day. 
It is believed that television has a plea of negative effects.The main problem still remains the same regarding who should decide what it is or is not appropriate for children.  Child’s right to information was the main subject of the “Children and Television World Summit”,  which indicates that child’s programming is not only a national but also an international and educational issue and parents or educators should hand this with this sensitive problem seriously starting a long-needed discussion on television.