Tuesday, 28 May 2013

Pop: how many points is your life worth?

There was a news story recently about the home secretary Theresa May regarding the prison sentences for those people who kill police officers and it left me wondering about the value of life. If what Theresa May wants actually comes into being, then there will be a difference in punishment for murder depending on the chosen profession of the person who has been killed or, in other words, the profession that you choose changes what your life is worth. 

So I decided to extrapolate this a little further. If we consider that the most a life can be worth is 10 points, how much is my life worth? Logic dictates that if the murderer of a dead police officer gets longer in prison than someone who murders me, the police officer’s life must have been worth more. My life therefore can be only up to 9, because there is a group of people above me. Is there, conversely anyone beneath me? The person who murders the police officer must have a lower value than me, as in fact must all criminals because they have been marked down by society for doing things that aren’t deemed ‘appropriate.’ Therefore my life must be worth at least 3.

I’m a woman, and society seems to value women as higher than men. This is evidenced by the fact that if you look on the news they have a tendency to only show missing people when they’re women. So if a male police officer has been pushed down to 9 then my life can only be worth 8 at most. 
A soldier’s life is valued more highly than a non-soldier but they could be on the same level as a police officer and I would position them as such if it wasn’t for the fact that while every dead soldier is reported on, not every dead police officer is. There is however on a positive note less sexism in the army so we’ll put men and women together, above police officers. That pushes me down to 8.

At the moment I occupy a range between 3 and 8, which is still a little too wide. I am of working age, but that could be taken as either a positive or negative. Children and the elderly are often treated with a lot more respect than the average working person which leads me to think that impact on the economy through labour doesn’t actually change life’s worth. It is clear however that celebrities are ranked higher than the normal public and so they must also be higher than me. The question then remains, who would take precedent on the news if a policewoman was shot on the same day an important Western celebrity died? Most likely they would focus on the crime because it’s more dramatic so my number is lowered again to 7. Add in the royal family, who push the lot down one more because their existence is somehow better than that of the rest of us inherently, and I’m a 6. 
The quality that women are most defined by is whether they have had a baby. I have no such thing, and even more so have no interest in having one. My lack of parasite lowers me in the eyes of other women, as it is somehow seen as a sign of maturity to give birth, and therefore I know that a mother is seen as having a life worth more than mine. Specifically this quality of theirs is mentioned whenever one dies, so I know that it must have been important. My life becomes a 5. 
Interestingly the space between 3 and 6 appears to be reserved for the normal folk, who are hanging around in the middle searching for scraps like a starving puppy. At the top of this group are mothers, because they keep society going by overpopulating, and at the bottom of this are the jobless whose only function in political life seems to be to contribute to the unemployment figures. They might as well be criminals for all anyone in power cares and if they are murdered then only their friends will really care. The media will never make a fuss about them unless they fall victim to the life of crime tempting them and murder someone higher up, thereby making their life worth even less.
So at the moment we have the following scale: 
1.       People who murder police officers
2.       Other criminals
3.       Jobless people
4.       Students/the general employed/creative types bumming around
5.       Mothers
6.       Celebrities
7.       Male Police Officers
8.       Female police officers
9.       Soldiers
10.     Royal Family

Now we have a scale, on which I rank 4, we can consider my other qualities properly to determine whether I can move from my lowly spot on the ladder. I’m young, but this is mitigated by my lack of child and it is this lack which is primarily blocking me from getting further up the chain. I’m white but the discrimination for or against skin colour is really a problem only at the extremes and where I have become trapped, hemmed in by prams, there are other problems. I’m blonde but I didn’t use hair dye to get that way and I’m not the right type of Hollywood pretty so I can’t skip up to celebrity. My intelligence naturally holds me back on such a hierarchy because intelligence tends to bring with it a scepticism for the world around and that doesn’t fit well with what the amoebic society we live in wants. Jobs that look fancy but don’t take brains will be naturally encouraged into higher positions because it is easier to control simple people in powerful positions.

Under this system Blip would be beneath me, because as discussed before he's male and females are currently considered more important. But somebody who dyed their hair would be more important than me because they conform to societal norms that I don't care for. If I dyed my hair and therefore moved up the scale, maybe to the level of mothers, would their be more worth to my life?

Movement up and down the scale can be considered under a few rules. Gender has a strong effect, ensuring that women are always higher than men. Effort into appearance would move a person up the scale, whether this is because a person wears the current fashion or the current alternative fashion. Music preferences can have an effect. If I listen to whatever crap is currently considered the best by the majority of people my life has more meaning and worth because I am normal. That is the crux of this, the worth of our life is all down to how much we fulfil that ideal of the perfect person that society portrays. Moving up and down the scale is dependent on the distance certain factors take us or push us towards this norm. I started at a 4 in the earlier dissection of this list but if my musical tastes and my clothing and my hatred of television programmes and American action films, along with my main hobby being languages, then I think I'd start to drop again. If all of these auxillary features, and this final consideration of my distance from the norm is worth 2 points then my life would be worth 2. 2 what you might ask? I confess I haven't thought of a name for my measurement. Some unknown force draws me towards HP and I think for the moment at least I'll stick with that.

So in conclusion, my final equation for working out how many HP a person has is as follows:
(Position in list - 1 for being male) - distance from popular trends = HP (where HP is worth life of person, courtesy of Theresa May.)

No comments:

Post a Comment

Please tell us what you think and don't be afraid to be honest, that's what we're here for.