Let´s talk about confrontations

We live in a world that is constantly convulsing. The clashes occur one after the other and we don´t have time to digest the previous scare. People are manipulated so we confront each other: it isn´t the interest of a few to be together, even when the similarities are bigger than the differences.

What am I talking about? I don´t have to go far:

(Legal arrivals: green; Ilegal arrivals: red)

– Madrid, a woman rebukes a child because she sat in the metro seats. Her crime? Being of Latin American origin. This woman´s rage was fed by the fear of the foreign “invasion” and the panic of other cultures can “contaminate” the “purity” of the Spanish culture. These people forget that the actual Spanish idiosyncracy resides in the richness that the Arab culture, for example. Many words come from the arabs and are accepted by the RAE (the Royal Academy of Spanish Language) because of their huge influence. I prefer to keep in mind the whole wagon reacting against this woman and defending the child and her family.

– All those persons that make videos for their social nets trying to make us fear that so many persons are coming in a small boat or crossing the border, because they are going to take the jobs from us and they will live out of the government welfare. First assertion: if these personas are scared of a person that has arrived recently from another country, that doesn´t know the language and is not qualified, what low self esteem they have. Second assertion: if these persons are waiting for “sugar daddy” state to solve their problems without moving a finger and complain because a person that arrived recently has some welfare, firstly, how lazy they are and, secondly, it´s better to be informed before throwing that poisonous venom through their mouths. Nobody remembers that Spain was an immigrant country not so long ago.

– The yihad persons are against everything that is against their ideology. They don´t only attack occidental people. Their vast majority of their victims are muslims, that suffer from terrorist attacks on their doorsteps (or even in their own homes, literally speaking). I will never understand why they consider necessary to make everybody thinks like them or die for not doing it… The diversity of opinions is so rich for the humans!

lesbian couple

– Talking about diversity, I´m sorry to be so dim but I don´t get what´s the problem of to persons that are in love with each other… and they are the same sex. Or that there are persons trapped in wrong bodies. Or that the union between two homosexuals are called matrimony. Or that they decide to adopt or have children. My questions to the ones that hate them: Do you think that the homosexuality gets caught like the flu? What´s the harm that are inflicting to the rest? I suggest these people to have a gay/lesbian/trans/drag… in their lives and they will see life full of colours, not only the tedious grey scale. And they will win some fun and laughs.

– On the other hand, political leaders raising the national union flag and making enemies to the rest of the world. Their speechs are based in the hatred to the ones that are different from them (colour/race/culture…) because the old reason: all benefits that are taken from the ones that came before in the country… and sometimes they forget that they are themselves son of recent illegal immigrants. Speech based in having a scapegoat to hide the atrocities commited against the citizenship.


– The hate between men and women. On one hand, those men that kill their partners and/or their children, they don´t give alimony or collaboration to their mothers´child, or the ones that treat women as objects and blame them for that. To top ir all, the debate amongst the polititians (men) about the breastfeeding or abortion. On the other hand those women that make their children to hate their own parents (parental alienation), they don´t obey the visiting arrangements for their ex-couples or they want to kill every man, without making a distintion between good or bad persons.

These confrontations are based in some principles:

– The hatred of everything that is different from what it is known.

– The love for the only thinking.

– The adoration to the comfort zone.

– The irrational fear of what is different because of ignorance.

– The retrograde mentality when it is thought that the previous times are better than the actual ones.

– The powerful people´s interest in keeping us divided, because they know that the united people are a danger for they stability in power.

Let´s join us, let´s be empathic to one another, let´s travel to know other cultures and be less ignorants, let´s value the diversity… Let´s be human.

family · feminism · Politics · Uncategorized

Make feminism dissapear


How to write an article about feminism now that is so fashioned? How to make feminism be understood and why its existance? And above all: Why do I want feminism to dissapear?

A song from Offspring (Self Esteem) came to my rescue. It tells the story of an abusive relationship in which she brushes aside the boy, bugs out on him, insults him and even cheats on him… Ridiculous and funny situation at the time, right?: what a henpecked guy… until you change things up and it didn´t look like a parody anymore (and I´m not saying that all men are al the same and we, women, are always the victim).

That´s why that I decided to revert the roles like the song did so the persons that can´t understand what feminism stands for. Now I want you, men, to imagine a world in which:

  • You have to think carefully where to walk on the street in case someone comes to you and assaults you… more so if it´s at night time…
  • You have to take some of your time grooming yourself a lot (creams, make up, hair…) because society and the beauty canons for men say you have to do it. If you don´t, you´re not men enough.
  • You assume that you don´t have to earn the same salary than the rest, no matter how much you study or work, just because you´re men.
  • A position in life has been imposed to you that means that your professional goals and achievements are not important but if you were able to create and keep a family or how well dressed you always are.
  • To get that dream job you have to “pay the price” and let the powerful do or suffer degrading situations. If you don´t fall into line,  the most probable situation is that that job will be given to other that has accepted the contract holder´s whim.
  • When an abuse is reported from others to you, the idea that you consented the situation and all the versions of the story wouldn´t count, because you didn´t show rejection and let them did what they did. Yes, it has happened in Spain!!!
  • Even when you had straight As at the university, it is expected from you, guys, that you professional aspirations are left behind to form a family and support your partners in their own professional career…
  • When someone has to decide to reduce their working hours to take care of the family, the men are the persons that decide to cut their salaries and expectations, because that´s the situacion that is expected from them.
  • When a man goes out with many women he´s called a whore that is worth nothing and a woman that goes out with many men is a real woman. The double standard.
  • It´s possible that our boss at work force you to wear with certain clothes (normally sexy ones) and if someone resists to do so, this boss tells him that there are plenty men on the street that would like to have that job and won´t complaint as much.
  • The songs that we hear talk about women having affairs with men (at the same time or not), how they (the women) play with men, with their feelings, how the men are going to receive what they deserve and it seems absolutely normal. Your sons will hear it and will think it absolutely normal that a woman would come and abuse them: you wouldn´t care less that your son would hum these type of songs.
  • Women believe that men´s bodies were created just for their personal satisfaction: society has shown it as a normal situation. Any ad you see it´s a portrait of this idea.
  • The legislatives decide to create laws in which it tells men when it´s ok to reproduce or when it´s necessary to do a vasectomy… and all of them are women that do not understand the men´s nature.
  • Some women believe that, because men were created just for their personal satisfaction and they are in this world to serve them, when some men rises up and doesn´t want to continue a toxic relationship, they (the women) decide that “with them or with no one” and kill those men because.

Do you need more reverse examples to realise the situation? I could write many other examples but I don´t want to extent the article much more. For these examples and many more is why I desire feminism to reach its goal: to make a person be judged because of being a person, not because of his/her gender. When this happens, feminism automatically will stop existing, it wouldn´t have a reason to be. That day everyone will have to make a party to celebrate. I´m afraid that there´s so much to be done still that I won´t be seeing the day. We are on the way: don´t stop fighting.

I invite you to watch a video from 1971… not that far away…


Citizen of the world


I´m sorry I can´t understand nacionalisms. I´m afraid I don´t have that chip integrated, due to my personal circumstances. Daughter of immigrants that had to leave their land and relatives behind to survive; being born in a country that embraced me during my first three years of life; double nationality during my first fourteen years; I also became an immigrant not for necessity this time but for love towards a foreigner, also an immigrant; mother of a double-nationality daughter… It´s easy to understand why I don´t understand nationalisms.

When a territory ask for disintegration because part of its population understands that they are better alone, my soul hurts. Where is the limit of the break up? Certainly, many would think that they can be better off without those noisy neighbours, for example. That doesn´t mean that we are not capable of learning of each other to get along amongst each other with our agreements and disagreements.

What the most conviced people to separate from the others that radically opose the idea have in common is that that all paraphernalia is used to divide people and let them feel that the other is an enemy. What other uses does it have? To creat division, to deviate attention over other issues that should worry more (corruption, health and education cut backs, economy, unemployment…) and others that will see the light soon (like the end of the bank secrecy in Andorra). Who benefits from all of it? As always, the same people: the ones that indoctrinate with hate towards what is different from them (in 1930s Germany it was called fascism. We can call it racism now) gets all the profit because, when they convince other of their superiority, they become natural leaders that can manipulate people as they please, therefore, manage all areas of life of that community as they want; On the other hand, the ones that are against the separation, they deviate the attention from their own wrong decisions (it´s my point of view).

Another example that we have ignored in the Canary Islands: the islands´confrontation. There´s a Royal Decree since September 27th 1927 in which the Canary Islands where divided into two provinces. What has been the use of that? Just to duplicate burocracy and keep the same ones and their close ones in power. And, of course, as Pedro Medina Sanabria says: “the non-scrupulous polititians don´t hesitate in using the islands´confrontation, when they consider that it´s convenient to their shameful plans, so they can distract people from the real endemic problems that we suffer.” I could not say it any clearer…

It´s been talked a lot about what Quebec achieved when they ask for independence in the 1980s and 1990s. Canada found a solution by means of the Clarity Act, in which it´s specified that a referendum can be done for the independence of part of the country… on the basis that, if part of that territory votes against the disintegration, this part wouldn´t separate from the country. The result? The independent part will be dismembered into little domains. It did work in Canada: why not in another place?

I still remember the anecdote in Coventry University, when I studied Comunication, Culture and Media, when we were ask for the most essential part of our beings, that part that cannot be taken away from us. A colleague asked quick: “being British!” The professor aswered her that the UK could be invaded by another country and change the nationality. The answer she was looking for was: being a person.

Please, let´s star being persons.