?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Sat, Apr. 30th, 2005, 12:22 am
Today children, we shall be learning about being socially inept

Does anyone else who's as useless as me at finding a partner have this problem: When you fancy someone, you only really focus on the fact that you fancy them, and not what it might actually be like to have them as a partner? Because actually, when you start to consider it, the person you've got eyes for might not actually be that good a mate.

This is strictly for people who lack confidence in this area of course: If you're a confident person you probably have a better idea of who you'd want to date, and can tell if people fit your criteria. For someone who's less than confident in this area like myself though, there isn't really a criteria. You just find yourself attracted to people, who are quite often not that good matches. I'm a straight edge kid and my past three crushes have been on raging alcoholics - I have no problem with drinking, but at the same time it'd be stupid not to think there wouldn't be SOME conflict with that.

Of course, opposites attract, so maybe its not a surprise, and sometimes these things do work. And infact, I normally have some common ground with the people i'm attracted to: I'm normally attracted to people after i've spent a lot of time with them and start to get inside their heads a bit, and you need some common ground to get that far. But then again, on a purely friendship level, this doesn't necessarily move them further than the level of an aquaintence: A lot of my friends I have common ground on the basis of music, or musicianship (which is more tenuous, as if you're both musicians but play different styles, you both have to be open minded enough to try and make them work together) but aside from that, not a lot else. So why do certain people who are often totally inappropriate become attractive?

This doesn't seem to be a question I can really find an answer to. On a slightly egotistical level, I could say there's not very many people like me, so finding a likeminded person i'm attracted to would be tricky. But in a more general sense, i'm wondering if this happens to other people because I think it does, and so therefore it wouldn't be intrinsic of my own personality.

Lets use a classic example which i'm thinking of about this: The Science nerd at high school, who has a crush on the pretty girl. Now this isn't quite the same as my own situations as this is often unrequieted love from afar - That is, they don't really have any contact with their object of desire. But, the fact is this cliche is basically an introvert, strongly left brained charachter, and their crush is an extrovert charachter with no interest in the same things. The introvert-extrovert part is the important part here: If the nerd charachter actually really considered what dating this girl would actually be like, it seems less likely to work: He's not going to want to go to teenage parties and get drunk with her. Post school, there is perhaps more chance of them reconciling their differences, but for the initial relationship this is quite obstructive. Anyway, in this situation the nerd will never have the courage to do anything, but this is besides the point: He hasn't really rationalised his attraction.

Having got this far though, I can ultimately see why this happens, due to the last line. You can't "rationalise attraction". Whatever the chemistry and biology, the psychology is always going to defy logic. Maybe the people who are more confident have managed to rationalise it to a degree, but then who knows how it works out in the end?

Hell yeah, politics free post.

Fri, Apr. 29th, 2005, 05:25 pm
I need a shower

...Because I forgot to use shampoo this morning.

I fucked up my friends page by adding myself. Fuck yeah.

Neighbours on next. Fuck yeah.

LiveJournal is ever so fun. I'm rediscovering the fun. WHenver i'm bored I can just go and type random things I like into the "Interest" page. So it just becomes spammy. Fuck yeah.

Nothing else to say. Fuck yeah.

Fri, Apr. 29th, 2005, 12:55 pm
Good Afternoon Children, today we shall be learning about SEX!

I wish the UK major political parties published their manifestos online, or if they do, made them easier to find. I was reading in the paper this morning about sex education, and some woman complaining about medical students "daisy chaining" which isn't hard to guess what it is, but for the un imaginative, its an orgy where everyone connects to another persons gentials sexually. Fucking to oral, over and over again, essentially. For some reason she was linking this to sex education in general, but i'd wager that medial students are smart enough to know what they're doing and aren't really what you should be focusing on for sex education and the like.

Anyway, i'd previously read that the Liberal Democrats were going to introduce sex education for children as young as seven, and hand out contraceptives for kids as young as eleven (If someone could find me a link confirming this, i'd be very grateful). This I found a little shocking, not because they plan to do it, but because it could actually be necessary. Certainately on the issue of contraceptives, handing them out isn't a bad idea because lets face it, if the kids want to do it, they're going to, so ignoring them and not at least making sure they do it sensibly is retarded. Hell, thats not even tackling the symptoms, let alone the cause! But while we're doing that, we do really need to actually get kids having a sensible idea about sex, and when to do it.

I'm sure you've heard this a million times before, but lets go over it once more: Sex education is rubbish. Unless you're aiming for a biolgy degree, nobody cares which tube connects to which to make the thingy come out of the thingy. Staring at diagrams of genitals teaches you nothing about sex, and is quite frankly, a little creepy. So you get lessons teaching you the science, but none of the actual important stuff: How its actually done, how you get to the point where you should be doing it, what reasons there are to be doing it and not doing it etc etc. All of these are saved for a 30 second cartoon at the end which is again, basically just creepy. My learning of sex has been roughly devided equally between TV, Porn, and wise liberal parents who buy decent sex ed books, designed specifically for teenagers, with none of the biology bullshit (TV gives you some approximation of relationships, non weird porn shows how its done, and all the fun bits, and the books do a mixture of the above, plus answer any questions and worries, and give you the spiel on STD's in an informative and unpatronising way).

The thing is, there are some good sex ed books out there: This book dispelled many a young teenage fear for me. You can tell from the title and cover it's got a sense of humour. I found this on my bookcase a couple of months back, and reading it I had to wonder, why the hell aren't lessons at school like this? It's obviously possible to teach sex sensibly. Before that book I had no idea what oral sex was. I remember having a conversation at school with a classmate during sex ed, where we came to the conclusion that it was like porn for blind people, or sticking your ear to the wall and getting thrills from your neighbours. At this point we had no idea what masturbation was either, and i'm not even sure if sex ed made it clear the man needs to be erect to have sex. In hindsight, why anyone would want to have sex was never made clear: It became a pressure thing simply because it was presented like something you're supposed to do. This strikes me as an incredibly clumsy way of doing things.

Doing websearches, relevant statistics seem hard to come but I did find that "In the UK, approximately 25% of 15 year olds and 50% of 17 year olds have had sex." (Source: NHS Hertfordshire) which isn't a very surprising statistic, but it just goes to show that teenagers are doing it, although I can't find any information on how young they're really starting. Actually that more than half of the teen population aren't having sex till they're past 17 is probably quite optimistic, although these stats are a few years out of date and according to the article mentioned earlier, the average age has dropped from 17 to 15. This aside though, if the teenage population is screwing like that, then the useless sex education that's being handed out isn't helping. The Liberal Democrats plan to introduce earlier sex education has been met with some criticism by the opposition parties, unsurprisingly, but for all the wrong reasons. It's not whether the kids are the right age we should be worrying about, and whether sex education will encourage them to have sex too early: It's whether they're being taught the right thing. Whoever does get in power, and whatever age they decide sex education should be taught at, the most important thing is that they get rid of the pompous, prudish science lessons, and replace them with something that actually teaches you about what sex really is.

For some interesting reading about teenage sex and pregnancy, try this: A league table of teenage births in rich nations Innocenti Report Card No. 3, July 2001, UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre, Florence.

Thu, Apr. 28th, 2005, 12:30 pm
What the hell

Advanced Global Personality Test Results
Extraversion |||||||||||||| 60%
Stability |||||||||||| 50%
Orderliness || 10%
Empathy |||||||||||||||||||| 90%
Interdependence |||||||||||||||| 63%
Intellectual |||||||||||||||| 63%
Mystical |||||||||||||||| 63%
Artistic |||||||||||||||||||| 90%
Religious || 10%
Hedonism |||||| 30%
Materialism |||||| 23%
Narcissism |||||||||| 36%
Adventurousness |||||||||||||||| 70%
Work ethic |||||| 23%
Self absorbed || 10%
Conflict seeking |||||||||||||||| 63%
Need to dominate || 10%
Romantic |||||||||||| 43%
Avoidant |||||||||||||| 56%
Anti-authority |||||||||||||||| 63%
Wealth |||||||||||||| 56%
Dependency |||||||||||||||| 70%
Change averse || 10%
Cautiousness |||||||||| 36%
Individuality |||||||||||||||| 63%
Sexuality |||||||||||| 43%
Peter pan complex |||||||||||||||||||| 83%
Physical security |||||||||||||||||| 76%
Food indulgent |||||||||||| 43%
Histrionic |||||||||||| 50%
Paranoia |||||||||||||||| 63%
Vanity |||||||||| 36%
Hypersensitivity |||||||||||||| 56%
Female cliche |||||| 30%
Take Free Advanced Global Personality Test
personality tests by similarminds.com

I figured why not. It's vaguely interesting. I personally think they place too much importance on order for intellectual capability and desire, so in that field I perhaps should've scored a little higher, and i'm definitely more anti-authority but otherwise I think its about right.

Fuck growing up.

Wed, Apr. 27th, 2005, 09:58 pm
Attention Politicians! The words "Future" and "Progress" do not make you a good choice

Yes, i'm updating. And yes its got politics.

Well, its that time of the year, that happens every four or five years, that special time that is UK Election time. And everyones writing about it, so I figured i'd jump on the bandwagon. Despite the fact I won't be able to vote (Fuck you Mr Blair, you could've waited a week) this is the first time in UK Politics that i've at least come close to having some recognised power (Yes, I do call voting some kind of power, despite it being the most limited possible) and so having had that stripped of me, the least I could do was make a LiveJournal post. And hey, i'd like to think I have vague understanding of the whole issue, which it strikes me is more than a lot of people. But I am arrogant. Probably.

So anyway, I may as well get to the point. I'm not in college at the moment, or at least not in a way where I get a first hand look at student politics. However, the grapevine does lead me some interesting information. Apparently Alton College has a wonderfully titled Conservative group calling themselves "Conservative Futures". Now, my first reaction to that is... Oxymoron? Lets use old faithful that is Google for some definitions here.

---

con·ser·va·tive (kən-sûr'və-tĭv) pronunciation
adj.

1. Favoring traditional views and values; tending to oppose change.
2. Traditional or restrained in style: a conservative dark suit.
3. Moderate; cautious: a conservative estimate.
4.
1. Of or relating to the political philosophy of conservatism.
2. Belonging to a conservative party, group, or movement.

5. Conservative Of or belonging to the Conservative Party in the United Kingdom or the Progressive Conservative Party in Canada.
6. Conservative Of or adhering to Conservative Judaism.
7. Tending to conserve; preservative: the conservative use of natural resources.

---

fu·ture (fyū'chər) pronunciation
n.

1. The indefinite time yet to come: will try to do better in the future.
2. Something that will happen in time to come: “The future comes apace” (Shakespeare).
3. A prospective or expected condition, especially one considered with regard to growth, advancement, or development: a business with no future.
4. futures Business. Commodities or stocks bought or sold upon agreement of delivery in time to come.
5. Grammar.
1. The form of a verb used in speaking of action that has not yet occurred or of states not yet in existence.
2. A verb form in the future tense.

---

ox·y·mo·ron (ŏk'sē-môr'ŏn', -mōr'-) pronunciation
n., pl. -mo·ra (-môr'ə, -mōr'ə) or -rons.

A rhetorical figure in which incongruous or contradictory terms are combined, as in a deafening silence and a mournful optimist.

[Greek oxumōron, from neuter of oxumōros, pointedly foolish : oxus, sharp; see oxygen + mōros, foolish, dull.]

---


I've bolded the key parts of the definitions. And yeah I had to look up an Oxymoron, because i'm an example of the second part of the word. Hey, at least i'm checking i've got my vocabulary right, otherwise this would be an Irish Catholic Rant declaring the woes of the Prostitute Church.

So anyway. Conservative, Future. Now, if the "future" is "3. A prospective or expected condition, especially one considered with regard to growth, advancement, or development: a business with no future." then logically, we can assosciate the future with progress:

prog·ress (prŏg'rĕs', -rəs, prō'grĕs') pronunciation
n.

1. Movement, as toward a goal; advance.
2. Development or growth: students who show progress.

3. Steady improvement, as of a society or civilization: a believer in human progress. See synonyms at development.
4. A ceremonial journey made by a sovereign through his or her realm.

intr.v. pro·gress (prə-grĕs'), -gressed, -gress·ing, -gress·es.

1. To advance; proceed: Work on the new building progressed at a rapid rate.
2. To advance toward a higher or better stage; improve steadily: as medical technology progresses.

---

Now, if conservativism is "1. Favoring traditional views and values; tending to oppose change." then i'm thinking, yes, conservative future is infact, an oxymoron. Future, and progress, imply change, which apparently a conservative would be opposed to.

Now, Labours campaign slogan is something to the effect of "Britain: Forward not back" or something similar. If Labour were still the leftist workers party, with a pleasant if moderate blend of socialist economics and liberal social views, i'd be more inclined to believe them. After all, this would be the opposite of conservativism. However, we're not living in those fabeled pre 1987 times, when my Dad had hair, so logically didn't have me to look after. Nowadays, Labour are none of these things. I can't think of a witty way to describe them, so lets just say they're faux tories. They're righties. Authoritarian. Plenty of things i'm opposed to.

At this point i'd better come clean and say I probably wouldn't have voted for the old Labour either, but then again in all honesty I consider myself an Anarchist, opposed to governments in general, so anyone is inherently evil. Still, the more leftist and idealistic the better. But i'm not making myself out to be particularly smart with this little blurb, so i'll get back on topic. This is meant to be satire after all, if you hadn't guessed. I imagine it's not very good, but never the less, back on topic.

Ok, so we've established Labour are infact, tories. And we've also established that Conservativism is inherently opposed to change and progress. Now, at this point you're not getting any dictionary definitions because "Forward" and "Back" are very basic words, so there's no real need to check, but if Labour are saying they want to move "Forward", then surely they're implying progress? Error, does not compute! You're a bunch of Conservative fuckwits, you don't like progress because it undermines what you stand for.

So, we have the "Conservative Futures" youth group, and the Labour "Forward not back" campaign. I'll give them credit, implying progress is pretty bold and exciting. The problem is its source. The future these guys are talking about is a standstill. Hell, in extreme cases, it'd be a step backwards. Who wants that? Lets face it, these are the guys who took buisness studies because there was too much ethics to consider in sociology. Yeah yeah, time is consistantly moving forward so they will bring a future, you know thats not what I mean. Who wants a "Conservative Future"? Really? Who wants a future that resists progress because of their moral high horse? Lets try an analogy: When I think Conservative, I think man in a suit (No offence Dad). I hate suits. So a conservative future? Thats a future where we all have to wear sutis. I'm sure you can find my point is in there somewhere.

On a side note, there was a debate between the three main parties at Alton College recently, and the results of the end vote were rather interesting. Of 127 students, the votes were as follows:

Lib Dem: 80
Tories: 40
Labour: 7

Now, whilst the only libertarian party getting the majority of votes is quite nice, 40 for the tories? Woah right there, that's a pretty big chunk, thats a little under a third. Now bear in mind this is a college of around 1000 students. This isn't particularly accurate, but it doesn't really matter: Say that the second year students are all eligable to vote, so 500 potential voters. Of this, roughly a quarter turned up to vote. (This is the main innacuracy as there would be a percentage of first years aswell as ineligable second years in the student debate vote). If of this number, about 30% voted conservative, which is a sizeable minority. If 75% of the legible students are apathetic, this means that the libertarians are actually in the minority of around 15%.

Now yes yes, innacurate statistics, who gives a fuck, this is a livejournal, not a newspaper. I imagine i'm more accurate than the Daily Mail anyway. So to my point: Where the fuck did youthful ideology go? Seriously, are we at the point where peoples idealism is worn away before they're even two decades through life?

Of course, apathy isn't necessarily because people don't care, i'll admit, I support none of the three main parties (Although after seeing him on TV the other day, power to Kennedy, he's got his head on straight at least) and people want to see things change so they dont want to vote for a third party that won't gain power. This is certainately not helped by the lack of proportional representation. I honestly can't see why this isn't implemented: I understand that this risks there being no clear majority of those voted for, but it would give a wider range of views. Hell, maybe we need to give the whole system an overhaul so there doesn't need to be a clear majority to decide. But still, i'd encourage people to vote for the fucking Monster Raving Looney Party than not vote at all. Voting for a third party at least says "I think these nobodys/clowns" could run the conutry better than the big three.

In the interest of fairness:
The Labour Party
The Liberal Democrats
The Conservative Party
The Monster Raving Looney Party

This vitriolic attack on the right has been brought to you by Coke, and for Christmas the Tories will all get a soda.

Have fun at the polls!

Fuck me, did I write all that?

Fri, Feb. 25th, 2005, 11:40 am
FARK COCK BADGERS

TESTICLES.

Mon, Dec. 20th, 2004, 01:50 am
Smeg

Blimey, they've changed this. I think. It's odd.

Big box. Space everywhere. Words are floating. Aaaaah.

Anyway, I found a journal of some very odd guy, and remembered there are odd people on livejournal, and remembered I have a livejournal, and remembered i'm quite odd, and then I stopped laughing. I'm a different sort of odd though. I'm special. My mummy tells me so. Ahhar.

So i'm typing this just so I can read everyone elses journals, and I didn't need to type this but I am, and have, so nerr.

Thu, Sep. 9th, 2004, 09:25 pm
They thought I was dead.

No-one reads this thing, I assume, i've had no urge to update it regularly. But now I guess it has a use. In the few months since I posted, many things have happened, none of which are significant. Or maybe they are. Small shaping things. Nothing big. Or nothing small, everything big in its own way. So much has happened and its impossible to put scale on. Its interesting, I think i've changed. This won't mean anything to anyone who reads it, I guess i'm just tapping stuff out, like I could do in notepad but I can hope it makes interesting enough reading for someone to give two fucks and actually believe any of this is real for enough to be engaged in it. Maybe some magazine editor will read it and think I have interesting insights into all sorts of things and hire me for a column. Or thats what we'd like to believe. Thats the movie plot, the kids book. It never will happen. And I don't care. What I care about is for a few seconds I was stupid enough to think maybe. Yeah, this is Nihlism 101.

So what has been happening in these months? Lots. Little. As said. Reading more obscure revolutionary literature. Starting a fight. Turning and old enemy into a new friend. Arguing fiercely and fighting people trying to get me to shut up. Learning compromise. Telling a girl I love her. Not caring that I know she wouldn't feel the same. Staying out all night listening to Hendrix with friends. Wondering how i'm going to escape living like that. Wishing I could live that way forever. Hating it whilst I can. Some how manageing to be nihlistic and caring for everything in the world. Constantly becoming more aware of the world. Its all the more real now.

The world changes all the time. Everyones world changes. Half of the things in that very incomplete list changed in even the last 48 hours. I tried to make some decisions. To embrace every change, not fear what could go wrong, just live to experience it. Something i've thought for ages and maybe i've started actually doing that now. I've had deja vu's, unhappy memories, and so many things that I look at and think "Fuck, my life is ruined" or "That ruined my life". I still want to destroy a lot of things that fucked me over and I can see bringing no good. But they didn't ruin anything. None of this makes sense.

Abort/Retry/Fail, rewind, start over.

There is no truth. As Bertrand Russell said, never feel certain of anything. I feel the same contempt for the cult leaders adn conspiracy theorists as I do for the leaders who are lying to us which the former base their arguements around, whilst subconciously, unintentionally but inadvertantly telling their own lies because their belief is so solid.

Fuck it, i'm cutting this short. I need sleep. Maybe i'll come back tommorow and write something coherent. Alternate interpretation of Society of the Spectacle. Or perhaps denouncing all of what I just said. Right now I don't care. I'm drunk of my own confusion.

My lips heart.

Mon, Jun. 21st, 2004, 06:56 pm
Cow Tipping

Udders.
Cowuuube.
Mooosic, Moooosli and other words with Mu replaced with Moo.
For some reason, cow jokes have factored into my life to a disturbing degree in the last week. So there.

That was udderly pointless. Guffaw.

Sun, Jun. 6th, 2004, 10:18 pm
Rock'n'Roll motherfucker!

I said i'd do the updating thing. And I am doing.

My band played its first proper gig on Friday! And we rocked fucking hard, despite the relatively sedate crowd. There were lots of people there, but a lot of them just hung out in the beer garden. Still, we had fun playing, and we had a reasonable crowd, just we didn't manage a mosh pit which was a let down. However up on stage, talking to the crowd was relatively easy, and we still managed to get into the music and went mental on stage, which will hopefully get people to remember us. We had a smoke machine which set off the fire alarm too, which was fucking cool. The other bands also played really well, especially EPiSODE who were on after us, who played a really good set despite the fact that the crowd almost completely ignored them. A lot of it probably had to do with the fact 22 Arrests, the band who were headlining, are Ska, and the art-punk and hard rock stylings of our band and EPiSODE respectively rather contrasted them, which although is no bad thing from my point of view, didn't enthuse the crowd. Oh well. I'm a rock star.

Yes.

-W

10 most recent