HOME | BLOG | About us | Contact Us | gallery | Store | Forum | WALL OF FAME | FAQ
Register as a member to participate in our calls. Play the video to listen to what our members think about this topic.
Date: Friday, February 10, 2017
Participants:
(from 8 countries)
USA: Rick, Jami | Argentina: Johny | France: Djamila | Russia: Altul | Iran: Rojhano, Hanieh, Sara, Zivar, Merisa, Saeed | Mauritania: Boboty | Sudan: Seif | China: Fangping
Teams
Panel PRO (Team A): Sara, Hanieh, Alireza
Panel CON (Team B): Djamila, Zivar, Saeed,
Audience (Team C): Johny, Rojhano, Seif, Boboty, Fangping, Merisa
Joined late: Altul, Jami
Host: Rick
Co-Host: Johny
Team A summary
Sara: Toys can be an obstacle for taking part of some sports. Playing with war toys can cause some violent reaction. Playing about how to kill people can condition them. They learn savage behavior. It’s better to teach other useful things like music and how to improve their body-health rather than teaching how to kill. When children play with toys, they learn about the activities that are involved with playing with their toys.
Hanieh: toys are the children’s world. Playing helps them get in touch with reality in terms they understand. It also gives them opportunity to learn how to interact with other children or people. When we buy them toys, we want to help them because we know they have emotional and mental impacts. Toys are also tools of education. They can have a variety of toys but we should make sure the war toys should not be the predominant type of toys they have.
Alireza: don’t know what effect they can cause to their lives. Children should have more toy options. Children can also “act” according to the toys they are playing and it could be dangerous, for instance, playing with guns pretending they are killing other people.
Team B summary
Djamila: The best option is not to make toys a big deal. Having a wide range of toys can help the children to find his/her personality. It may be important to see how your kids behave when playing with certain toys. Banning may not be a good idea. In many cases children don’t know how to play with them and we need to teach them how. It’s not up to us to say that their kids are aggressive or that they will become like that. Too offensive to say children can make their option but it can be the right thing to do. Drawing too much attention to toys – for, example by banning them or refusing to buy them – can actually make your child want them more.
Zivar: Not to purchasing will not guarantee that the person will not behave wrong when they grow up. Maybe paying with them and talking with them will make them understand that it’s just a game. If the kids are aggressive them the best thing to do is to let them play a little bit less with those toys. Toys can have both positive and negative effect but it does not depend on the toy and it also depends on the way we teach them how to play with them.
Saeed: Movies have a big influence on kids; they can feel attracted to what they see in movies and may insist parents to buy them something like what they saw in the film. Children may not see the real application or the real effect of guns so this fact can be used to rest importance to the matter.
Team C summary
Johny: (just voted, did not give any opinions.)
Rojhano: I agree that children should have choices but it’s not what the topic is about. Both teams made it clear that children have needs but team A could defend their arguments a little bit better.
Boboty: Both teams agreed that toys have influences on children’s future. However, I agree that we should only buy them things that will be useful for their future and that we should avoid exposing them to dangerous toys. Even though team B argues that it’s important to let them have experience with different types of toys, the argument does not convince me enough; because when they are young and unstable, allowing them to play with certain type of toys can have a tremendous consequence for their future; even if it doesn’t seem to be the case. One point neither team talked about is that if there are toys that can cause negative impacts on children, these should be allowed to be sold or manufactured in the first place.
Merisa: When children are born, they come into life without any experiences and parents have no rights to limit children on what they can experience because when they grow older, they need to know how to interact with other children and parents are supposed to provide their children with as many possibilities as possible. “Let children experience everything.”
Votes:
Team A won this debate.
Rick’s take away: A lot of this depends upon the child. We cannot look at all children as the same. Though there are some children who have some problems, we cannot put a ban on all toys. There are some children with some of those problems who should not be around these toys and parents should make a choice; but saying that we should teach parents not to purchase these toys is an absolute statement and I don’t agree with absolute statements because it all depends on the children and on the environment the child is in.
Thanks everyone for participating and for visiting this blog. Below are the links to listen to this discussion.
Listen Online
Date: 2/4/2017
Participants:
(from 10 Countries)
USA: Rick, Jami | Argentina: Johny | China: Fiona, Catherine | Romania: Flory | India: Kratika, Fandy | Algeria: Soso | Iran: Behnam, Sara, Merisa | Tunisia: Amin | Morocco: Karim | Russia: Sersh
Host: Rick
Format: General discussion on Skype.
Summary
Catharine: friends must be honest towards each other, be caring and also have the same interests. Comfort is essential In terms of friendship. A friend would defend our similar values, besides friends are not looking at each other’s possessions. Loyalty and honesty are very important in terms of friendship.
Fiona: appearance plays a big role when choosing friends. Friendship is a process: it starts with physical attraction, then getting to know about their inside and finally developing the friendship further.
Flory: friends care about loyalty; they are always there for each other and would let you know about your weak points in order to strengthen them and grow personally. A person can be measured by their friends so be careful whom you're getting into friendship with.
Fandy: we associate with people around us. Friendship is something dynamic which we are not able to plan. It happens based upon things we share (hobbies, Interests etc.). And friends never manipulate each other.
Kratika: a friend is someone whom you can trust, rely on and share your hardship with. If you have a friend and you really care about that person then you're in a real friendship, a friend has an impact on your own character, so choose your friends warily. Financial matters are out of friendship affairs.
Amin: demonstrating kindness and friendly behavior should be something we all do not only with friends. A friend to me is the one who is not interested in my possessions but the one who cares who I am.
Soso: your friend must have higher level than yours (better than you in all aspects) In order to learn things and improve yourself or at least be in the same level as you are. Opinions about what a friendship is vary from person to person but you must get together with someone who can teach you and who can cause a positive impact on you.
Karim: true friendship can be developed very quickly. A friend can have many different qualities. Loyalty is one quality most people look for in a friend. Intelligence is another quality valued by many people. Other qualities that people look for include: sensitivity, honesty, having the ability to listen and generosity.
Sara: A good friend likes us for who we are; a person sensitive enough to cry when we cry. A good friend would encourage us and support us in all aspects of our lives. “I look for a person who can listen to me and understand me.” A friend doesn’t have to have all answers. A good friend is the one who read your mind and know what you are thinking. True friends never use your private information against you or never reveal it.
Sersh: I prefer to be friend of someone who has a lot of money, have influential power; someone who is very successful because if the person does not have those things he/she is a loser and very unhappy person. I would be “infected” by his/her unhappiness and his/her failures. If we are in the company of successful people we may get some of that success too.
Merisa: Real friends are nice to each other, care about each other, listen to each other, they are always there for each other to support each other and despite the arguments they’re still friends. Having something in common is essential to maintain the relationship.
Thanks everyone for participating and for visiting this blog. Below are the links to listen to the discussion.
Listen Online
Date: February 3, 2017
Participants
(From 12 countries)
USA: Rick, Nikki | Argentina: Johny | France: Djamila | Iran: Rojhano, Behnam, Elham, Zivar, Sara, Alireza | Indonesia: Tibi, Hastin | India: Ayush, Kratika, Fandy, Mohit | Tunisia: Amin | Sudan: Seif | Bangladesh: Toufaiq, Jobair | Morocco: Karim | Pakistan: Usaid | Russia: Sersh
Teams
Panel PRO (Team A): Toufaiq, Amin, Mohit, Kratika, Djamila
Panel CON (Team B): Usaid, Fandy, Zivar, Hastin Elham, Sara, Ayush
Audience (Team C): Seif, Johny, Rojhano, Nikki, Jobair, Alireza
Just Listening: Tibi, Behnam, Sersh, Karim
Host: Rick
Co-Host: Johny
Team A summary
Amin: it depends on the beauty criteria. Some women use their beauty to get jobs. It has nothing to do with their dignity. Women use make up to draw attention. They just compete, the contests does not necessarily focus only on their beauty. Some women even go to these contests to fortify their dignity.
Mohit: if we look good, we will be confident and we feel we can achieve many things in life. If we look good, our partner can be more attracted to us.
Kratika: it's a place where women can show more than just body. They can demonstrate the way they think and the way they live their lives. Women don’t do anything wrong in these contests. It gives them chance to show their talents. They can build confidence because beauty is not only for women. Beauty is just one more tool and it depends on how you want to use it.
Djamila: we are not talking about children, we talk about adults and it is their decision, no one forces them. It can help to build self-confidence and contestants can learn a lot from these contests. It’s not always about being beautiful, it’s about commitment, being organized, having long term projects and personality. People should look at it as an opportunity to socialize. People can be beautiful but these contests are a window to new opportunities for jobs and other things. In many case it helps women.
Team B summary
Usaid: we cannot replace the natural things and if we do it, it will not reflect who we are.
Elham: Objectifying women, treating women like object and judging which object is better. Who defines beauty? What motivates women to attend these contests? It could be for entertainment. It's like judging a book by its cover.
Sara: why people admire women's beauty? I prefer being admired for my culture or other factors, not for my external appearance. Beauty pageants do not improve women's dignity and self-confidence. Beauty pageants only judge people by their appearance. Young participants only learn that "looks" is equal to "success". They spend a lot of money in make ups and hair extensions and traveling around in order to participate. They also suffer from depression, stress, and eating disorders when they participate.
Fandy: many children are raised to participate in these beauty pageants. It's a cheap activity, because there are better ways to display yourself instead of show up your beauty. It's a kind of discrimination. If you can do something then you can do something. Having a skinny child does not define beauty. It spoils the actual talent of the person.
Zivar: setting beauty standards on physical attributes is arguable. It denigrates women by focusing only on their external beauty. Some beauty pageants show participants doing charity works. It's not fair to judge people based upon their beauty because some people were not born with such bliss.
Hasting: women are treated as inanimate objects.
Ayush: beauty is not the only tool to use to be successful.
Team C summary
Johny: Team b did not do a research, beauty pageants are not only about physical appearance.
Rojhano: if men show their beauty, nobody would blame them. We may not know their personal reasons for why these women participate in these contests but it may not be for the reasons we think they do.
Jobair: Team A was more prepared with more information about the topic. Getting a job does not always depend on whether you are beautiful or not. Even if we do not talk about children, they are affected by this. They learn that beauty plays an important role in society. This is dangerous to society.
Nikki: it's a woman's choose to participate in these contests, it's her self-esteem what will dictate if it will damage her dignity or not. Self-confidence is not the same as self-esteem. It’s up to each woman to face the judges because it was them who chose to participate.
Votes
Team A won this debate. Thanks everyone for participating. Below are the links to listen to this discussion.
Listen Online
Date: Sunday, May 8, 2016
Participants
(From 7 countries)
USA: Rick | Iran: Noorola, Behnam, Zeinab, Rojhano, Sarah, Taregh | Argentina: Johny | Tunisia: Amin, Marwa | Nepal: Grace | Egypt: Heytham | Mauritania: Boboty
Teams
Panel PRO (Team A): Noorola, Rojhano
Panel CON (Team B): Marwa, Heytham, Sara, Boboty, Zeinab
Audience (Team C): Grace, Amin, Johny, Behnam, Taregh
Team A summary
Team B summary
Team C summary
Votes:
Team B won this debate, Thanks everyone for participating. Below are the links to listen to this discussion.
Listen Online
Date: 7/8/2016
Participants
(From 10 countries)
USA: Rick | Iran: Noorola, Elham, Behnam, Zivar, Amir, Sarah | Argentina: Johny | India: Azamu, Haary | Azerbaijan: Guneyli | Algeria: Soso | Nepal: Grace | Vietnam: Amina | Poland: Mario | Switzerland: George
Host: Rick
Teams
Panel PRO (Team A): Noorola, George, Amir
Panel CON (Team B): Zivar, Behnam
Audience (Team C): Amina, Elham, Azamu, Mario, Grace
Just listening: Soso
Late: Haary, Sarah, Guneyli
Team A summary
Noorla: Throughout history, men and women have had different roles. However, people often adapt to their times, and these roles are affected by those changes. Feminism is a relatively new movement and some people still don’t get used to it. But the world is changing and moving ahead, now women work shoulder by shoulder with men. Women nowadays can do almost everything any man can do, so there is no need to take this movement further.
George: Women have earned their rights. When you eat more than what you need, to get overweighed. When you exceed in something, it becomes negative. Women think they don’t need men for anything. When they find something where women are not included, they fight for equality and they get it, but at the same time, they themselves set up organizations just for women. They want to be included in what men do but they don’t want to include men in what women do. And when men ask them to be fair women say “no, we are women, we are special.” Not only do they want to exercise their rights for equality, but they go beyond that and set special rights for themselves. To the point that it may seem that they are a different species.
Amir: All “isms” have failed. They don’t pay attention to other people’s rights. When people are given too many rights, they become selfish. Some men cannot get married due to the rights women have gotten. We all should keep equality of rights but let’s not give more rights to some and not to the other. Women not only want what men have, they want more. So let’s keep it even.
Team B summary
Zivar: According to some definitions, there is no discrimination against men in feminism. It’s about having equal rights. It’s not about getting revenge against men. It’s about giving women the same rights men have.
Behnam: Rights go hand and hand with responsibilities. Feminism means having the same rights, and thus having the same responsibility. When we ask them to do the same thing men do, it seems we are treating them unfairly. There are things that men tolerate doing that women shouldn’t be doing. Men and women are different but that doesn’t mean one is better than the other; it just means we have different “tools”, nature, talents and responsibilities. Rights and responsibilities should be justified. If one can do more, then they should be given more rights. Whether men or women.
There is no doubt that women were discriminated in the past, but nowadays feminism is going beyond fighting for equality, now it begins to discriminate women as well. It became a political movement that is no longer aimed to set equality of rights.
Team C summary
Amina: Women were treated unfairly in the past, we only want equality, to work in offices and in the military like men does. We do not discriminate men. With science and technology women have more freedom now and they can participate in the work force, jobs have become less physical and more intellectual. In many situations women were paid less and abused at home and there needs to be more equality and this movement brought more visibility to the situation. Men should learn about this because we need to share responsibilities. If a woman is a career woman she has much rights as a man does and that both the man and the woman should responsibilities at home. In most cases a woman can do what a man does and that the phase “behind every successful man there is a woman” is not true. Besides every successful man there is a woman, with equal rights and equal responsibilities. Equality means “besides”, not “behind”.
Elham: Feminism makes women deceive themselves. Men are behind feminism, using it for their own benefit. But it’s against both, men and women.
Votes:
· Amina: Team B.
· Elham: Team B.
Team B won this debate.
Rick’s take away: Equal opportunity is based upon equal capability, equal qualifications; in other words, you don’t pick someone just because they are men or women, black, white, Asian, or whatever. In an economic environment, in a work environment, you pick somebody because they are capable of doing the job not because is a “he” or “she”. On a social level, everyone has the same social rights. Politically speaking, again, it comes down to capability and qualifications. It depends on whether the person is qualified to do the job. There are limitations though that we all know about, there are some physical demands where in certain jobs one gender is more suitable perhaps, we all recognize that. However, if there are women who have as much strength as a man does or the same capability, then there is no reason to deny that job. The word “feminism” can be used to divide people. It’s true that historically there have been discrimination in the past, not only against women, but also against immigrants and color people. But the question is: how far back shall we look into the past to learn and move forward? How many times shall we say “I am sorry”? If we keep looking into the past, we will never stop saying “sorry”. We should stop saying “I’m sorry” and begin moving forward. Am I going to apologize for what my ancestor did 200 years ago or am I look into the future and make sure I’m begin person in the future? We need to be careful about these things.
Thanks everyone for participating. Below are the links to listen to this discussion.
Listen Online
Date: 11/13/2016
Participants
(From 11 countries)
USA: Rick, Jami | Iran: Hanieh, Zeinab, Nesa, Bahar, Merisa | Argentina: Johny | India: Jay | Indonesia: Tibi | Russia: Eugene | Turkey: Meliksha | Romania: Flory | France: Djamila | Poland: Mario | Sudan: Seif
Host: Rick
Co-Host: Johny
Teams
Panel PRO (Team A): Johny, Hanieh, Zeinab
Panel CON (Team B): Jay, Djamila, Mario
Audience (Team C): Nesa, Merisa, Seif, Tibi
Just Listening: Bahar, Flory
Late: Eugene, Meliksha.
Team A summary
Zeinab: When there are no borders we talk about total unification of the human race. And even though we have different cultures and languages that would make this difficult to achieve, there has been examples of some countries where they have kept large part of the place in states. There should be some limits but not as the level of a country.
Johny: This is a good opportunity to start over, to learn from our mistakes as species and it’s a wake-up call; this is to say that if we want to survive as species and become one, we need to collaborate with one another, in order to avoid repeating the mistakes we have created as human beings, To solve the problems, “we must declare Earth and all of its resources the common heritage of all of the world’s people,” it concludes, echoing the terminology of internationalists the world over, especially those at the United Nations, about how to redistribute the world’s wealth in areas such as the law of the sea, outer space law, environmental law, human rights, and humanitarian law.
Team B summary
Djamila: if we don’t have countries, it would be like an empire and the history in Planet Earth shows that it was not a successful system.
Jay: if we don’t it creates conflicts in the people’s rights. People with different religions would fight against each other.
Mario: It depends on the planet itself. If there is about a planet with no resources, then it’s okay to belong to one nation.
Team C summary
Merisa: If having no borders will generate wars and if history in planet Earth shows that there have always been wars despite of having national borders from the very beginning so therefore, With or without national borders, war will happen.
Team A was presenting a fantasy whereas team B was basing their argument based on what happens today in Earth.
Votes:
Merisa: Team B.
Nesa: Team B.
Team B won. Thanks everyone for participating. Below are the links to listen to this discussion.
Listen Online
Date: 4/23/2016
Participants
(From 9 countries)
USA: Rick, Jami | Iran: Bahare, Elham, Behnam, Zeinab | Argentina: Eliana, Johny | India: Reneesh, Yusuf, Haary | Vietnam: Amina | Tunisia: Amin | France: Djamila | Pakistan: Ayisha | Algeria: Soso
Teams
Panel PRO (Team A): Jami, Eliana, Amina, Johny, Elham, Behare, Reneesh
Panel CON (Team B): Djamila, Ayisha, Amin, Yusuf
Audience (Team C): Behnam, Haary, Soso
Just listening; Zeinab
Host: Rick
Team A summary
Jami: People may be encouraged to do more killings for the sake of selling fur.
Eliana: All clothing made with fur/skin should be banned! in this way we safeguard valuable species such as tigers, otherwise people see an animal and see only sign $$$$$ and don’t see the true importance of species. I am very happy because in Argentina last week was fined for 300,000 pesos a boutique who wanted to sell a carona (part of the saddle of a horse) of a tiger (Panther onca)
Elham: We don’t need animals nowadays to make clothing. In the past, it was the only way to have clothing but we have better and cheaper materials now. Let’s be kind to animals.
Amina: Animals have feelings just like humans. We should look after all animals and don’t use them for our own benefit.
It’s not fair and cruel for animals.
Bahare: We should not kill animals so that we can feel beautiful. We should protect them, not kill them. We can always use artificial materials and not kill the animal for its fur.
Reneesh: most animal fur is used for clothing and the animals are not being eaten by humans, their bodies are thrown to the side using anything but the fur. This is a waste because animals should be treated fairly and not have them suffer cruelty just to make someone’s coat or jacket.
Johny: (was unable to speak)
Team B summary
Djamila: It’s too hard to use the word ban because it depends on the country we live. Some people use it for things they need. We can use the fur if the animal is already dead. The practice though should be regulated.
Ayisha: If animals’ skins are being used to generate money then yes, it should be banned. Nonetheless, Animal skins and leather are good for protecting old people. If we ban it, people who are in the business related to this would be jobless. If the animal is already dead, then it is okay to use their skin. Some animals are slaughtered for religious rituals and it’s a tradition. People from cold climate need to protect themselves from cold.
Amin: You care about animal torture due to their skin? Think of the millions animals that are killed so that you can eat. We are already mistreating them so one more torture is nothing. We should care more about humans because we are above animals, they come second. We should rather care about a more humane way to kill them. After all, we are humans, we own animals’ life and we can kill them whenever we need jobs, warmth and food.
Yusuf: killing animals is part of some culture. It’s hypocrisy to be against animal killing and brag about how much you like eating meat. Once the animal is dead, better to make the most of it.
Team C summary
Behnam: We are needed people and we use nature to satisfy our needs and in this regard there is not difference between plants and animals, we can make use of everything.
Behnam voted for B.
Team B won this debate. Thanks everyone for participating. Below are the links to listen to this discussion
Listen Online
Date: 3/18/2016
Participants
(From 11 countries)
USA: Rick | Iran: Zeinab, Rojhano, Noorola | Switzerland: George | Sudan: Seif | Nepal: Grace | Tunisia: Marwa | Philippines: Jesson | Indonesia: Dewi | Mauritania: Boboty | Thailand: Finda | Pakistan: Ashfaq
Host: Rick
Teams
Panel PRO: (Team A): Seif, Jesson, Marwa, Grace.
Panel CON (Team B): Dewi, George, Zeinab
Audience (Team C): Boboty, Finda, Lala, Noorla, Ashfaq, Rojhano
Team A summary
Seif: Many people are judgmental.
Jesson: Even Hollywood stars give much importance to their looks. Everyone seems to be judgmental all over the world.
Marwa: Beauty is relative. Men help girls more than boys due to their sex appeal. It seen that is very common for companies and stores to hire beautiful women and even the employees tend to beautiful girls before men.
Grace: In some society, most people prefer a fair beautiful girl over a well settle girl, not matter if she has a very good job or how intelligent she is or how wealthy her family is.
Team B summary
Dewi: Even though appearance plays a big role in many societies, the factor that has the capacity to either break it or lift it is the intellectual capacity of people.
George: many people use their beauty and appearance to earn more money, like actors, actresses and artists.
Team C summary
Finda: To know whether a person is intelligent or intellectual, time is needed. One cannot just judge that in a short time. For a successful career, we need to be smart, not as a genius scientist but just smart enough.
Behnam: if we talk about the majority, then unfortunately is true, people appreciate more our physical attributes than other things. Most people in most societies pay more attention to the biological needs.
Lala: if we ask people about historic figures they may not know anything but if we ask them about Justin Bieber or Beyoncé, they would speak for hours. This clearly shows that people would care more about beauty. This is embedded in us as part of our evolutionary trends. We are evolutionarily programmed to search for healthy and physically attractive partners.
Intelligence can take you everywhere but beauty is what definitely drives the masses because pf the value the world has place in it.
Rojhano: the appearance is the first thing we notice about people. Physical appearance has a significant impact on the relationship we have with others, on marriage, finding jobs and those who has the bliss to be handsome or beautiful have an advantage over others. An example of its importance is seen when a woman’s body changes after bearing a child and the husband doesn’t feel attracted anymore and the situation may result in infidelity.
For the people out there who feel they are not handsome enough, or beautiful enough, just be yourself and don’t give importance to what other people think. Give value to your character and what it is inside you, and you will be fine.
Votes:
· Finda: Team A.
· Behnam: Remained undecided.
· Lala: Team A.
· Rojhano: Team A.
Team A won this debate. Thanks everyone for participating. Below are the links to listen to this discussion
Listen Online
Date: Friday, February 19, 2016
Participants
(from 12 countries)
USA: Rick | Argentina: Johny | Iran: Rojhano | India: Haary | Bangladesh: J.A. | Philippines: Lala, Jesson | Japan: Masato | Sudan: Seif | Pakistan: Cadet, Usman, Aliza Saifi, Perfect | Mongolia: Ganaa | Nepal: Grace | Indonesia: Mikhael
Host: Rick
Co-Host: Johny
Teams
Panel PRO (Team A): Jesson, Cadet Khan, Masato
Panel CON (Team B): Usman, J.A., Haary, Aliza,
Audience (Team C): Johny, Lala, Saifi, Seif, Ganaa, Grace, Rojhano, Perfect.
Team A summary
Jesson: In their search for their own identity, some teenagers can be very vulnerable to the influence of other people. If there are people who do illegal things during the night, they can influence negatively to these teenagers. This may happen especially if teenagers want to be accepted by those people. It’s easier to do bad things during the night.
Cadet: Curfews provide more opportunities to parents to watch out and control their children by staying at home. The more time children spent at home, the less likely they are to become drug addicts or criminals.
Masato: if children really obey the rule, then it might be effective, but it’s not always obeyed.
Team B summary
Usman: the more time the teenager spends at home, the less he/she will know about the outside, about what is going on in the society. He/she may lose first-hand experience and knowledge about certain things. One thing is to learn things at schools but another very different is to learn things from society.
It wouldn’t make any difference if the teenager stays at home after certain hour because whatever he/she will do it can be done at any other time. It all depends on the kind of education that teen had. If he/she was well educated, then he /she will not do bad things outside at nights. The night itself does not make teenagers do bad things.
It’s much more important for parents to know with who their children are. What kind of friends they have.
J.A: It essential to their knowledge and experience for teenagers to be exposed to the society. Curfews take away opportunities of doing so. If they encounter bad situations, they can seek advice from their parents.
Haary: most teenagers tend to be rebellious and don’t want to listen to almost anyone. They want enjoy their lives and imposing such rules may not be effective at all. Even if we forcefully keep them at home, if they want enjoy the outside they will find the way to break such a rule. It’s their lives and they will not get it back. If we want them not to do certain things, it’s better to just talk them out of them than forcefully imposing things.
Lala: Curfews for kids keep them safe from doing risky behaviors. Imposing curfews may reduce violence and keep gangs’ activities and criminal rate low. It keeps teens away from temptations such as sexual risks, drug use, drinking and other bad teen habits. It also improves teens learning by giving them enough time to do homework and enough sleep.
Johny: most criminal activities are done by adults, not by teenagers. Most teenagers are at home either way because they sleep early. They have classes in the morning so not all teenagers roam around all night. If we impose these rules to teenagers, we may show that we don’t care about people’s freedom and feelings. It’d be better if we rather talk to them and advise them when they are in difficult moments and not going about preventing them from learning by themselves just because we say so.
It’s important to all teenagers as it was for us to attend a prom, or to know what a sleep over in a friend’s house is. It is a good experience to have as teenagers. In addition, if we impose things to them, things they won’t like, and based upon their rebellious nature, we would actually encourage more negativity from them. Moreover, if they are engaged in bad activities, they will do it anyway in another time, either in the morning or in the afternoon, a curfew will not make any difference. The night doesn’t have a monopoly on negative activities.
Votes:
· Saifi B
· Johny B
· Ganaa B.
· Lala A.
Team B won this debate. Thanks everyone for participating. Below are the links to listen to this discussion.
Listen Online
Date: Friday, February 19, 2016
Participants
(From 12 countries)
Argentina: Johny | India: Bubbly | Iran: Zeinab, Rojhano, Behnam, Elham, Noorola | Mauritania: Boboty | Bangladesh: Mohiuddin, Azamu | Algeria: Soso | Philippines: Jesson | Switzerland: George | Azerbaijan: Salima | Tunisia: Amin | Sudan: Seif | Kurdistan: Suren
Host: Johny
Teams
Panel PRO (Team A): Suren, Zeinab, Mohiuddin, Soso, Jesson
Panel CON (Team B): Rojhano, George, Salima, Amin, Rick
Audience (Team C): Behnam, Boboty, Azamu, Bubbly, Seif, Elham, Noorola.
Team A summary
Zeinab: Flattering helps you to be promoted faster. Your boss would support your opinions if you do it. Flattering not only does it work with bosses, but it also works with teachers.
Soso: some people don’t know the difference between flattering and complimenting. If the boss is a man and the worker is a woman, there could be misunderstandings. However; if the boss has a low self-esteem, it works. Inflating your boss’ ego may help you receive a special treatment.
Suren: Albeit some people consider flattering a bad thing, it does work. For instance, flattering your teacher could make you get better grades.
Mohiuddin: On one hand, some administrative board likes to promote people with whom they feel there is some certain affinity. There are some people who know this and make use of this strategy quiet often.
On the other hand, there are people who use other options such as working hard for their success.
Nevertheless, when people do not have what it takes to get promoted, they may resort to flatter and to sweet-talking to their bosses.
There are also people who from very early in life they’ve flattered in schools and universities to their teachers and
They’ve learnt by flattering they can achieve things as well. They’ve made this a habit and become accustomed to not working hard for their success.
Jesson: You could just work for your promotion and keep on doing what you are supposed to do but flattering does make it a bonus. Flattering could develop a stronger bond between the boss and the employee.
People use it to get advantage over other workers. However; it can be seen as bad thing when people do it and others don’t know the reason behind it. Unfortunately, the reality at some working places show that people who are good at it can be promoted.
Team B summary
Salima: flattering is bad manners, and disrespecting. If we all know our rights as workers, there shouldn’t be any need to flatter. There is no need to do it if you meet your responsibilities.
George: sometimes, when you do everything right, everything you are supposed to do, you become invisible and nobody appreciates your work. Only by making mistakes could you be noticed. There is a difference between being just kind and being a flatterer. Flattering people because we are kind is one thing but doing it to get advantages is immoral and wrong.
Amin: Most people say that flattering is wrong and yet we use it all the time; at work, at home with our wives, at schools, etc. to either make this life pass smoothly or to generate good vibes. Using it wisely at work with a hard and difficult boss could help make the atmosphere better. Using it excessively though could be counterproductive.
Rick: Even though flattering can be used to gain more visibility and therefore more opportunities, the reason is not necessary is because in a work environment your performance is the number one factor. “Performance” doesn’t lie. Flattery is subjective and most good managers and supervisors would see through the flattery and focus on your actual performance instead.
If you have a good character, personal integrity and a credible reputation then you have what it takes to being promoted. Those are not subjective, they are objective and these things would help you as much as if you try to flatter. As the matter of fact, most supervisors may look down at that and see it as not being professional. (Speaking for the USA) Most American managers would rather focus on your performance than on other things.
There are many ways though to “weaponize” your way up, but it would depend on the working environment. For instance, if you work in a quality professional organization, the managers in charge of promoting people would look at your performance. Not matter how many times you invite them a cup of coffee or how many times you tell them how good they look. But there are also places where people think that flattering will take them everywhere and it does work in certain places, but not in everywhere.
Votes:
· Behnam: team C
· Bubbly: team B
It was a tie. Thanks everyone for participating. Below are the links to listen to this discussion.
Listen Online
Date: Sunday Feb 14th 2016
Participants
(from 15 countries)
USA: Rick, Jami | Argentina: Johny | France: Djamila | Japan: Masato | Switzerland: George | Iran: Rojhano, Elham, Behnam, Fastline, Fatemeh, Noorola | India: Haary | Tunisia: Marwa | Azerbaijan: Salima | Bangladesh: Mohiuddin | Russia: Salavat | Nepal: Grace | Algeria: Soso | Philippines: Lala | Sudan: Seif, Hassan
Host: Rick
Co-Host: Johny
Teams
Panel PRO (Team A): Rojhano, George, Johny, Masato, Haary, Jami, Anibal, Marwa, Hassan
Panel CON (Team B): Noorola, Grace, Soso, Salima, Mohiuddin, Elham, Ashfaq, Salavat
Audience (Team C): Behnam, Lala, Fastline, Seif, Fatemeh
Team A summary
George: If it there were such a choice, then yes. If my children would like to be illusionists, then it’s their choice.
Masato: if the school is something like “The castle” in The US then yes.
Rojhano: one thing is to put on an act to divert people but real magic could be something really different. Real magic could be used to help the world, and modify the events in the world. If someone can obtain such a power, it could be very interesting. People always imagine and dream to have powers.
Haary: learning magic can help many people. Possessing the power of Magic has many advantages. One of them for example could be improving their self-confidence.
Johny: If the school teaches harmless magic, such as replicating food, growing hair for those who need it, healing wounds, or accelerating the growing process of thins (such as plants and fruits) then yes, I would allow my children to attend such a school. I would have to be sure first that the school only teaches harmless magic and that the school is committed to be a responsible and serious institution.
Marwa: I would allow them if it is for a short period of time to get experience and to avoid receiving their complaint if I don’t allow them. I would allow them so that they will realize that what they really want cannot be achieved through magic. If they really like it and want it, I won’t prevent them from attending it. Moreover, if they can turn things into gold then I would be very happy.
Hassan: I would allow my children to study whatever they want. There is nothing more harmful than not knowing things. Being magicians could be very good but it depends on their decision.
Jami: I would allow them. Magic is part of history (in the sense that people were looking for it throughout history) and children should know about history. If magic existed, then they should be allowed to study it.
Anibal: I would allow them if they would be learning harmless kind of magic and if the school would not be teaching how to summon any kind of spirits. If children could learn to light a room using their magic wands for example then yes. If it is a playful thing and students wouldn’t get involved with spirits and those sorts of things.
Team B summary
Ashfaq: I wouldn’t allow them because children, especially minors, could use it to do illegal things. In addition to that, some religions don’t allow it. Moreover, people could use it to get revenge for something.
Noorola: The idea of a school focusing on the art of magic is ridiculous. Magic doesn’t exist.
Soso: if people would be doing dangerous things like the things the famous illusionist “Chris Angel” does, then I don’t think I would agree with my children learning those things. I think it’s violent and I don’t like these kinds of things.
Salima: When I was a child I used to be amazed by magicians but as I grew up, I learned about their techniques and tricks and I realized they were very ordinary. I think we shouldn’t send them there if they don’t have skills for it. Education is very important for their future so we need to be careful when going about choosing schools for them.
Mohiuddin: Nowadays children have a lot of subjects to learn at regular schools and learning magic may not be considered as important. Real magic nowadays is within science and technology so children may have a brighter future if they get involved in these subjects instead.
I would allow my children to enjoy magic acts performed by artists but I won’t allow them to attend a school of magic.
Votes:
· Behnam: remained undecided.
· Lala: team B.
· Bobory: team B.
· Celio: team A.
· Azamu: team A.
It was a tie. Thanks everyone for participating. Below are the links to listen to this discussion.
Listen Online
Date: Friday, February 5th, 2016
Participants
(from 14 countries)
USA: Rick | Argentina: Johny | Iran: Noorola, Behnam, Taregh, Rojhano, Amir | Bangladesh: Azamu, Mohiuddin | Kurdistan: Suren | Algeria: Djamila, Soso | Tunisia: Marwa | India: Haary, Bubbly | Romania: Flory | Pakistan: Adnan | Switzerland: George | Philippines: Jesson | Sudan: Hassan | Indonesia: Atilla
Host: Rick
Co-Host: Marwa
Teams
Panel PRO (Team A): Flory, Mohiuddin, Haary, George, Djamila.
Panel CON (Team B): Marwa, Hassan, Amir, Soso, Noorola, Jesson.
Audience (Team C): Johny, Bubbly, Behnam, Azamu, Adnan, Taregh, Rojhano, Suren, Atilla.
Team A summary
No so long ago, say 20 or 30 years ago, men use to treat women in a more gentle way than today. Maybe it’s because of the internet or who knows why but something has changed in the last decades.
· There seems to be a tendency to care about expensive things nowadays rather than focusing on the simple things which some women would appreciate more.
· What makes a gentleman be a gentleman are many factors such as growing up in a peaceful and loving environment and nowadays, that kind of environment has become difficult to create or maintain. It’s easier to see this in countries where there are much violence and discrimination. Moreover, with the increase of violence in the world, it’s plausible that chivalry may even disappear.
· A real gentleman would keep his chivalry with all people and not only in private with one woman so it’s difficult to identify a real gentleman from just an interested man.
· One big reason may be because women themselves have also changed and men feel different towards them than before. It is not that men have become ruder or selfish but because women have changed their preferences and attitudes and this have a big impact in how men treat them today in comparison with how they did in the past.
· Many people behave in certain way just to avoid problems rather than being authentically gentlemen. This is seen in environments such as schools, work place or with political relatives. As soon as they change environments and place, you can see they change their attitude.
Team B summary
According to some definitions, a gentleman is a person who is gentle and gentleness can be present in both genders, not only in men. A woman can be also a “gentlewoman” and indeed there are people who are gentle in both genders.
Experiences shape our behavior and the more mature we are, the more likely is for us to become a gentleman.
Mature people have learned important lesson in life and they draw significant conclusions which drive them to be more gentlemen.
In the past, the situations in the society were different. What drove them to be gentlemen were situations of compulsory reactions, meaning that they were forced to be gentlemen otherwise they would lose something; perhaps lands, deals, bargains, business, family position within the society, etc. Those things are no longer present in the modern societies so men are no longer compelled to forcefully behave in a fake and exaggerated way.
However, some of these reasons persist in some circles and in some stratus of some societies and therefore, there are still some “gentlemen” around.
It may be a thing about the place where we live but gentlemen are not extinct just yet. In some countries at least you still see men helping the elders crossing a street, holding doors and ceding their seats to women and old people as well as assisting others when there is no obligation.
Many people are still gentle and thus there are still many “gentle-men”.
Good people and bad people always existed. What changed are the situations, not so much the people.
Nowadays there are gentlemen still. It is just that they only show it in certain situations not all the time because no one is perfect.
Countries and cultures define a gentleman in different ways and many people still recognize them according to their own definitions.
Questions Segment
Mohiuddin’s question to team B: “How gentlemen are incorporated as part of the culture?”
Noorola’s answer: As mentioned before, in some countries the definitions are different. For instance, some countries define a gentleman in religious terms and since those countries are religious, all religious aspects become part of the culture.
George’s question to team B: “Can you ask a person to do more than what you yourself cannot do?”
(In order words, he tries to imply that if someone cannot do or giver beyond his capacities is not considered to be a gentleman)
Hassan’s answer: If you are a supervisor or boss, you can but if you are among equals, you can’t. A woman should not ask to a man to give or be more than what she herself cannot give or be.
Noorola’s question to team A: “If you claim that there are no more gentlemen anymore, and if you think it is good to be gentleman, why aren’t you a gentleman to prove they still exist?
George’s answer: Gentlemen are commonly spotted by women and they are the ones who usually try to define who a gentleman is and who is not. We say that there still are gentlemen but perhaps not based on what women define by gentleman.
Mohiuddin’s answer: Sometimes it is just not possible since the situations in the modern world have changed over time and what was possible in the past it is not possible today.
Team C summary
· Despite people saying that there are no gentlemen anymore, it is not true. There are still good gentlemen out there and to know this we don’t need to look for complicated definitions and concepts. Good and gentle people are there offering their seats to women, helping elders crossing streets, treating his family and strangers in a gentle manner. It is not all about women; it is not only related to women.
· Being a gentleman has nothing to do with being educated or not. It’s about manners, not knowledge.
· It’s true that nowadays females define what a gentleman is and due to the times we are living nowadays; it has become difficult to meet the definitions that women have about gentlemen.
· It all depends on the perspective of the other person.
· Being a gentleman has nothing to do with any religion. Anyone can be a gentleman regardless of what religion they belong to.
· The culture plays a big role in defining what a gentleman is so it all depends on the culture.
· What a gentleman means today is not what people believed over 100 years ago. A long time ago, a very long time ago, a gentleman was a man of wealth and power, which implies that in order to be a gentleman you needed to be wealthy or have some sort of wealth.
· Nowadays the term has completely taken a turn for the better good we can say. In order to be a gentleman you no longer need to be wealthy. To be a gentleman in present time, signifies treating others and specially woman in a respectful manner.
· The problem today is those women think they’re going to go into a club and find a gentleman, (Not saying there might not be one or two, but realistically it’s difficult to find one in such places.)
· What happens normally to the men who would open a car door, write you a poem, a letter, pull your chair when you are about to have dinner, is that even though they do a nice thing, most of the time they are referred to as just “the nice guys.” I think most of us have heard this before.
· In some countries, women often say: “oh He is just too nice, I need him to be little bit tougher.” Or they say they like "bad boys"
· There are indeed gentlemen left in this world. However, most women don't give these guys a chance to show it.
· Most guys are jerks because most women do not appreciate nice guys. When a guy is nice, most women will cheat on him, use him for his money, abuse him and play with his emotions.
· Some women don't take the time to find out they're gentlemen in the first place, because too many women are too busy trying to show every person they come across that they're as good at everything as any man can be.
· Despite the fact the chivalry is seems to be pretty much alluring, the true of the matter is that many of the men’s trends in these times have changed because they have learned the disadvantages of being a traditional gentleman. However, there still are many men who want to consider themselves as such and thus they strive to accomplish it despite all.
· Being a gentleman is not a title any man can give to himself; is one of those things where actions speak louder than words.
Votes:
· Bubbly voted for team B.
· Taregh voted for team B.
· Behnam voted for team A.
· Azamu remained undecided.
· Adnan remained undecided.
· Johny voted for team B.
Team B won this debate. Thanks everyone for participating. Below are the links to listen to this discussion:
Listen Online:
Date: Saturday, June 18, 2016
Participants (from 14 countries):
USA: Rick | Argentina: Johny | Iran: Rojhano, Behnam, Henieh, Amy | Vietnam: Suat, Amina | Pakistan: Ayisha | Kurdistan: Suren | Tunisia: Amin | Algeria: Djamila | Azerbaijan: Salima | China: John | Nepal: Grace | Switzerland: George | Russia: Oleg | Bangladesh: Yusuf
Host: Rick
Co-Host: Johny
Teams
Panel PRO (Team A): Johny, Henieh, Taregh.
Panel CON (Team B): Djamila, Suat, Amin.
Audience (Team C): Amy, Behnam
Late: Suren, Ayisha, Yesser, Salima, John, Noorola, George, Grace, Amina, Oleg, Yusuf
> Summary not available <
Votes:
It was a tie. Thanks everyone for participating. Below are the links to listen to this discussion.
It was a tie. Thanks everyone for participating. Below are the links to listen to this discussion.
Listen Online:
Download:
Date: Sunday, May 22, 2016
Participants (from 11 countries):
USA: Rick | Argentina: Johny | Tunisia: Marwa | Iran: Elham, Behnam | Sudan: Seif | Egypt: Heytham | Algeria: Soso | Bangladesh: Boboty| Azerbaijan: Salima | China: John | Pakistan: Maria B., Naemullah
Host: Rick
Co-Host: Johny
Teams
Panel PRO (Team A): Rick, Johny
Panel CON (Team B): Maria B, Marwa, Salima, Seif, John, Heytham
Audience (Team C): Behnam, Elham, Boboty, Soso
Just listening: Naemullah.
Team A summary:
Gender equality: Any female can perform as well as any male and any male can perform as well as females.
Contact and non-contact sports. Capability. Minimum level to play or compete. If they have athletic capability then they should be allowed to play the sport.
Gender equality: Any female can perform as well as any male and any male can perform as well as females.
Contact and non-contact sports. Capability. Minimum level to play or compete. If they have athletic capability then they should be allowed to play the sport.
Gender equality: Any female can perform as well as any male and any male can perform as well as females.
Contact and non-contact sports. Capability. Minimum level to play or compete. If they have athletic capability then they should be allowed to play the sport.
Team B summary:
Football is a very rude sport. Boys against boys it’s okay, but football is not appropriate for women.
Women cannot reach the same level of strength of men.
Even though they can play or compete against one another, it’s better to keep them separate.
Football by men is more popular than of the women’s.
Biology and morphology is a key point.
Women cannot win against men. Moreover, Men play more aggressively than women.
Team C summary:
Votes:
It was a tie. Thanks everyone for participating. Below are the links to listen to this discussion.
Listen Online:
Date: Saturday, May 14th 2016
Host: Rick
Co-Host: Johny
Participants (from 13 countries):
USA: Rick | Bangladesh: Mohiuddin, AB Barek, | Egypt: Heytham | Argentina: Johny | Iran: Rojhano, Behnam, Amy, Hanieh | Pakistan: Adnan | Azerbaijan: Salima | Philippines: Mhikie, Mitchz | Nepal: Grace | Indonesia: Atilla | Mauritania: Boboty| Iraq: Zahir |Algeria: Soso
Format: General discussion
> Summary unavailable <
It was an interesting discussion. Thanks everyone for participating. Below are the links to listen to it.
Listen Online:
Date: Sunday, June 12, 2016
Participants (from 15 countries)
USA: Rick | Argentina: Johny | France: Djamila | Switzerland: George | Vietnam: Suat | Azerbaijan: Salima | Iran: Hanieh, Noorola, Taregh, Elham | Bangladesh: Mohiuddin, Abdur | Algeria: Soso, Hamzabat | India: Santo, Mannu | Poland: Mario | Morocco: Aziz | Pakistan: Alex | Egypt: Heytham | Nepal: Grace
Host: Rick
Co-Host: Johny
Panel PRO (Team A): Marwa, Mario, Salima
Panel CON (Team B): Johny, Santo, Djamila, Mannu
Audience (Team C): George, Alex, Suat, Noorola, Aziz.
Listening only: Henieh, Taregh, Elham, Abdur, Hamzabat.
Late: Heytham, Mohiuddin, Soso, Grace.
Team A summary:
Team B summary:
Votes:
Team B won this debate. Thanks everyone for participating. Below are the links to listen to this discussion.
Listen Online:
Download:
...NE is considered as a very dangerous energy as it contains Uranium but it’s efficient. We just need to consider its effects on the environment and people...
Read more
...By having these subjects students can enhance their abilities with their hands and fingers which will help them in other areas...
Read more
Date: Sunday, November 15th 2015
Participants (from 9 countries):
Iran: Noorola| Argentina: Johny | USA: Rick |Turkey: Butterfly| Tunisia: Marwa | India: Reneesh | Morocco: Imad | Sudan: Seif | UK: Marissa
Host: Rick
Here’s why is important to learn about money at an early age
By Johny
Parents can prepare their children to build financial skills, habits, and attitudes for a financially prosper future, and this is important to do at an early age. It might be surprising for you to know that children as young as five are ready to learn about saving and spending. If you take advantage of this fact, you can build the foundation to allow them to manage their finances as adults. For instance, a piggy bank or savings account can give them a practical experience to create a money-saving mindset.
Your child may even acquire a taste for financial planning that could last well into adulthood. In addition, giving allowance can guide your child to build habits. This is an ineffective way to build a child’s financial skills. To couple this with a parental oversight of to how the money is spent, can be very effective.
Youngsters learn from experiences: we all make mistakes; however, if parents listen and provide guidance on how to make good choices when it comes to savings and spending, children can build financial skills in a safe manner.
When we give children opportunities to make their own decisions, they learn more and better. This is not only true financially but in all aspects of their lives. The benefits are greater if we give them feedback and advices during this process.
For more ideas on teaching your kids or yourself about money, we are also working to help communities by providing mentorship on financial education. If this interests you, feel free to share your ideas or interests to info@globalenglishgroup.com
Having said that, we encourage you to listen to what our members have to say about this topic, below are the links to the recorded discussion.
Listen online:
For people who did not join the live discussion or want to provide ideas, feedback or comments, feel free to contribute in the comment blanks below.
