Chernobyl selfies lead to warning from show's writer

Tourists visiting Chernobyl must be respectful, the creator of the HBO show about the nuclear disaster there says.

Some people visiting the site in Ukraine, where the world's worst nuclear accident happened in 1986, have been taking pictures smiling at the abandoned power plant - one person posted a semi-naked picture.

Craig Mazin said it's "wonderful" that a "wave" of people have been visiting.

But he's asked people to remember "that a terrible tragedy occurred there".

Estimates of the number of people affected vary hugely - the Chernobyl Forum says fewer than 50 died following exposure to radiation, but there could eventually be up to 9,000 deaths linked to the disaster.

"Comport yourselves with respect for all who suffered and sacrificed," Craig wrote on Twitter.

A number of companies run tours to the 30km exclusion zone around Chernobyl, and Pripyat - the abandoned city that was built for Chernobyl's workers and families.

It had a population of 60,000 before the disaster but has been largely deserted ever since - although an estimated 60,000 tourists visited last year.

The exclusion zone spreads from Ukraine and into Belarus and covers an area more than twice the size of London.

Following the popular Sky Atlantic show there has reportedly been an increase in tourism to the zone. Its landmarks now feature in the background of pictures on Instagram.

As we've said, the number of people who died as a result of exposure to radiation is disputed.

A 2005 report from the Chernobyl Forum suggested that fewer than 50 people died as a result of exposure to radiation - but it also estimated that up to 9,000 people could eventually die. Greenpeace puts the figure as high as 93,000.

What's not disputed is that around 5,000 cases of thyroid cancer - most of which were treated and cured - were caused by the contamination.

And that's what Chernobyl's writer wants people to remember.

It's not the first time people have been asked to stop taking questionable selfies at historical sites.

In 2014 an American teenager's selfie at the Auschwitz Concentration Camp went viral for all the wrong reasons.

It wasn't the only selfie to be taken at the camp, where 1.1m people were killed during the Holocaust, or at the Berlin Holocaust memorial.

A website that Photoshopped graphic images from the Holocaust into the selfies was set up in response.

But with the Auschwitz Museum still feeling the need to call people out in 2019, it seems like something that's still happening.

https://www.bbc.com/news/newsbeat-48608713

BBC NEWS 12 June 2019

Skip Instagram post by seregastrange

A matter of vaxx: parents don’t have the right to risk their kids’ lives

Choosing not to vaccinate our children is not like deciding what TV programmes they can watch – putting them in danger can not be our choice to make

I'm not going to talk about science. There have been a hundred studies and a thousand articles, dedicating millions of hours to discussing the science behind a simple truth: vaccines are safe and they work.

And if you haven’t been convinced by those already, I’m probably not going to convince you by repeating them here.

Facts don’t convince anyone of anything anymore. Not like they used to, anyway.

But it’s more than that.

Science should be left to the scientists. And when the science of vaccines is left to them, they say that vaccines are safe and they work.

The rest of us are just screaming at each other in the comments section.

Personally, I don’t think that’s productive. Both sides have slogged through to where we are now, and where we are now is that nothing has changed – both sides have dug in further, and one side is much better prepared for an outbreak of measles.

But one thing has changed. These days, the anti-vaxx movement has become an issue of rights, and a parent’s right to make the decisions for their children. That’s what I want to talk about.

These days, with the rise of social media and the constant evolution of technology, it’s never been more important for parents to be vigilant and attentive to their children. At the same time, however, it’s never been easier for parents to tune out – YouTube for the kids, Netflix for the parents, TikTok for granny, and you can all tune out together.

None of us have any idea what will make our child grow up to be happy and successful. We all have thoughts, sure, and plenty of educated guesses, but nobody really knows. There is an entire industry of people out there who are eager to tell you (if you subscribe, guys!) how and why they turned out to be so successful. But they’re just guessing and connecting unrelated dots. They’re looking at stars and drawing constellations. Every time they say, “I’m successful because of X”, it could actually be the opposite: they’re successful in spite of X. Or vice versa.

Parenting is just a series of guesses, and the overall hope that you’re doing the right thing. And that’s terrifying. So, I can understand parents wanting to be proactive and attentive. All you can do is not tune out, and try your best. It’s just that when you’re wrapped up in all that anxiety and pressure, it’s very easy for parents to lose sight of their role along the way.

As a parent, you can decide that your child won’t watch TV, or be christened, or listen to Nickelback. These are your values that you’re passing on to your children, reflected in the decisions you make for them. But these aren’t your decisions. You’re deciding what’s in their best interest, but only because they can’t right now. They’re too young, they don’t understand consequences or that chocolate isn’t a vegetable. You’re making choices for them, but it’s actually their choice, not yours. You’re just in charge of it – temporarily.

Ruin their life

I’m not saying you need to ask your baby’s permission to change their nappy; I’m saying you don’t have the right to make decisions that will ruin their life. Go ahead, keep your children from watching TV or listening to Nickelback; raise them with or without religion, with or without meat. These are values that, if they disagree with them later in life, won’t do any harm to them. They can be undone. When you make a decision that can’t be undone, and that will do harm, the State steps in. Of course they do – it’s not your decision. And this brings us back to vaccines.

I’m not going to argue with you. Because I do understand; you’re trying to be proactive and attentive. But I recently read the Facebook comments below an article about vaccinations.

And as I read through the comments, I imagined all of us – all of the commentators – on a beach somewhere, watching a group of children swimming. Looking out from the beach, I saw a child flailing and thrashing in the water. He was clearly struggling.

“Hey, look!” I cried. “That kid looks like he’s drowning!”

The man next to me looked annoyed and said, “That’s my son.”

“Can he swim?”

The man shook his head. “We kept him out of lessons. Jesus, you can’t trust lifeguards – they’d let him drown in the pool!”

As I started dialing 999, I protested, “You shouldn’t let him out into the water if he can’t swim.”

The man stared at me angrily. “And what about my rights?” he demanded.

“Your . . . what?”

“I know my rights. I have the right to not teach my son how to swim and to let him swim in the ocean. Besides, if you teach your kids how to swim, then what are you so worried about?”

I pointed at his son, who was still flailing dangerously in the water and had drifted towards another group of swimmers. “Well . . . that’s a group of pensioners and cancer patients. They learned how to swim, but they can’t swim well anymore. He’s going to drag one of them under.”

We watched as he drifted towards another group of swimmers.

“Those kids know how to swim,” I said. “But even a good swimmer can be pulled under by a flailing, drowning person.”

“But . . .”

“And now he’s getting closer to that group of babies,” I continued. “They’re too young to learn how to swim. He’s going to drag them under too.”

The man looked startled. “Babies? Why are there babies swimming?”

“Because this metaphor had one last point to make,” I said gravely. “By the way,” I continued, “the rescue service currently saving your child is going to cost a fortune and your child probably won’t forgive you for risking their life to make an unnecessary point about your rights.”

Especially because those rights were never yours in the first place.

The Irish Times June 10 2019

Amsterdam invites tourists to 'marry' a local for a day

Fake weddings aim to improve relations between residents and visitors and include a brief ‘honeymoon’ to explore the city’s less popular sights

I’m wearing a vintage bridal gown with a long train, and my groom, Julian du Perron (30), is in a top hat. He’s all smiles, but I’m a little nervous, which is unsurprising because we’ve only just met.

Eventually, I relax into it. After all, the wedding is as fake as the flowers that frame the arch above us, and our marriage is for just one day.

I’m trying out Marry an Amsterdammer for the day, one of several activities suggested in the Untourist Guide to Amsterdam, a book and website launched this week, in collaboration with the city marketing organisation amsterdam&partners, and local businesses. It’s packed with ideas for bringing tourists and locals together, and encouraging visitors to explore less-known parts of the city, as an antidote to the problems of overtourism. Other activities include a boat tour of the city guided by refugees, and fishing for plastic in the canal.

“The idea is that tourists not only feed from the city, but can also build a connection with people who live here,” says Jona Rens, founder of Wed and Walk, the shop-cum-chapel in Amsterdam’s De Pijp district where Julian and I make pledges to the city as well as to each other, and where Jona has been conducting kitsch mock weddings since 2015.

Last year, about 21 million people visited Amsterdam. Attempts to handle such numbers has have resulted in campaigns like Enjoy and Respect, launched in June 2018, dishing out steep fines for nuisances such as littering and urinating in public.

The Untourist Guide takes a refreshingly positive approach. Social innovator Elena Simons, one of the authors of the book, describes this influx of people from all over the world as “a really exciting opportunity”. She says: “Let’s do something with all that energy, all that diversity – something good for mankind and enjoyable at the same time.”

On Wednesday (5 June), a mass wedding between tourists and Amsterdammers will take place at Posthoorn church (close to Central Station) and, from June to January, visitors can bid, starting at €100, for a different listed bride or groom each month, who will introduce them to a new aspect of Amsterdam life during their one-day honeymoon. Shamiro, the city’s current night mayor, will take visitors to off-beat late-night spots, for example, while Natascha, an urban farmer, will introduce you to her favourite green spaces around town. Friends and family can come too, as long as the amount of money bid covers the activities and there’s something left for the chosen charity of your bride or groom.

My marrying Julian for the day probably isn’t going to make Amsterdam a better place but, symbolically, this union between a resident and a tourist does have a strange poignancy. The red aisle that I walk down, the music, and the exchanging of thrift-store rings creates a powerful mood – although it’s a hug, not a kiss, that seals the ceremony.

As we sign the register, the sun appears, and we take our first steps outside as a “married” couple. Drivers honk us, a French tourist stops to take photographs, and Julian, who is charming and relaxed throughout, gets his guitar out and serenades me with Ed Sheeran’s Thinking Out Loud.

Since I am a writer and he is a musician, he proposes a collaboration: we will write a love song to the city. We jump on bikes (goodbye loaned dress, hello jeans) and head off to his home turf in Amsterdam East (Oost), over the Amstel river and out of traditional tourist territory.

The Oosterpark, with its lake and shady terraces, is the perfect place to pause and make music and it’s much quieter than the better-known Vondelpark. “Moving people to less obvious places is a positive by-product,” says Elena, who sees the wedding’s primary aim as improving relations between tourists and locals, as well as taking them to less popular areas. “It’s such a pity we live in separate worlds,” she says. “We use the same city centre, but we hardly ever really connect.”

When the limits of my songwriting skills become obvious, Julian throws his guitar on to his back and we explore a little further. “You think you know the city quite well,” he tells me, “but every day you discover a new part.” The stalls are packing up at the multicultural Dappermarkt, where Julian buys his fruit and vegetables, but Brouwerij ‘t IJ, a brewery with a large terrace beneath Amsterdam’s oldest windmill, is buzzing, and we order beers for around €3 and toast our wedding day.

“Tourism can be so much more than grabbing a selfie at the canals,” says Nico Mulder of amsterdam&partners. “I’m not saying nobody will go to the Van Gogh Museum or Anne Frank House any more, but it’s really positive to see tourists and Amsterdam citizens more as one, instead of opponents of each other.”

• Bidding for the mock weddings starts at €100. More information about the Untourist movement at untouristguide.com

The MUSICAL is here!

Tomorrow evening you'll have the chance to enjoy the musical of the year!

Some of your classmates and other students and teachers at the EOI Las Rozas participate in the performance and we are all really pleased to invite you to come and enjoy this fantastic musical.

Venue: AUDITORIO JOAQUÍN RODRIGO
Date: Wednesday 5th June
Time: 19:00h
Free tickets available at the ticket box of the auditorium