Mixed marriages indeed a bumpy ride
I really enjoyed reading your article about mixed marriages ["Mixed couples: A bumpy, enriching ride" by Tom Nicholson, Vol. 7 No. 18, May 7-13]. I am a Slovak married to an Englishman, currently living in England.
Since I met my husband in the US, I didn't really know what to expect before moving here. But seeing that I am a very flexible person, I simply assumed that getting used to a different lifestyle would be like getting used to driving a new car. Well...not quite.
I was very shocked seeing my own reactions to this new environment. I was homesick all the time, desperately missing my family and my friends. That ultimately resulted in my frustrations with silly little details, like "Why do British people eat chips in their sandwiches?"
However, with the great support of my husband, I got over it. We stumble upon cultural differences every day of our marriage, and laugh about it all. All our holidays for the next two years are solely reserved for trips to Slovakia.
Good luck to all who decide to join the "mixed marriage club".
Not all the elderly revere Mečiar!
After reading your article ["Mixed couples: A bumpy, enriching ride" by Tom Nicholson, Vol. 7 No. 18, May 7-13], I got rather upset over one sentence: "... if you criticise Mečiar to anyone over 50..."
This is an insult to all of us over 50 and 60 and 70 who NEVER EVER supported Mr. Mečiar. Trust me, there are tens of thousands of us.
Should the media be leashed in?
Concerning your editorial ["Mass Media Law: More sound, less fury", Vol. 7 No. 14, April 9-15], first of all, it would be good to know just who you are. That is, put your name (if not your money) where your mouth is.
Secondly, while I agree with you that it's impractical to ask for and receive signed permission for every statement a paper publishes, the law is perhaps necessary precisely because of "aggressive fools" who shove cameras or microphones in people's faces.
You seem to understand this in the case of a mother, but not in the case of a private funeral. Ján Ducký [the former head of gas utility Slovenský plynárenský priemysel (SPP) who in January 1999 was murdered in Bratislava - ed. note] was no longer in any public office, nor was he running a state-owned company [at the time of his murder]. The reporter you mentioned was asked numerous times to keep his distance at his funeral, but this didn't seem to sink in at all.
Vladimír Mečiar, whom I don't like and who wasn't holding public office at that time either, "lost his calm" only because of the repeated abuse by the reporter. I would bet money that, at your friend's funeral, you would do the same.
And finally, who are you trying to fool? The media has never been a "free social force" (socialist maybe) and it's always under the influence (political or commercial) of those who own it. Just check out your own paper's ownership.
P.S. When does a "public servant" cease to be one and who gets to decide?
Well, of course women are paid less than men
Concerning your article ("'It's a fact': Women paid less than men" by Martina Pisárová, Vol. 7 No. 18, May 7-13), it's really ironic that women are complaining that they are paid less than men, even though they spend more money on retail therapy than men.
Less money more shopping. How do sociologists explain that one? Women in general want there [sic] cake and want to eat it too.
Example: Men dig roads, lay cables, fly aeroplanes and so on. Women want equal rights, so when will we see them digging up the roads, laying cables and so on?
Women cannot give the same level of commitment or consistency as men. They desire babies, family etc., so promotion is hindered due to lack of experience when considered against a man. A woman of 45 has given up three to five years to raise her child. These lost years make a difference.
Women, as we say Gentlemen: You can't live with them, you can't live without them, the ultimate Catch-22.
What a foolish and out-dated argument put forward by Bryan Rylands. To use the example of hard physical jobs to prove women's "inequality" shows how pathetic his opinion is. His letter is so poorly written and punctuated that he could not compete against a literate woman.
21. May 2001 at 0:00