Automated Attack Monkeys, Scalpel Mines, & Acid

The Platitudes of Successful people - WARNING, contains swears.

Wed, 13 Mar 2013 10:37:26 GMT

Some successful people really annoy me. Quite a lot of them don't, but a sizeable majority... Take Ricky Gervais. He is a man of some (but not massive) talent, who because the stars were right and there was a gap in the market briefly became a massive success and is now riding the long tail of that.

He fully believes that his talent and work are the only factors in his success. He also believes the corollary of this - that anyone who is NOT as successful as him is not as successful as him either because they are not as talented or because they didn't work as hard or both. This is why he makes tweets like the ones he regularly makes, which I have no doubt he thinks are funny, and which dismiss people he sees as lesser than him.

The belief that people succeed ONLY on their own merit is utter bullshit.

Now I'm not saying that successful people aren't talented, or that they don't work hard. Clearly there is a requirement for some talent and some work involved. What I AM saying is that there are huge numbers more talented people, and immeasurably huge numbers more hard-working people than there are successful people, so there must be some other factor. Some very talented people are going to work their arse off their entire life and not get anywhere. It's harsh, but it's life. There is only limited room at the top, sadly, and for every person who gets the breaks there's going to be several who didn't. Being one of those who didn't isn't fun. But you know what makes it ten times worse?

Smug deluded arseholes like Ricky Gervais rubbing people's faces in it and telling them that the only reason they aren't as successful as Ricky Gervais is because they're Not Good Enough.

Fuck off Ricky Gervais, and the idiots who believe your bullshit.

comments

Chris Williamson MP: sadly misinformed, or a liar? @chriswmp

Mon, 04 Jun 2012 10:34:11 GMT

Yesterday, Chris Williamson MP tweeted:

Lib Dem membership in freefall. I'd urge all Lib Dems who want progressive social change to back #Labour

Now, I know that some of you reading this have left the Lib Dems. At least one of those has joined the Greens, and several have joined the Pirates. Maybe some of you have joined Labour, and you know what? I'm a Liberal, and I am happy to see the exercising of personal choice even if it's not a decision I would make myself. But the idea that Liberals should leave the Lib Dems en masse and join Labour just because a Labour MP says so? THAT got my back up. So I replied. Possibly slightly less than respectfully:

AHAHAHAHAHAHAA the day authoritarian #Labour are the agents for real social change is the day Satan skates to work

Now, to give him his due, he didn't just ignore me. Unfortunately, some of the examples he replied with are.... well, shall we say "suspect"

But Labour introduced NHS, welfare state, equal pay, race & gender equality acts, min wage, civil partnerships, legalised abortion

So, I'm not the political historian that matgb is, but even I know that David Steel introduced the Abortion Act, and it was a free vote issue, and lots of Labour politicians opposed it. To try and claim that as a Labour measure just because Labour were in power when it was passed is disingenuous to say the least. And I know for a fact that they introduced civil partnerships because they were too cowardly to introduce equal marriage, which Lib Dems in government are doing RIGHT NOW! (Hi Lynne! *waves*) This makes me suspect that some of his other examples might not be as clear-cut as he is presenting them either, although I suppose I can give him minimum wage. So I go to reply to him to say that "just because something happened when Labour was in government doesn't mean it was instigated by or supported by Labour" and notice that he's also having a twitter conversation with Douglas... In reply to

What about those of us who value civil liberties, constitutional reform & not pandering to the media?

he says

Your point is? Remember Labour introduced biggest constitutional reforms, FOI Act & it was Ed Miliband who took on Murdoch.

So, chickening out of proper Lords reform (which, again, Lib Dems are doing in government), backing away from electoral reform when you got a big enough majority to snub Paddy, and opposing AV and boundary changes mean Liberals should trust you on constitutional reform, does it, Chris? And Ed Miliband is better than, ooo, say... VINCE CABLE on Murdoch?

So, my question to you, loyal reader, is this: is this man misinformed, deluded, or simply lying? And why does he think that spouting untruths directly at Lib Dems will get them to join his party? I mean, if you are a person who thinks the Lib Dems lied on tuition fees (which I can understand, even if I don't entirely share that view) or is dismantling the NHS (which, again, I can understand, even if I think what we're doing is preventing the tories from doing so) then WHY IN CTHULHU'S NAME would being barefaced lied to by a Labour MP entice you to join Labour? I know we have a reputation as masochists in the Lib Dems, but surely we're not all that masochistic?

My advice to you, if you're a Lib Dem leaver who still wants to remain politically active? If you're technologically inclined, join the Pirates, because they love freedom as much as we do, and they're a rising star. If I were ever to leave, that's where I'd go. If you're less technologically inclined, join the Greens and try to change some of their more ridiculous anti-science policies. And say hi to Liz. And if neither of those appeals, then join a single issue group. Perhaps the electoral reform society. But for pity's sake, don't join Labour. They'll betray you like they've betrayed everybody else since about 1998. They lie about how we got in the mess we're in now, they lie about what they did in power, and they won't even tell us what they're going to do if they get back in. If you want the definition of an untrustworthy politician, I'd say look for one in a red rosette.

comments

An Open Letter to @nick_clegg

Thu, 14 Oct 2010 17:12:37 GMT

Dear Nick,

I realise that coalition government is not the same as a party governing on its own. I realise that when one signs up to a coalition agreement, one has to make compromises. But when one has signed a pledge giving a cast iron guarantee one ought to stick to it.

When you signed the pledge to vote against tuition fee increases, lets be honest, you could not have known the circumstances you would be asked to do so in. But that does not alter the fact that you signed the pledge. Perhaps by doing this you have learned a valuable lesson not to sign such an open-ended pledge, and you've certainly learned a lesson to make damn sure that when you negotiate coalition agreements you should bear in mind what pledges you have signed. But none of that alters the fact that you, personally, signed the pledge.

There is no point in whining and misdirecting by saying that other parties have broken pledges too. We are not other parties. You were supposed to be countering the bloody politicians, they're all the bloody same meme, not feeding it.

There's no point in saying that we have to cut higher education funding if we're cutting everything else, because we're not cutting Trident, and if we can afford to spend money on stuff to blow up half the planet, we can afford to educate our children.

There is also no point in wittering on about how this and that safeguard is being put in to make sure that poor people will not suffer. Poor people won't suffer because the idea of spending that amount of money on university will put them off going in the first place, because they can't imagine possibly earning enough to pay it back. It'd put me off going. That's a HUGE amount of money to me. I know it's small change to you, but it's not to me, or millions more like me.

At the end of the day, though, it doesn't matter that I think the tuition fee increase is unjustified and unjustifiable. It matters that you made a pledge, and you made it in the hopes that you would never get called on it, in order to tout for votes. Well, you are being called on it. And if you don't answer that call, you are no better than the Labour politicians you lambast for their broken promises, and if someone asserts that to me on the doorstep I don't know how I will answer them, because I will think that they are correct in their assertion.

I voted for the coalition because on balance I thought it was the lesser of a number of evils. I still think that. But my patience and tolerance are wearing thin. Very thin indeed. I thought we were an honourable party, and striking an honourable course, for the good of all. There is nothing honourable about signing a pledge to grub for votes, and then going back on it the second it becomes a bit uncomfortable.

I thought we were better than that.

yours in disappointment

Jennie.

This blog is proudly sponsored by Caron's Musings

comments

Where are all the Women Bloggers? Right here, as always

Tue, 12 Oct 2010 17:34:22 GMT

I know I'm a bit of a stuck record on this point, but here is some concrete evidence of how the blokosphere works against women, all the while pretending not to:

Mark Pack blogs that the majority of UK bloggers are female. Someone asks him how he knows that; he replies that he got it from the ONS.

Mark would never have known about that ONS data had I not told him about it, but it never enters his head to credit me with the information. It's just information, it's in the public domain, it doesn't really MATTER where he got it from... Right?

I mean, the fact that when blogosphere stories enter the mainstream, the MSM normally credit Guido or the Egregious Tory Tosser, even when the story was almost always broken by someone else and they just picked it up off their RSS feeds or Twitter... as long as the story gets out, it doesn't matter who the source was, right?

Even more obviously: all those black people whose songs Elvis ripped off... As long as the music gets out there, who cares who wrote it?

Even when female bloggers DO do something worth noticing, we never get the credit. And we're told we should be grateful, because at least the information is out when the men deign to notice. I'm sure that this was not a conscious snub by Count Packula. I'm sure he's very wounded that I am even typing this. But you know what? Women are conditioned from birth to know our place, to not speak out in case we upset someone, to keep our heads down and just be grateful... Well fuck that. Sometimes someone needs to have their cage rattled.

If you're seriously about solving the problem of women being excluded, Mark, you might want to stop perpetuating it. Just a thought.

comments

I Don't know Which is More Depressing...

Mon, 02 Aug 2010 08:19:59 GMT

The fact that one of the Milliblands has got headlines for jumping on the Save Our Pubs bandwagon that Greg Mullholland and other Lib Dems have been successfully piloting for years, or the fact that Mike Smithson, famed sage of politicalbetting.com thinks that my livelihood and the lifeblood of many communities (not just rural ones) is trivial and laughable.

OK, so Millibland's "bold" plans are nothing more than to appoint a minister for pubs, and not to do anything about the beer tie, or the stupid over-regularion of the market, or the ridiculously complicated duty regime (here's an idea: differential taxation on cask and bottle/can), or any of the other issues that plague my industry. But that does not mean that the issue is not a serious one, affecting not just the lives of barmaids, but the fabric of our communities.

To dismiss this as so much sausages is, I venture to suggest, slightly short-sighted of the seer.

This blog is proudly sponsored by Voter Speaks

comments

Note to Lib Dem Parliamentarians: We Are Not Stupid. Please stop treating us like we are.

Sat, 24 Jul 2010 10:37:03 GMT

As is my wont on a Saturday morning, I am listening to The Week in Westminster. One of the items they have had on it was about rumblings of discontent in the party that we are not having enough influence on the coalition. Stephen Gilbert, of the whip's office, tried to counter this by listing policies which we have had influence on which are currently being enacted... and the first one he came up with was also a Tory policy.

HOW FUCKING STUPID DO YOU THINK WE ARE?

The thing about being a Lib Dem is that you have to fight tooth and nail for every vote, and the thing about fighting tooth and nail for every vote is that you know the manifestos of your oppponents as well as you know your own. HOW DARE YOU try to hoodwink us? How dare you try to spin doctor those of us who campaigned like hell to get YOU elected?

Sandra Gidley was right, you cannot ignore the rumblings of discontent from within the party, or dismiss it by telling us we are not being grown up. I was one of those who voted enthusiastically for the coalition, I am fully aware that coalition involves compromise, but compromise, to my mind, does NOT involve pretending to be ecstatically happy about a desperate fudge that nobody actually wants (AV), and nor does it involve being an uncritical fawning abused partner in a marriage with very unequal power footings. I've seen where that leads, thank you, and I'm not going to participate enthusiastically in the macro version.

If you keep trying to dismiss and ignore the feelings of the grassroots of the party, you are going to reap a whirlwind in Liverpool, you smug, arrogant, dismissive tosser. And that's a long time before we get wiped out at the next election, which it's looking more and more like we will...

This blog is proudly sponsored by

If you would like to view this entry with a pale colour scheme click here. If you would like to subscribe to my blog click here for RSS or here for atom.

comments

IPSA and whining MPs

Sun, 04 Jul 2010 00:19:04 GMT

I have friends who are MPs. I have the greatest of respect for the vast majority of parliamentarians. Having said that, I am completely sick of hearing various over-priveledged windbags on Today in Parliament moaning and whining about how long it takes them to fill in their forms for IPSA, and how stupid and bureaucratic the rules are, and how much time they have to spend ticking boxes, and how unweildy the claims system is...

Well, boo fucking hoo. Welcome to the world that YOU have made the rest of us live in for the last thirty fucking years or more. You think you have it tough? Try filling in a DLA form, when you can't hold a pen for athritis, and your local CAB has been shut down for lack of funding. Try deciding between paying back the overpayment of tax credits you got because some spotty oik on minimum wage at the Revenoo fucked up the data entry, or feeding your children. You think it's tough having to slum it in standard class on the railway instead of being able to go in first? You're lucky you can afford the train.

It took your SECRETARY two hours to fill the forms in, did it, you poor mite? Your FUCKING SECRETARY?!?! Because, of course, those of us who are expected to fill in tax credit forms after working full time and caring for our families and volunteering for our local political party and having no time left for actual life, we TOTALLY have a secretary to fill in all the stupid and pointless questions on THAT form for us.

You had to provide proof that your spouse was your spouse, did you? They wouldn't just take your word for it? The CHEEK! It's not like the rest of us have to deal with that at the bank or the post office or (increasingly) the pawnbroker and gold merchant EVERY BLOODY DAY!

You have NO FUCKING CLUE, do you? You have no clue what it's like to be on or below the breadline. I know this, because the ones who DO know are not the ones doing all the moaning.

Just shut the fuck up, grow a backbone, and get on with it.

This blog is proudly sponsored by

If you would like to view this entry with a pale colour scheme click here. If you would like to subscribe to my blog click here for RSS or here for atom.

comments

Janet Street Porter's Views are Invidious, but widely held

Tue, 18 May 2010 18:27:08 GMT

According to Janet Street Porter, my illness is a product of me not having anything better to do. She thinks that if I just get up off my arse and do something about it, it will all magically disappear, and that I ought to just get a grip. She thinks that it's a trendy middle-class malaise, and I'm only diagnosed with it so that I can keep up with the Joneses. Like the people who think that Tourette's is just an excuse for swearing in public, and that dyslexia is just a posh word for stupid, Janet Street Porter thinks that clinical depression is something people are just making up to get attention.

If she had any fucking clue what it is like... This is not something I do to get out of work - actually, work is one of my coping mechanisms, stressful as it might sometimes be, because I know my function there and I know I am good at it. But everything else?

My parents spent a fortune on my education. How have I repaid them? By becoming a barmaid and living in a shitty hovel. I am a bad and ungrateful daughter.
My friends near and far spend time and money to see me, and how do I repay them? I rush off to the next thing and the next. I never give them the value they are due. I never could, not if I lived forever, for some of them. I am a bad friend.
My daughter loves me and trusts me, and how do I repay her? I struggle to even keep a roof over our heads. I am a bad mother.
Mat spends his life looking after me. Oh, he might not keep the house very clean, or earn huge amounts of money, but he is the anchor that keeps me from drifting into total madness. And how do I repay him? By taking him for granted. By tearing his heart out every time he has to see me feeling like this. I am a bad fiancee.
I hate delivering leaflets. I am a bad Lib Dem.
I don't like David Tennant. I am a bad Doctor Who fan.

That list could go on forever. All the things I am bad at, that I shouldn't be bad at. Some of them are more important than others, sure. But they don't come in isolation, and cumulatively they are a weight which is so heavy that sometimes it's hard to breathe.

I have squandered my life and my opportunities. People think I am so strong, such a powerful woman. I've lost count of the people who have said they admire me for taking stands and similar. And you know what? It's all a front. I fight because if I don't, people will notice how worthless and useless I am. I fight because if I don't, I'll die.

And it is hard. You think I choose to struggle like this, just to get out of bed every day, Janet Street Porter? You think anyone would choose to live like this, if they had a choice? Fuck you. Fuck you good and hard.

comments

OK, I am officially FUCKING SICK of this now.

Sun, 28 Feb 2010 22:25:43 GMT

So, I have been doing the one woman campaign for the recognition of the FACT that there are more women bloggers than men ones etc. etc. for a long time now. And you know, I knew this was a problem in other areas as well, but I just read this post on Splinster and it made me hopping mad.

Horror is a very different genre from political writing, it's true, but YET AGAIN we have a man in a position of power telling a woman that the people she is talking about don't exist, or if they do exist they don't count for some reason, and even if they did count nobody important (i.e. male) would want to read about them anyway.

I AM FUCKING PIG SICK OF THIS

Women blog more than men. Women buy more books than men. There are MORE WOMEN THAN MEN. Why the fuck do we continue to let ourselves get excluded like this? Why?

Anyway, I have an idea for a solution. What I propose is this: I want to see a website, and I want it to be a directory. I want it to have a list of categories, and in each of the categories I want to link to the websites and blogs of women writers, directors, etc. etc. And then the next time some smarmy-arsed fucker says but there are no women writers in sci-fi! or But there aren't any important women political analysts! or whatever, I can just link them to a page which proves them fucking wrong.

Does this website already exist? Because if not, I will fucking build it.

My February Sponsor is

To view this post with minimal formatting, click here. To view this post in your own Dreamwidth style, click here.

comments

Friends Don't Let Friends be iPricks - warning, contains rant

Sat, 13 Feb 2010 13:33:41 GMT

What the fuck is it with Apple products? Do they put mind-altering drugs in them or something? Why do they cause such uncritical adoration in normally sane and rational people? It's eerily like religious fundamentalism, and it creeps me the fuck out.

You know, I can understand that a person can like Apple products. I can understand the the UI is user friendly, and that iTunes is cleverly designed to cost you lots of money while making you feel good about it, and all that jazz. I can understand that. But why can't people who like Apple products accept that some people don't? Why is it that if someone posts a blog post asking "I want a new MP3 player, and I don't want an iPod" the immediate response from a segment of the blogosphere is "but iPods are AWESOME! How can you not want one?!"

If someone says "I want to make a meal, but I'm vegetarian" you wouldn't pop up and recommend roast beef.
If someone says "I want a night out, but I'm muslim, so I can't do alcohol" you wouldn't recommend a cocktail bar.
If someone says "I want to watch a movie, but I don't like sci-fi", you wouldn't recommend Star Trek.

So please, I'm begging you, if someone says that they don't like Apple products, accept that and move on. Don't be an iPrick. It's not the end of the world if someone's tastes differ from yours, and you don't have to evangelise to everyone in your social circle. Honestly.

My February Sponsor is

To view this post with minimal formatting, click here. To view this post in your own Dreamwidth style, click here.

comments

Newsflash, Arseholes: Getting Angry With Checkout Operators Doesn't Change the Law

Mon, 12 Oct 2009 01:05:25 GMT

I've noticed a couple of bloggers (not just you, Mark, lest you think I am picking on you, but you are the only one worthy of linkage ;)) tonight moaning about how some woman was refused service in a supermarket because there was a suspicion she might be supplying some alcohol to a person under 18. A lot of the commentary on this seemed to be aimed at the supermarkets, and there were threats of violence against the checkout operator from a number of quarters. What the blue buggery fuck do people think shoving the bottle of wine up the operator's arse would achieve?

Yes, the law is illiberal, ill-thought-out, and stupid. But taking it out on some poor bugger who is being paid minimum wage, is terrified that (s)he is going to get fined £5000 and lose his/her job, and probably thinks you are one of the many mystery shoppers (s)he knows are circulating to make sure (s)he is doing everything correctly and parroting all the stupid lines (s)he has been given by management? How the monkey buttocks do you think that is going to help? If anything, it will be utterly counterproductive, because it will confirm in the minds of legislators that anyone (apart from themselves, obviously) who ever drinks alcohol (or consumes any other age-restricted product - fags, knives, whatever) is dangerous and needs to be controlled.

If you get IDed for an age-restricted product, it's a minor inconvenience to you. If you DON'T get IDed, and you turn out to be one of the ~~stooges~~ Mystery Shoppers who are purposefully selected by the rozzers because they are underage and don't look it, or to test if you are going to serve someone who looks like they are buying for an underage person (which MIGHT be legal in the home, but is increasingly illegal in many other areas, and the police drum this into the stores) then the person serving you loses their job, a vast wad of cash, and the likelihood of future employment as well - because what shop/bar is going to employ someone who serves underage people? For fuck's sake show some perspective and stop flaunting your privilege, people. Because frankly, the sight of Entitlement Queen white boys going on about how disgusting it is that the peon behind the till doesn't know her place and isn't bowing and scraping to their every desire is more than a little nauseating.

If you want to change the law, aim your ire at the bloody government, who can do something about it, not the checkout girl who can't.

This blog is proudly sponsored by

comments

I am Woman, Hear Me Roar

Tue, 29 Sep 2009 20:24:23 GMT

Today is a bit of a pisser of a day to be a feminist. The number of people defending Roman Polanski for drugging, raping, and anally raping a 13 year old is making me feel sick. You know, I think he's a bloody good director too. But that does not mean he shouldn't be subject to the law, and I don't care how old he is now, or how fucking long ago it was that he did it. HE RAPED SOMEBODY, and he's got away with it for over thirty fucking years. This is NOT ON.

Still, I shouldn't be surprised, in a world where our esteemed prime minister thinks that girls who are made pregnant should be locked up while the boys who do the fathering can run off consequence free. In a world where it's OK to completely change the appearance of women on a day-in, day-out basis and fuck with their self esteem completely, just in case one of them shows a bra strap. In a world where girls are still turned away from some scout groups just for being girls. In a world where Nadine fundamentalist arsewipe Dorries is talking like a beacon of sanity (and you have no idea how hard it was for me to type that).

Still, there is hope. One tiny, faint glimmer of hope in all this awfulness. Whisper it quietly, folks, cos we don't want to scare her away. Alix Mortimer posted today. Shhhhh!

This blog is proudly sponsored by

comments

The Lib Dem Voice Weekend Meme

Sun, 26 Jul 2009 23:57:50 GMT

Lib Dem Voice is sponsoring this year's Total Bollocks Blog Awards. Stephen Tall has to write the article which Daddy Richard and me will giggle drunkenly over at the Lib Dem Blog Awards like we did over Nich Starling's article last year, while we loudly heckle from the Serial Runners-Up table as Costigan Quist and Mark Reckons collect all the awards.

Except, rather than write it himself, he's asked other Lib Dem bloggers to write it for him.

Stephen, you're sponsoring the Total Bollocks Blog Awards. You've GIVEN MONEY TO IAIN DALE. And you're asking where the Lib Dem Blogosphere is going wrong? I despair, I really do.

The Lib Dem blogosphere is very insular, and needs to start connecting with people outside the politics geek blogosphere. The way to do this is not to cosy up to the Egregious Tory Tosser. The way to do this is to talk to people from OUTSIDE THE POLITICAL BLOGOSPHERE COMPLETELY.

FWIW, I think we punch way above our electoral weight in the politics blogosphere. We're known to bloggers from other parties, and some of us (i.e. Costigan and Mark) are even respected by members of other parties. But those comments could equally apply to the Libertarian Party, and look how far that gets them in elections. But the politics geek blogosphere is a tiny, miniscule, insignificant part of the blogosphere in toto. And it will remain so the more insular and navel-gazing it becomes. Talking to Iain Dale is just gazing at a bigger navel.

This blog is proudly sponsored by

comments

One for the Boys - The Scar Crow #ffw09

Mon, 15 Jun 2009 20:35:18 GMT

Last night, as part of the FFW, there was a screening of a film called The Scar Crow, and a Q&A session with cast and crew afterwards. The film had great effects and was beautifully and creatively shot, especially given the tiny budget and shooting timescale, but it just REEKED of misogyny. I can't give specifics without spoilers, but I had many, many problems with the film. Now, you can say this about a lot of films, including many that I really love. But the classic Hammer/Amicus/etc. films get something of a pass due to being made 30, 40, 50 years ago. This film was made last year. The ONLY named female characters were "evil", apart from the "sympathetic character" - i.e. the one who deserves a Well Done For Not Being A Rapist Cookie - 's girlfriend, who was merely peripheral AND stupid. There's an incestuous "lesbian" kiss, which the director stated in the Q&A he had put in because his 12 year old son had asked for some hot lesbo action.

And you know what?

Even as I type this I can feel the internet's reaction to me criticising the film for these reasons. It's just one film - it's not systemic. Not all films are like that! - just like not all men are like that. Well, YOU might have been offended, but I wasn't, and therefore it's not a problem. So you're saying we ought to ban films with hot lesbo action/films with female bad guys/etc. I thought you were a liberal?

etc. etc. et fucking cetera.

It's not just systemic in horror (and yes, I DID have an audible intake of breath when the director claimed to have been subverting expectations by shooting a gore flick with evil women and hot lesbo action in it). It's not just systemic in films. It's not just endemic in entertainment. It's endemic in life.

Are we all ready for the chorus of Oh, you're exaggerating! I don't know anyone who finds this a problem, girls? Boys, I hate to break this to you, but perhaps nobody has told you they find this sort of shit a problem because they know what your reaction will be. Do you ever find yourself thinking well harrassment/sexual assault/rape can't be that much of a problem because I don't know anyone who has been harrassed/assaulted/raped? I bet you a tenner that you do. For starters, if you know me, you do.

And do you know what? Even with all that said, I wouldn't want to ban films like this. I'd just like to live in a world where I can make this sort of criticism without having to pre-emptively defend myself against accusations of being a strident whinging harpie. I'd settle for that, but it'd be even nicer if I could go and see a gore flick where it's the men who are relentlessly objectified, and the women who are held forth as praiseworthy for not being rapists... Not because I think reverse discrimination is in any way the way forward, but just because it would be SUCH a fucking novelty.

Using the icon I have is a defensive action too. It's saying I know that women are objectified on the basis of their bodies, and I know it happens to me, and I can cope with it. It's saying I realise that I am part of the problem here. It's saying look, even though I have been raped, I have a sense of humour about stuff like this.

Yeah, I'm in a really good mood today.

Thanks to puddingcat for pointing me at most of the articles I link to.

This blog is proudly sponsored by

comments

PSA: Colourschemes. Tick tick tick tick BOOM.

Sat, 30 May 2009 11:14:12 GMT

Much of the backlash to do with my comments on the Lib Dem Euro Election website has been well I don't like the colour scheme of YOUR blog, and therefore you don't know what you are talking about, nyah nyah!. This makes me feel slightly aggrieved. There threfore follows a somewhat intemperate rant.

People, if you are logged in to Dreamwidth, either with a regular account or an openID, there is a little link at the top right on the navbar which reads "reload in my style". You are perfectly at liberty to change my colourscheme to whatever the fuck you like WITH ONE CLICK. I have my colourscheme set this way because Dreamwidth is not only my blog, it is my feed reader, and I set it to a colourscheme which I can comfortably spend a long time looking at without getting a headache. This makes it accessible for me but it does not cause a problem for the rest of you - unless, that is, you are too lazy to click ONE FRIGGING LINK.

If you are reading via RSS you get it in your choice of colourscheme anyway. So there is no need whatsoever to try to force me to conform to what you want to see.

Now, I would LOVE to see Lib Dem websites with different skins available for those of us who don't like glaring white burning the pattern of our retinas to the back of our skulls, but I suspect that's not going to be an option any time soon, because even in the FUCKING LIBERAL PARTY its easier to attack those who don't conform to a perceived norm than it is to examine one's own actions.

The fact remains that an image heavy website causes accessibility problems.
A website with no noticeable nav structure causes accessibility problems.
A website with a vast amount of header before you get to the content causes accessibility problems.

Now, I accept that scrawling this in red sarcastic comments across a screengrab of the website might not have been the most adult way of critiquing it, but to dismiss all those concerns as merely an expression of personal taste? That's wearing your privilege on your sleeve. In fucking neon.

This blog is proudly sponsored by

comments

A Random collection of things which have made me angry today.

Fri, 22 May 2009 19:12:42 GMT

I am cocking furious about the Torygraph's coverage of Jo Swinson this morning. Lib Dem Lovely Jo claimed for some stuff, and on the same receipt - but unclaimed for - were some items of MAKE-UP!!! ZOMG!!! Someone who is female buys make-up! Next you'll be telling me that male MPs bought razors and didn't claim for them! Oh, no you won't, will you, because you don't want to make lazy smears against anybody MALE for buying grooming products you VACUOUS, MISOGYNISTIC TORY SHITBAGS! Well, unless they are gay, of course, like poor Ben Bradshaw, who got a kicking from you for BEING MARRIED in the same issue that you PRAISED Call Me Dave for doing exactly the same thing as him. Wankers.

I'm getting really tired of pitchfork-wielding mobs. Just, really. They're all the same. They're all in it for themselves. You know what? SOME of them are, but by no means all. Some of them are criminals, yes, but that's a tiny minority. Some of them were gaming the system, yes, and that's a bigger minority. Some of them, let's be frank, are just fucking stupid. And some of them are, and have been for a long time, fighting tooth and nail to bring in the kind of reform that you lot are baying for, and it would be totally unjust to tar them with the same brush as the crooks and the cheats - or even the ones that are just stupid. Seriously.

Lib Dems who are maligning the federal exec in general, and Ros in particular because they/she haven't waved a magic wand and made it all better. If you want an investigation, and due process, and all that malarky that we liberals are SUPPOSED to favour, you have to be aware that not only do these things take time, but if you want federal exec to police the party, first you have to give them the power to do so. I know most of you haven't READ the constitution, because it's long and boring and frankly, I can't blame you, but Federal Exec has fuck all power to rein in ANYONE. They can recommend and cajole and shout until they are blue in the face, but the final decision lies with the whips' office, or the leader, or various other people depending on which particular alleged transgression you are demanding action on. I would LOVE to see the FE and the president given some power, even given the dangers of it turning into the Labour NEC, because, let's not forget,

Hazel Blears. And the fact that because of her I have to thank the Egregious Tory Tosser AGAIN for giving me pertinent information. Damn him for being so pleasant and reasonable.

Mark Littlewood. I agree with a lot of things that Liberal Vision is aiming for, but frankly, the man is our party's Derek Draper, and I just want to slap him.

No Platform for the BNP. If those twats actually appeared on Question Time and Newsnight and got skewered on their own vileness, people wouldn't be able to fall for their conspiracy bullshit.

The fact that nobody has invented transporters, like in Star Trek, yet. Because sometimes a friend rings you up in such a state that you want to go and give them a big hug, drag them to the pub, get rascally drunk and say bollocks to the lot of you and you can't because they live three and a half hours' drive away. If you're reading this, unnamed friend, the reason I know how long it would take to get there is because we looked it up on Google Maps route planner. But I'm sending you the biggest virtual hug the internet can handle.

And then there are some things that have cheered me up too:

Steen and Dorries hoisting themselves on their own petards in various radio programmes.

Paul Walter answering for my call for him to sort out his blog feed. One down, 5cc and Mortimer to go

The wife making lovely falafel for tea

The phrase He's gone to spend more time with his ducks

Any Questions is being interesting so far, and I find myself on the side of Caroline Lucas.

On balance, then, I'm in a state of RAGE!!!! with various moments of hollow laughter. I think I have been infected by the lady who sponsors me...

This blog is proudly sponsored by

comments

Where Are All The Female Bloggers?

Tue, 19 May 2009 17:48:04 GMT

So Mark Reckons posted a couple of very interesting posts.

I linked to him on my own blog, and then I linked to him on the LC netcast, because they WERE very good posts.

andrewducker picked it up, and linked to it, and discussed it with his f-list... And thanked matgb for the link.

I didn't bother saying anything to Andy because, well, Mat and I ARE practically the same person, and it doesn't really matter, and he must have figured that Mat would be the one to link to it, being the psephology geek of the two of us.

Today, Mark Reckons posts again, thanking ALL the people who have linked to him... Mr Quist, Andrew Ducker, Malcolm Clark, That Tory Blogger, Claude IF Carpentieri, even Millennium... oh, and of course Professional Journalist Polly Toynbee - who isn't male, but IS a paid journo!

Where are all the female bloggers? Where they have always been. Here, blogging, and being ignored by the men, or even when they do notice us, being passed over for credit because people with our little fluffy female brains can't POSSIBLY be serious political bloggers.

You're damn right I'm bitter.

((Thanks for the ETA, Mark, it's very sweet, but I think the ~~Matrix~~ patriarchy has you))

comments

GODDAMNIT PEOPLE!!

Mon, 18 May 2009 22:22:09 GMT

Remember this rant about truncated feeds? Since I posted it, the award-winning Alix Mortimer has STARTED truncating! FFS! Still, it's better than Paul Walter and Five Chinese Crackers. You just get a bare url from THEM in the feed. Well, this is your warning, you three. Either institute proper feeds, or next Monday, when I do my Monday inbox clearout and checking of feeds, I'll remove you from my reading lists.

Don't think I don't mean it.

comments

Truncated Blog Feeds - a Rant

Sun, 10 May 2009 10:29:43 GMT

There is a setting on some blog platforms which means that you can set the RSS feed of your blog to be just an extract, or even worse, just a url, rather than the whole post. I would like to KILL whoever invented this setting. There is nothing more frustrating when doing the netcast than clicking through from what looks like an initially promising first paragraph to find that it is, in fact, the ONLY paragraph, or that the post descends into lunacy shortly thereafter. If this happens once, I am much less likely to bother clicking through to see if your post is interesting again.

If you truncate your blog post for RSS, that is entirely your right, but do bear in mind that it will have the following effects:

It will make me pissed off with you, so if I DO click through I am much more likely to leave a nasty comment
It will make me less likely to read your posts, and thus less likely to link to you
In extreme cases, it will make me drop the feed from my list

Lest you think that this is just me moaning, studies show that this is how most other people react to truncated blog feeds too. Do yourselves a favour, truncators, and STOP IT.

comments