,

Crime and Corporal Punishment

Over the past few days, in addition to the usual crime reports, there have been stories about the need to address what the prime minister called a “serious a chronic problem”.

Crime has plagued The Bahamas for a long time. Every government administration, upon arrival, blames it on the previous administration, and every Opposition blames the sitting administration for failing to find the solution.

While political parties blame each other to escape responsibility, members of the public convince themselves that the most violent crimes have nothing to do with them. It is often said that the criminals are killing each other, and some people go further to say this is a good thing. One of the reasons crime continues at high rates is that very few people and entities — including families, churches, and workplaces — are prepared to accept responsibility or take action to prevent it or intervene.

photo

POLICE at the scene of one of last year’s shootings. Photo: Austin Fernander

Violence does not come from nowhere. It is a learned behaviour. We all understand the threats of physical pain and death as a motivator. They can get a person to take or refrain from taking a particular action. Physical pain and death are understood as punishment. If a person fails to take or refrain from taking a particular action, especially after being threatened, they may be physically harmed or killed. This can be useful for learning not to, for example, touch fire because the direct consequence is the pain of being burned. It is unhealthy when fear is weaponised against a person. A person brandishing a weapon and giving a directive does not necessarily have to verbalise a threat for another person to understand that they must do as they are told to avoid being physically harmed or killed.

Unfortunately, children are taught, by example, to use other people’s fears against them very early in life. Children are beaten for any number of actions and inactions, including accidents. Get a bad grade, get beaten. Don’t finish dinner, get beaten. Spill juice on the couch, get beaten. Say a bad word, get beaten. Knock over a glass, get beaten. Text a boy, get beaten. Cry, get beaten. They are not only experiencing violence as a response to certain behaviour, but living with the threat of violence and how it shapes their behaviour. This is uncomfortable and feels as unsafe as it is, and it is training for abusing other people with the same tactics. Children learn that threats are scary, they can be made with or without words, and they can drive action. By practising the use of threats with their peers, they learn that anyone can do it.

When the issue or corporal punishment is raised, many parents become upset. Corporal punishment is what they know. It is the way they were “corrected” and “raised” by their parents, and it is what they use to “correct” their own children and any other minors in their care. They find the suggestion that it is wrong to be inconvenient. They do not like when it is referred to as violence. They see it as “discipline”.

Violence is “behaviour involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something”. Corporal punishment, including the spanking, hitting, and pinching of children, is, indeed, violence. It hurts, and it can cause damage.

Discipline is “the practice of training people to obey rules or a code of behaviour, using punishment to correct disobedience.” Punishment is “the infliction or imposition of a penalty as retribution for an offence”. Interestingly, discipline has two components — training to obey and punishment as a response to failure to obey — and punishment is a response to offence. The response does not have to be physical, yet for many Bahamians, corporal punishment is the only familiar punishment. Perhaps it is that way because it is easy. It does not require thought. It could be that it is a generational practice that too many people are not prepared to question, challenge, or change, even when we know its association with slavery. More thoughtful, effective discipline takes thought and time. It is not immediate, and may require a cooling off period, so adults do not have the physical satisfaction of not only punishing a child, but offloading all of their frustrations in their delivery of corporal punishment.

Even before punishment is doled out, parents get it wrong sometimes. Maybe the believe the favorite child, and that child knows they can blame everything on their siblings. Maybe what parents perceive to be an act of rudeness is an accident. Maybe poor performance is not a refusal to try, but an ill-suited learning environment or an undiagnosed learning difference. When children are wrongfully punished, resentment can build. We know that there are angry people among us, and we do not know why. Some of them are still angry about the ways they were treated as children. Some people have mental health challenges because of the violence they experienced as children. Some are in unhealthy and abusive relationships because they were told all their lives that violence is love.

The crime we see in The Bahamas is not all due to violence against children. It is also not completely separate from it. We learn violence before we can speak. Years ago, ZNS played a recording of a child reciting “Children Learn What They Live” by Dorothy Law Nolte.

If a child lives with criticism, He learns to condemn.

If a child lives with hostility, He learns to fight.

If a child lives with ridicule, He learns to be shy.

If a child lives with shame, He learns to feel guilty.

If a child lives with tolerance, He learns to be patient.

If a child lives with encouragement, He learns confidence.

If a child lives with praise, He learns to appreciate.

If a child lives with fairness, He learns justice.

If a child lives with security, He learns to have faith.

If a child lives with approval, He learns to like himself.

If a child lives with acceptance and friendship, He learns to find love in the world.

That recording was played so often that many of us memorised it without trying. There must have been a reason ZNS played it. I do not remember it being preceded or followed by a public service announcement about child abuse, parenting, or anything of the sort. It may have been expected that the message would be received through repetition, but here we are. Child abuse continues to be called discipline, and people who lived with hostility and ridicule enact violence against people known and unknown to them.

The family is the first institution we know. It is where we learn behaviors we take with us through all of our lives, and some of us work hard to unlearn along the way. It is the place we are most easily and deeply scarred. It could be the place we learn to love and be loved, to treat one another with respect, and to believe in and value justice.

Will the government take a stand against corporal punishment? Will elders admit that violence is not the way to raise or discipline children, and that is has harmful effects? Will churches guide members in understanding metaphors and other literary devices so that “spare the road, spoil the child” does not become a license from god to abuse children? Will workplaces and other organizations support parents who need help balancing the work and family responsibilities, and to learn healthy parenting practices? We need all hands on deck. Everyone needs to participate in developing good, active citizens.

/0 Comments/by
, , ,

Culture Clash: Want More Women in Politics? Create a Better Environment

International Women’s Day was on Monday and, of course, it came with radio talk show slots, panel discussions, presentations and purple attire. It is an annual day to celebrate the progress women have made and to take action toward the changes that still need to happen.

The global campaign’s theme was “Choose To Challenge” and the UN Women theme was focused on women’s leadership (in alignment with the upcoming 65th session of the Commission on the Status of Women). Both themes were taken up and used to frame events and initiatives. It was great to see Corporate Bahamas make space for discussions about women in leadership and the issues we all need to choose to challenge. It is even more important that they contribute to the efforts through resources, including funding, and structural changes that ensure women are in the leadership pipeline, compensated fairly and working in enabling environments.

The Prime Minister recently stated that “the representation of women in Cabinet is at an historic low”. He said he challenges himself, political parties and the nation to ensure more women are in the House and the Cabinet.

These words, of course, are nothing without action. It is not enough to wish for better representation of women. The Prime Minister claimed “a number of women” declined the offer to run on the Free National Movement’s ticket and that he is pleased that more women are running this time around. It will be interesting to see how many women the Free National Movement puts forward. The current proportion is abysmal with only five of the 30 ratified candidates being women.

Unless eight of the nine candidates to be announced are women, there is very little to show for the Prime Minister’s statement about including more women as the party would not even have 30 percent representation. How can we expect more women in Cabinet if they are not going to be on the ballots?

The Prime Minister said he was frustrated by women declining opportunities to run. He did not give the reasons. Maybe they did not see the Free National Movement—or any other party, for that matter—taking firm positions on issues of importance to them. Maybe they do not want to be collapsed into a system that was not built for them. Maybe they do not see the political environment as one they can survive in, much less thrive.

Aside from all of the issues with party politics and the failure of every political party in the country to make clear their positions on important issues, there are specific actions that need to be taken in order to create an environment within which women can safely and successfully participate.

If party leaders care about women’s engagement in political leadership, they need to take decisive, targeted action.

Here are five actions the Prime Minister and all political parties need to take in order to successfully recruit, retain and run women as candidates in general elections:

  • Institute a quota. Go beyond 30 percent which is a low bar and does not result in gender parity in a world, and a country, in which more than half the population are women and girls. Low bars do nothing for us. Let’s start with acknowledging that we have a long way to go, then figure out how to get there. Make the quota 50 percent, and do it now. The current administration can still do this on a national level. All political parties can do it for themselves. Let’s call on all political parties to make their positions on women’s leadership clear by instituting party quotas of 50 percent now. This commits them to do the work of recruiting and training women, creating enabling environments within the parties, and improving the conditions of all women so that they are able to pursue opportunities in frontline politics and other forms of political leadership.
  • Provide training and mentorship for women. Boys and men are raised and trained to believe that they are destined for leadership while girls and women are often taught that they are to play supportive roles. What we see in the leadership of men and boys and in women and girls is not a result of natural abilities or inclinations on the basis of gender, but gender ideologies that have been used to put people on particular paths. Men and boys have long been considered more suitable for leadership and certain kinds of work, so women and girls have been dealing with implicit and explicit discouragements from leadership and the areas of work that have been reserved for men. This needs to be intentionally interrupted and corrected. We need specific programmes and initiatives targeting women and girls, preparing them for leadership.
  • Reject gender stereotypes. Publicly challenge and rebuke all suggestions that gender is a determinant of ability or suitability. Create opportunities for women and girls to pursue education and careers in areas that continue to be dominated by men. Run campaigns that highlight women already working in these areas, their contributions to the industries and to the country, and the support that has made it possible. Encourage the private sector to do the same. One example is providing scholarships and other opportunities such as fellowships to girls and women pursuing education in STEM and trades.
  • Reduce the burden of care work. One of the factors that impacts people’s performance in the workplace and both ability and willingness to pursue ambitions is the work they have to do outside of their formal employment. Women are often tasks with the upkeep of the home. Even if a household can afford to employ domestic workers, the supervision and management of household tasks still tends to be the responsibility of the women. Childcare and eldercare are often the responsibility of women as well.

There is so much to be done at home that it is known as “the second shift” and can prevent women—and the girls often enlisted to help and learn from them—from studying and participating in other activities that could help to advance their careers. Recognize that women’s time is not elastic, acknowledge that women have taken on much of the work that the state is obligated to do, and make structural changes to allow and encourage men to share the domestic labour and support women in reclaiming their time. For example, change the expectation that women are solely responsibly for childcare by amending legislation to give parental leave so that fathers have more than five days to help with newborn care, leaving postpartum women to heal and care for babies alone.

  • Protect women from gender-based violence. Gender-based violence is a pervasive issue that is affecting families, communities, islands, and the country. It can be physical or non-physical, and it takes place both in person and online. Social media has been weaponized by men, used to discourage women from engaging in public life and punishing them for it if they dare to enter public life anyway. This administration and all political parties need to rebuke all forms of violence against all women, regardless of political affiliation or position. Disparaging comments and ads that target women on the basis on their gender need to be banned.

There are many other ways to create an environment that is conducive to participation of women and other marginalized people.

This needs to be regarded as a matter of priority and a marker of the commitment of the Prime Minister and all political parties to ensuring, not only greater participation of women in politics, but gender parity.

It’s not just about recruiting women and hoping they accept under the current conditions.

There is a responsibility to create a better environment through systems and initiatives that not only demonstrate personal and political commitment, but contribute to a cultural shift that creates space for women to not only lead, but do so with support and the reasonable expectation that they and their families will be safe.

Published in my weekly column in The Tribune on March 10, 2021.

/0 Comments/by
, , ,

Culture Clash: We Need Feminist Leaders, Not Just Women Leaders

International Women’s Day is next Monday, March 8. The theme set by UN Women is “Women in leadership: Achieving an equal future in a COVID-19 world.” This theme is meant to align with that of the upcoming 65th session of the United Nations Commission on the Status of Women (CSW)—“Women’s full and effective participation and decision-making in public life, as well as the elimination of violence, for achieving gender equality and the empowerment of all women and girls.” Both themes are important and need more than one to 12 days of discussion, analysis, and action planning. We can see that quite clearly in the national context, particularly as we are in the midst of election season.

Political parties continue to announce the ratification of candidates and are far from gender parity. Not even 30 percent of the slates are women. This is no surprise considering the fact the two major parties had four and six women on their slates of candidates. We currently have five women in Parliament — 12.8 percent. It stands to reason that if both political parties had more women as candidates, women would comprise a higher proportion of Parliament and we may have actually had better representation.

It is important that, even as we advocate for a political quota, we emphasise the need for quality candidates. We do not need more women in Parliament who will not only fail to represent women in all our diversity and work to address issues that directly and disproportionately affect us, but embarrass us repeatedly and help to set us back.

We do not need women who simply want to be a part of the “boys club” or want to set themselves apart by distancing themselves from women’s rights issues or “feminine” characteristics.

We do not need more people who simply want to occupy a seat. We need women who are well-equipped to represent their geographic constituencies and the larger constituency of women.

It has been particularly interesting to watch the hypocritical response to the resignation of Lanisha Rolle from the Ministry of Youth, Sports, and Culture. All of a sudden, people and organisations are concerned about the absence of women in Cabinet.

Over the past four years, very little was said about there being only one woman in Cabinet, and that one women being among the worst of Cabinet Ministers. Her earlier appointment to the Ministry of Social Services and Urban Development was cause for great concern. Those who were paying attention knew that it would not go well. Giving Rolle oversight of the ministry with departments responsible for serving people in need and meeting international obligations such as CEDAW made no sense. The Department of Gender and Family Affairs was suffocated by her refusal to recognise the necessity of its work. It was devastatingly stagnated, despite the work of some of the most dedicated, qualified staff – and it has yet to recover.

Rolle, when asked for her position on marital rape, said marital rape was a private matter. Are other forms of violence within the home also private matters? The personal is political. This is not just a saying. It is a truth we need to understand. The decisions we make as individuals and the structures of our relationships and institutions, including families and businesses, are directly impacted by and directly impact the economic and political spheres.

We can look at the state of households during the COVID-19 pandemic (though the same dynamics existed before this exacerbation). We continued to work, whether on-site or from home, and took on the additional work of supervising virtual learning and the tasks that could no longer be done by others due to restrictions. Most of the added labour fell to women who had to continue their regular work, help children with virtual learning, look after elderly family members and keep the house clean and prepare meals on a more frequent basis. Before this, women and men were working and, in most cases, women came home to the second shift, handling domestic tasks and care work. Some may say this is a personal matter.

The way people divide their household work is up to them, right? Well, how do they come to these decisions? Are they actual choices, made consciously, or predetermined due to circumstance or the (often unspoken) gender division of labour?

The way tasks are divided are home depend heavily on the ways women and men see themselves, not only on a personal level, but culturally, politically, religiously. If only one person in the household can work overtime in order to ensure household matters are dealt with, it is likely to be the person who is making the most money. This is directly impacted by the gender wage gap and the difference in opportunities available to and accessed by men and women.

A woman does not truly choose to spend less time on paid work and take care of the children if the issues are that no one else is available to do it and/or the man is able to make more money in less time. This “private matter” is affected by public issues of education, employment, and social security, among others.

Returning to the absurd idea that marital rape is a private matter, we have to look at the factors that affect and are affected by dynamics within the home. When we create this kind of divide between private and public, we leave people defenceless. Rolle’s comment communicated to the public that what happens to any woman at home is her own problem. The government is not concerned about such matters and sees no need to interfere.

Miriam Emmanuel, no better than Rolle, saw fit to share a disturbing anecdote about her father’s victim-blaming regarding intimate partner violence. Comments like these send the message that women are disposable, unprotected, and complicit in their own harm while men are excused or even revered for their brutality, creating the environment for violence in the home to proliferate. It is important to understand that the effects are not limited to the individual, but affect public health and the economy. Hospital visits and sick days do not affect just one person.

We need true representation for women in Parliament and Cabinet. We need women who are aware of the issues affecting women, care about about addressing them, and are prepared to do the work with minimal support. Rolle is not a loss. She was a liability the entire time she was a Cabinet Minister and remains a liability as a Member of Parliament.

This month, as we advocate for women to be in positions of political leadership, it is critical that we are clear in the demand for feminist leadership and true representation. We do not simply need women, but women who believe in equality. Women who understand and explicitly state that marital rape is rape. Women who advocate for comprehensive sexuality education in all schools. Women who have studied and have mastery of international mechanisms and declarations such as CEDAW and the Beijing Platform for Action and have fresh ideas and plans of action for legislative reform and implementation. Women who are engaged with civil society organisations that are engaging in women’s rights work.

The Prime Minister said he wants to see a woman be Prime Minister one day, but he has done nothing to move us in that direction. Look at the 2017 slate of candidates and look at the ratified candidates to date. Is there representation? Are the candidates equipped for the task at hand?

Taking notice of the lack of gender parity now could be a sign of opportunism because it is election season or because it is a global priority. Better late than never when the latecomers are ready to go the whole way. Let us not lament the resignation of Rolle as though we have suffered some great loss. We have not. Focus the discontent on the actual tragedy — the continued lack of representation for women and all indications that the next term, no matter the administration, will be quite similar to this one. While all parties still have room on their slates, pressure them to ratify qualified women who believe in and will advocate for human rights. Pay attention to what The Bahamas says in international spaces. Hold the government to the commitments it makes. Call it to a higher standard.

Published in my weekly column in The Tribune on March 3, 2021.

/0 Comments/by
, , ,

Culture Clash: Throwing Money at the Problem Doesn’t Make It Go Away

Last week, it was reported a woman was sleeping in a car with her children, including an infant. She was asked to leave her previous apartment after being allowed to live there rent-free for several months. She expressed concern about her children’s education, noting her daughter had fallen behind over the past year. She noted there were other people in the same situation, forced on to the streets.

As a result of the news story, a group of a people stepped in to assist the family. They secured a place for them to live and gave them food. They also said they were helping her to find a job. In many cases, community members have to work together to support others. One of the issues is that we rarely know what others are going through. Sometimes, we have an inkling there is an issue affecting a large number of people, but without a personal account, few are moved to take action. Pride and the expectation of condemnation prevents people from sharing their stories and asking for help. When we do hear a story, we begin to understand different realities.

Shortly after the news story of the woman and her children, there was a social media post about a man with two children who were homeless. The children were staying with someone during the day while he tried to make money by washing cars. If he earned money, he was expected to give some of it to the person keeping the children. The person posting did not have time for him to wash their car, so they shared the story to encourage other people to help him in any way possible. Several people responded, asking for his contact information. Hopefully, he is also receiving assistance.

People quietly give and receive assistance every day. Sometimes someone overhears their story or sees a need. They may notice the issue at work and, unable to help in their official capacity, refer them to the right person or organization. By whatever means, some people find the help they need, and the general public never hears about it. The stories we do hear are a drop in the ocean.

My friend and fellow advocate Erin Greene often talks about the impetus to solve our problems by throwing money at them as one of our biggest problems. It seems to be the way of many of our elders, likely because it was possible for them in times of plenty. Some of us have adopted the same method of responding to problems. We pay for it to go away.

The electricity keeps going off? Buy a generator! Public transportation is too unpredictable for your child, a university student, to use it to get to campus? Buy them a car!

Yes, we do have the right — and often the need — to use our resources to solve our own problems, but that’s a real problem. As Greene says, when we use our money to solve our problems, we only solve them for ourselves. The issue is still there, affecting other people, but we have bought our way out of experiencing or even seeing it. Those who cannot afford to buy their way out of the problem have to continue to live with it.

It is not inherently bad to seek comfort for yourself. The electricity outages are frustrating. They hinder productivity, damage appliances and other equipment, make it uncomfortable to be inside and affect our ability to properly care for loved ones. It is not shameful to put provisions in place to stop the outages from affecting your life. It is, however, important to recognize the issue persists and, should your personal solution fail or turn out to be unsustainable, you will experience the issue again.

Similarly, the assistance we give to a person or family is necessary and good, but the issues of homelessness, unemployment and the lack of a social safety net persist. People need to eat – now. They need a safe place to live – now. Children need to be enrolled in and attend school – now.

When we are able to step up and offer assistance, it is important we do not hesitate. Still, there is only so much help that we can give. The landlord in the first story was only able to help the woman and her children to a certain extent. The babysitter in the second story offered to help, but also needs income. There is a limit to the support people without financial wealth can give. We need to address the issues — the cycle of poverty, the fragility of the economy and the system that has cut people out and failed to provide support.

It is not enough to book a month-long hotel stay for a family. A fridge full of food for the week is only the beginning. A job is, of course, a more longterm solution for an individual or family, but without building wealth, the same thing can happen again. We saw it after 9/11, after Hurricane Dorian, and now during the COVID-19 pandemic.

What about the people whose stories we do not hear? What about those who are turned away or receive insufficient support from the government agencies that are supposed to help? Our assistance to a few people does nothing to change the systems that create and sustain this unnecessary struggle. We need an approach that responds to immediate needs and reforms systems.

We need safe houses for survivors of abuse. We need shelters for the unhoused. We need rehabilitation programs and support services for people with addictions. We need a system that is properly funded and designed to meet the needs of the vulnerable including people who are unemployed, underemployed and retired.

People house family members in their living rooms for as long as they can. Others give money to help people to cover their rent. In cases of medical emergencies, there are cookouts, money transfers, and GoFundMe campaigns. We do what we can to help each other. We try to make a little bit of money go a long way. These are temporary, case-specific solutions. Our $10, $100, and $1000 contributions do not address the issue. Most of us are so busy dealing with cases that we do not have the time to think about, much less address, the systemic issues.

Our individual problems are symptoms. The money we use to solve them mask the symptoms. We need a real treatment plan.

We are now in election season. The Progressive Liberal Party and Free National Movement have both announced about half of the candidates on their slates. We should soon hear about the issues they claim to champion, but we do not need to wait for their charters and manifestos. We need to make our demands and not be moved by the empty, tired promises of thousands of jobs. We need an administration that is prepared to conduct critical analysis of government systems and resident needs, and to develop a plan of action for filling that gap. We not only need better solutions, but details on budget and execution. After cycles and cycles of being duped and ignored, we need to ask how election promises will be fulfilled. We need to demand that candidates, parties, and party leaders “make it make sense”.

In case you’re interested…

  1. Dispossession by Tayari Jones. This Audible short story, from the author of the best-selling novel An American Marriage, is a story of motherhood, race, and loss. It has been so long since Cheryl has seen her son that when he promises a visit, she takes time off from work that she can’t really afford. She is a mover, and her job exposes her to the lives and possessions of other people. Her next job reminds her a bit too much about her own past.
  2. Queen Sugar. The television will be back with season five this month. Now is a good time to start at the beginning if you have not watched the earlier seasons. The Bordelon siblings are very different — activist Nova, NBA manager and wife Charley and struggling Ralph Angel are all after something. They are brought together by a death in the family and have to work together to run the family’s sugarcane farm. If you’re a reader or want to become one, pick up the book by Natalie Baszile. The television series makes quite the departure from the book, so prepared for that.
  3. Cardi Tries. This series, available on Facebook, is all about rapper Cardi B trying to do new things. She takes a dance class with Debbie Allen, tries race car driving, makes sushi, and practices basketball (yes, with the long nails) among other activities. If you’re looking for something low-stakes to watch and have a good laugh, this series is worth a try.

Published in my weekly column in The Tribune on February 10, 2021.

/0 Comments/by
,

Critical Conversations: Young Leaders Speak

Last week, I moderated Young Leaders Speak—the second event in the Critical Conversation series hosted by the Commonwealth Foundation. A collaboration with the Queen’s Commonwealth Trust and the Commonwealth Youth Council, this conversation was a space for young people to talk about what they need from Commonwealth institutions in order to expand their work and increase its impact. Darrion Narine from Trinidad & Tobago, Kakembo Galabuzi Brian from Uganda, Kavindya Thennakoon from Sri Lanka, and Emmanuelle Andrews from the UK were the main speakers. They talked about the past atrocities and lingering effects of colonialism in Commonwealth countries, the importance of recognizing one own privilege, rejecting tokenism and recognizing young people’s expertise, and the questions and comments from viewers were just as interesting. Check out the 90 minute conversation.

/0 Comments/by
,

We Know Opening the Borders in the COVID-19 Crisis Doesn’t Add Up

Is this freedom? Beaches and parks, gyms and spas, places of worship, and businesses are now open. The requirements are different from what we expected. Masks do not have to be worn during exercise. They must be worn to enter and exit gyms and beaches, but not for the duration of the stay. There are to be no gathering of more than five people on beaches and parks. It is not clear why five is the magic number, or why it would be safe to be in close proximity to people from different households at this time. While the risk might have been lower because we have successfully flattened the curve and reduced the spread of COVID-19, it is sure to increase in due time.

The borders are now open to commercial flights. People all over the world, including Americans, have been waiting to be able to go somewhere else — almost anywhere else — for a vacation for months. Visitors are sure to come to The Bahamas, where we have put in the work to protect public health, but does it make sense to risk that for the US dollar?

On Friday, Florida reported 8,942 new cases of COVID-19. More than 13 percent of new tests were positive. This is just one state, and it is the one closest to us.

Most visitors to The Bahamas come from the US. It is not difficult to imagine a person with COVID-19 coming here and spreading the virus. It can easily happen, especially since all visitors need to do is present the results of test taken within the seven days prior to travel. Seven days is more than enough time to contract the virus, and we have already established there are asymptomatic carriers. Someone can take the test on Monday, contract the virus on Thursday, and be in The Bahamas strolling the beach mask-free, dining in a popular restaurant and playing black jack on Saturday. This is the risk authorities have chosen to take, and we need to be aware of it rather than taking relaxation of restrictions to mean we can safely go back to normal.

Let’s be clear: We are taking a risk

It seems the government has decided that, since COVID-19 is not going away before a vaccine is introduced and most people have received it, it makes sense to bring in some US dollars while we can. However the important the tourism industry may currently be, this is a risk and we need to regard it as such. As other countries open their borders, most E.U. nations are not likely to allow people from the US to enter because of its high rate of infection.

Our borders are now open, the beaches and parks opened for us to enjoy them for two days before tourists start arriving, and we have been told that we should not travel. If it is safe for people to enter the country, why wouldn’t it be safe for us to visit other countries and return? If we know the entry of tourists will increase the risk of COVID-19 community spread, why are households being allowed to break social distancing on the beach?

If the number of COVID-19 infections goes up, we will face longer lockdowns. Whether we travel or not, we will live with the consequences of new cases.

While we may be happy to be able to go to the beach and for hotel workers and taxi drivers to return to work, we have to think about the information we have been given, realise that is doesn’t all add up and behave accordingly.

Don’t get “lost in the sauce”. We are free to work out, to swim, to shop and to gather in groups of five. That does not mean we are safe. COVID-19 has not vanished. It is still possible to contact the virus. Even as we enjoy freedom, we can take precautions. Maintain the six-foot distance and wear a mask as much as possible. We complied with the Emergency Order for months and we have benefitted from it. There is no reason for us to rush into a second round when we can reduce the risk in simple, if inconvenient, ways.

To be clear, this is not to say the Emergency Order should be continued at this time or indefinitely. It does not make any more sense for us to continue to be under curfew than it does for us to have weekend lockdowns or tourists freely entering the country, especially from countries that have not adequately responded to the pandemic. This is to encourage consideration of the facts, discussion on the repercussions of decisions being made, and both personal and community responsibility.

Who will handle non-compliant tourists, and how?

Potential visitors have expressed their displeasure with the mask policy on the Ministry of Tourism’s social media accounts. Some have said they are cancelling their trips because wearing masks is not a part of their island fantasy. It would not be surprising to see tourists walking around resort properties with masks sitting under their chins or covering their mouths but not noses. Are hotel staff prepared to enforce this? How will they do that while maintaining the welcoming, (bordering on) deferential demeanours? How are employees being protected?

There should be health and safety protocols approved by Ministry of Health in place at all properties. There should also be guidelines for baggage handlers, flight attendants, Customs and Immigration officers, taxi drivers and anyone else coming into direct contact with visitors. If they exist, they should be shared and as models for vendors and other businesses — not only those coming into direct contact with visitors, but those who will be in contact with those on the frontlines of the tourism industry.

What do you need to change?

The past few months have been difficult. Our work lives have been upended, some of us somehow ended up with more responsibilities, we’ve spent far too much time with the people who live with us, and we have not really been able to socialise. There have been a lot of sudden, drastic changes. While there is some return to the way things were before, we can still feel a bit off balance. It is important to acknowledge this as a normal response to very abnormal circumstances.

For many, it is time to go to the barber, have a beach day, or enjoy a nice meal at a favourite spot. These are easy ways to get back to where we want to be. It may be a good idea to do a bit more than that, and try to address underlying issues and observations made during the lockdown period. Did you find yourself saving money because you weren’t able to eat takeout as much as you usually do? Do you want to change that habit for the benefit of your savings account? Did you realise you tend to shop online when you’re bored or under stress? Maybe it’s time to come up with more helpful, healthy alternatives.

Who did you call when you felt like you were at your limit, and how did they support you? Family members and friends don’t always know the right thing to say or have the tools to help you through a difficult time, so it may be a good time to look for a mental health professional.

What about work-life balance? Did it go out the window, or did you not have it from the start? Working from home can reveal a lot about the way we work and manage time. If you’ve noticed you’re consistently doing more than a day’s work, it could be time to reassess your position, duties, and compensation.

These are just a few examples of areas in our lives that we may see in a different way now. They are not just to be observed, but addressed. Now may not be the best time to make sweeping changes, but make note of everything you’ve noticed about your life that makes you uncomfortable. Ask yourself what would make it better, and move in that direction. While the world around us changes, we have the opportunity to at least plan for changes of our own.

Published by The Tribune on July 1, 2020.

/0 Comments/by
, ,

QCT Racism and Injustice Series – Week 3

In last week’s session, young people in the Queen’s Commonwealth Trust talked about what is taking place in their national and regional contexts in response to the Black Lives Matter protests in the U.S. We talked about the gap between gestures and meaningful action, the link between race and class, the tension between address issues at home and showing solidarity for actions abroad, and how COVID-19 and the stay-at-home orders may have helped to fuel the current movement and the global response to Black Lives Matter protests.

/0 Comments/by
, ,

QCT Racism and Injustice Series – Week 2

In last week’s discussion on racism and injustice, we took a look at some of the responses to the Black Lives Matter protests in the U.S. and thought critically about their usefulness. When is an action or response appropriate, and when it is inappropriate? Which actions are we uncertain about? What lessons can we learn from failed responses and successful responses? Check out the video, varied thoughts about specific actions, and ways to assess our idea before we take action.

/0 Comments/by
, ,

QCT Racism and Injustice Series – Week 1

In the coming weeks, I will be hosting a discussion series with young people in the Queen’s Commonwealth Trust (QCT) network about the Black Lives Matter movement in the U.S., racism and injustice in Commonwealth countries, solidarity, allyship, and the work to eradicate racism. These conversations are often difficult to have, but they are necessary, and there is a lot for us to learn from each other. In this first conversation, Izzy, Mike, and I ask broad questions to give us a sense of how everyone is feeling, what people are thinking about, and which topics we need to focus on exploring in upcoming sessions.

/0 Comments/by
,

We Need a Proper Plan, Not Just Reactions

Last week I saw a Facebook post that stated the government plan to deal with the COVID-19 crisis is a good one, but the people lack discipline. I stopped and re-read it several times, wondering whether or not it was sarcasm. I waited for people to comment, interested in the conversation it would spark. People seemed to, for the most part, agree with the statement.

To say I disagree would be generous because I do not even believe what we have seen thus far from the government is a plan. We have seen the introduction of individual measures. They do not stem from a strategy and do not work together within a solid, cohesive design. If a strategic plan was in place, we would not have had a grocery schedule introduced just hours before a five-day lockdown was announced. Surely the people designing the plan would have predicted the chaos we saw at every major grocery store in New Providence. At the very least, measures would have been put in place to ensure people were able to practice social distancing as they waited to enter the grocery stores. This is not what happened.

There are four major issues with the way the COVID-19 crisis is being addressed by the government. The first is it does not consider and respond to the needs of vulnerable people. Measures put in place to protect our health end up disproportionately disadvantaging vulnerable people. An easy example is the arrest of the unhoused people for breaking curfew. If the government considered vulnerable people, it would have opened emergency shelters, invited people without homes to stay in them and advised police to transport them to the nearest available shelter instead of criminalizing homelessness when they are found on the street during curfew.

The second is that these short periods of lockdown followed by, essentially, large public gatherings as people panic in clusters at grocery stores in the attempt to prepare for the next lockdown period is like hitting a reset button.

According to last week’s address, we will be doing this over and over again, at least until the end of April. We stay home for a couple of days and this reduces the spread. We go out again in a rush, trying to get essential supplies (and yes, some use it as an excuse to be out and about), and end up in crowds, likely with asymptomatic people who are spreading COVID-19.

It would make more sense to give everyone time to prepare and have a longer lockdown. The government is probably delaying this because of the first issue – it is obligated to meet the needs of vulnerable people. There can be no extended lockdown before the government ensures there is food security. We know some can only afford to purchase a few items at a time. They need to be provided with food before grocery stores can be closed to the general public for an extended period. Is the government prepared to do this?

The third issue is the expectation that businesses bear the burden of enforcement. Last week, grocery stores were not given systems or clear operational instructions for compliance with the emergency order given the sudden changes. They were expected to, overnight, figure out how to manage large crowds with their existing staff. Law enforcement officers were not routinely stationed at grocery stores to help maintain order. The simplest suggestion – to give numbers and have people wait in their cars – was not made by decision-makers. Small adjustments can make a big difference and there would be less to correct and remedy with more input from experts and practitioners. Organizations that managed hurricane relief, for example, can offer tactics and solutions that have proven effective, but that would require consultation.

The fourth issue with the current approach is the assumption people – including those considered low-risk – will comply. This requires a sense of personal responsibility for what occurs within our communities. Whatever we like to think, we do not have this in high volume. We have a lot of work to do to properly build strong communities with members who actively care about and look after each other. People who do not care about each other’s wellbeing do not just comply. Until we build the kind of community we want, we need better guidelines and systems that work to enforce them.

I’ve learnt a structured day is important to me

It feels as though we have been at home for a long time. Relative to other countries, it has not been very long at all. We are likely at the very beginning. Not only that, but what we have done thus far is probably nowhere near what is needed. There will be more time at home and it is in our best interest to not only comply, but take some time to make decisions and create systems that will make it easier for us. Going with the flow may work for some, but others will be completely lost, frustrated, or largely unaffected until they realize how much time has been lost. We each have to figure out what works best for us, and that may require some trial and error.

I have experimented a bit on my own, tried different approaches and arrived at the conclusion that structure is important for me. I want to wake up early, do most of my cooking and baking before the hottest part of the day, check on family members, work on at least one of my projects, catch up with a friend, spend time in the yard and start winding down at a reasonable time every day.

Some people can work with a to-do list and check tasks off as they go, but I prefer to put tasks into time slots. I set time aside for meal preparation, phone calls, leisure activities, work tasks, household tasks and anything else that needs my attention. This is, of course, helpful when I need to schedule meetings and set times for calls with friends in different time zones. It helps that I am disciplined and used to working from home, but there is always temptation to stray from the plan. For some, it feels better to leave the day open and take on tasks at will. We all have different needs and they may have changed given the circumstances, so give yourself a chance to figure it out.

Even if you do not like structure, it is a good idea to set your non-negotiables. What are the things you will not let yourself do or fail to do? It does not have to be as strict as getting up at five o’clock in the morning, but it can be helpful to set eight o’clock as the absolute latest you will stay in bed. That way, you have a window of time within which to get up and you can give yourself varying amounts of wiggle room depending on the day you have ahead of you. It may be a good idea to set alarms for your mealtimes, especially if you are on a particular diet.

Time can go incredibly slowly or surprisingly quickly when you are in a different environment and missing the time queues you usually get when there are coworkers in your physical space. You could end up having lunch at ten o’clock in the morning or completely forgetting about it if you’re not paying attention. Based on what is important to you, experiment with different types of schedules until you find the right fit.

Books can help us escape

Whether you have a lot of free time or not, it is important to have something other than work to fill your days. There are new shows popping up on Netflix all the time, social media challenges, virtual parties with top DJs and live sessions with celebrities and professionals in a range of fields. One of my favourite ways to spend my time is reading. I have three fiction books to recommend.

Little Fires Everywhere by Celeste Ng is a portrait of characters. It opens with the Richardsons’ home on fire and their youngest child missing. Rewinding, Ng tells the deeply personal story of a mother and daughter – Mia and Pearl Warren — who move into the same suburbs as the Richardson family and rent one of their duplex apartments. The entire book is backstory, digging into past experiences of primary and secondary characters, but it remains clear which characters are the focus. Just as you settle into the stories of the Richardsons and the Warrens, there is an adoption, a missing baby, a ruckus, and a court case with different characters. Ng is skilled in bringing characters to life, making the reader care, and blurring the line between right and wrong. If you read and love this book, pick up Everything I Never Told You and let Celeste Ng bring you into a world of fascinating, yet ordinary characters for a second time.

With the Fire on High closely follows Elizabeth Acevedo’s The Poet X. Both are young adult novels that remain true to difficult circumstances without a heavy-handed approach or excessive focus on a moral. With the Fire on High follows Emoni Santiago as she navigates the challenges of high school, motherhood, and helping her grandmother to make ends meet. She is passionate about cooking and everyone enjoys her food. Her strength becomes a challenge when she takes a cooking class at school that requires everyone to follow the rules, no matter how good their intuition may be. This is the perfect book to read with a teenager. It is sure to spark conversations about family life, career choices, friendship, and the transition to adulthood.

Queenie by Candice Carty-Williams has been referred to as the “black Bridget Jones,” but the comparisons are only at the surface. Carty-Williams using Queenie’s life experiences as commentary on issues of race, gender, migrant cultures, and the continued effects of slavery. Queenie is easy to like. The opening of the novel is deceptively light-hearted and simple, so when it turns to heavy themes such as mental health issues and unhealthy relationships, it is a bit surprising. By that time, the reader has a relationship with Queenie and can’t help but to root for her, even when she makes terrible decisions. Queenie is a like a cousin or a friend from high school. She will annoy you, but you want the best for her anyway.

If you are looking for more books and recommendations for other activities, follow Equality Bahamas on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram. Our team is sharing book, tv show, movie, music, TedTalk, and Tiny Desk concert recommendations almost daily. Every now and then, we all need an escape.

Published by The Tribune on April 15, 2020.

/0 Comments/by