The Snobbery of Art – Tracey Bashing!

I read yesterday that there’s a long awaited (for us who love and appreciate her art) Tracey Emin exhibition at the White Cube Gallery in Mason’s Yard called “Those Who Suffer Love”.

Once again, there’s a bubbling undercurrent of controversy, for HEAVEN FORBID Tracey has a piece in it that shows that most women in the 21st century like to masturbate. One of her pieces is a flick-book animation of a woman masturbating. Oh, HOW pornographic!

The first article I read about the exhibition was on the BBC News web site. They mentioned the animation briefly, but seemed to realise there’s much more to talk about with Tracey’s work. They had a comment from Tracey about the piece. She said, “[Masturbation] is not just about self-love, it’s also about self-loathing and being alone and for the act of being alone.” I understand what she means completely. Tracey’s work speaks to me.

I have to say, I’d never even heard of her until I moved to the UK. And even then, it took a visit to Tate Modern and seeing some of her work for her name to REALLY resonate with me. I saw a short film she’d made, almost like a video diary piece. Her art is SO personal and the video work I found very moving. I think I started to become a fan from that point on. If indeed artists have “fans”, like rock stars do.

Perhaps that’s what the critics (and Lord, the woman has her fair share of them) hate about the “modern” artists or as the Brit contingent are referred to YBA’s (Young British Artists – in the early 90’s, when a set of them came to public attention). That they are sort of held up as “pop stars” and have fans and followers. Damien Hirst, Sarah Lucas, Sam Taylor-Wood, The Chapman Brothers, Michael Landy are in the ranks of being labelled YBA’s. Hirst and Emin appear to be the “King and Queen” of the YBA’s, given the Wikipedia entry on the subject.

I see Tracey as almost a “today” version of Frida Kahlo. Kahlo was ballsy. She went FAR beyond what was the “acceptable face” of femininity in her art and her life. Her art was deeply personal and although I’m not a BIG fan of her artwork, I am of Frida herself and the things she represented in the art movement at the time. She portrayed herself in her art. She showed us what she wanted us to see, not what she THOUGHT we WANTED to see.

And that’s why I love Tracey. Her art is personal, but it is in no way conceited or self-centred. I’m sure critics would disagree (oh how they would disagree), but that’s how I see it. And that’s why ALL art is good. Critics, I swear, through their snobbery think they must like ALL art. If they don’t like it, it’s not art. WHAT A LOAD OF SHIT! I don’t rate Damien Hirst much myself, but I don’t begrudge people liking his work, or think any less of them.

I do, however, think it’s criminal that art has become SUCH a commodity. I watched a programme recently called “The Great Contemporary Art Bubble.” Revealed in the programme were aspects about how the collectors make the art a bigger commodity than it should be. A couple of examples: Andy Warhol collector Jose Mugrabi and his sons prop up the price of Warhol works, because they own SO much if it. Jay Jopling (the owner of White Cube Gallery – incidentally) and Damien Hirst bid on his own artwork (Hirst’s) to make it sell for what THEY deem it to be worth. But not only that, they also retain a percentage of the work most of the time, as it’ll be bought by consortia in which THEY are part of, therefore reinvesting in their own work, making more and more profit each time.

Most of the critics that criticise Tracey don’t do it because of some morality about the absurd price of art. Quite the opposite in fact. Most of them think she’s just “not worth it” or is not an “artist”. But what is an artist? Someone who is creative? Someone who produces images (be they words or pictures) for viewing? And isn’t art, like beauty, in the eye of the beholder? Should I be pandered to and told what is art and what isn’t? Should *I* be told what I should and shouldn’t like? Am I meant to like a Jackson Pollock, even though (frankly) I think an elephant can do a better job? That’s just MY opinion on Pollock though. I don’t expect others to feel the same. For what his art sells for, obviously most people don’t.

But the critics who critique Tracey seem to think we should all listen to them and stop liking her work.

Here are comments left on a article on the Times Online.

She’s absolutely right when at the end she says others artists will be missed by the media even if they are fantastic, whereas she will not . She’s “lucky”. Job done…but just don’t ask us to accept your rubbish as well. You’re extremely famous and lucky but you can’t draw. You are not an artist.

Bob, from Hong Kong.

I have a good idea for an artwork. Copy some of the crude scrawls from the walls of my local public toilet, add some pretentious titles and pseudo-intellectual explanations, and…

Oh bugger, Tracey Emin has beat me to it.

Chris K from Cheltenham

While Hirst doesn’t seem to be any better at drawing than Emin is, at least it is not what he’s trying to impress us with…. actually the ‘dead sheep’ and ‘pickled cows’ have quite an effect when seen for the first time. I just really can’t see what’s so special about her rather ugly sketches.

Paloma, from London

In response to Paloma, I dare say that what separates Hirst from Emin is that although it could be argued that Tracey’s sketches are crude (by definition a sketch is “A hasty or undetailed drawing or painting often made as a preliminary study.”), they ARE personal. What’s personal about a pickled cow? Yes, it’s very fascinating anatomically, but is it art? Is it something Hirst MADE? All he did was probably design the thing it’s displayed in. He didn’t “design” the cow, or make up the formaldehyde or probably even dissect the animal himself. Tracey’s not trying to “impress” us, she’s telling us her story (and for some of us her appreciate her art), OUR story).

Then there are just absurd, ridiculous statements that are laced with personal attacks.

Good grief! We have all had trauma in our lives – why is this hellish woman who wants us all to know about her tawdry life in a sick visual Big Brother style, taken seriously? Arrgh. She is not an artist but a poor exhibitionist who always makes me want to shower after seeing her work. Eeww shudder

Christina from Edinburgh

“As artistic as vomit. – Tom Franklin, London, United Kingdom”

Geez Tom, don’t give the lady any ideas!

Clickety6 from London, in reply to an earlier statement.

Tracey Emin can’t draw for toffee.
Nice frock she’s wearing though, so she must find a few suckers.

Sara from Leicester.

Maybe an inspirational woman, but an artist!?
You can fool some of the people some of the time…………

Steve Duckworth from Leicestershire.

Steve may have a point at the end, but if you are basing that purely on her drawings, then perhaps you would come to that conclusion. The Times article DOES point out (some people seemed unable to take this information in) that some of the drawings go back a LONG way.

Let’s not forget, they are doodles, sketches. What Tracey does is present ALL of herself. Good and bad. If you only show the “good” art, isn’t that sort of a con? A cop out? Why do people not understand that? That, what is artistic in her is the way she reveals herself. That’s HER art. That, if you like, SHE’S the art. If she left sketches out because they weren’t “good enough” she’d feel she was cheating us. And people can’t see that it’s the revelation of the art, and perhaps not so much the pieces themselves that is the art.

And that’s why I compared her to Frida. And that’s why I want to go and see the exhibition.

Would YOU give 1000% to something?

Are you THAT committed? I’ve just been reading an article from the BBC News – Magazine section on their web site, about the death of using the term “giving it 100%” to signify you giving something your all. It’s not enough to say 100% any more. You have to say 110%, 150%, some, in the American version of The Apprentice are now using the over-assured 1000%!

I was trying to put this into context. Say you’re applying for a full-time job and you say “I give everything 1000%”. Would the employer snap you up on the logic that if you give “everything” 1000%, that perhaps you’d work 1000% MORE? Say the job was for 40 hours per week, does this mean you’re willing to give your employer 400 hours a week of work? There’s only 168 hours in a week?!

I’m really committed to finishing the post now. I think I’ll give it 99.99%! lol

To read the story, click the link below…

BBC NEWS | Magazine | The death of 100%

Where Has Morality Gone?

There is a big story in Australia at the moment regarding sex scandals between groups of professional, high profile sportsmen and young women who participate in “consensual” group sex with these sportsmen.

Not all incidents are evidently consensual though. The ABC’s current affairs programme Four Corners looked into the way NRL (National Rugby League) players conduct themselves off-field and their attitudes to alcohol and women.

I’ve been reading the transcript of the Four Corners programme and my word, some of the reading is disgusting.

Some of the behaviour highlighted is beyond belief. One of the teams season launches (the Manly Sea Eagles) was so fuelled with bad drunken behaviour, I found myself slack-jawed reading about it. There was an incident involving Sea Eagles player Anthony Watmough in which he was at the ceremony badly intoxicated and was abusive to one young lady – apparently for the appalling reason that she couldn’t remember his name and didn’t recognise him as the “famous footy player” he so believed he is! He then went on to verbally abuse her to her own father, saying “How could you let her leave the house dressed like that?” (for obviously Mr Watmough believed her to be scantily clad) and then proceeded to punch him!!

Another incident highlighted saw team members from a different club behave in a disorderly fashion at a University campus. What’s wrong with that? I hear you ask. Well, not anything especially, other than the players had absolutely no reason to be AT the campus, and one helped himself to trying to sexually abuse a young woman who was sleeping in her dorm. Yes, she was intoxicated herself, but she was in her OWN private dorm, asleep! She didn’t invite him back to her dorm, she didn’t consent to anything. She was asleep in her dorm, and this player just walked into her room and assaulted her!

Another incident saw a group of players take back a “footy groupie” to a hotel room and forced her to perform oral sex on several players whilst being filmed on mobile phones. She was actually told to say that she’d given her consent to the sex acts, TO camera!!

A woman who was involved in arranging “groupy” meetings with footballers on Facebook said that one of the men present told her about the incident. She wanted to know if she knew the woman and so asked the player who she was. He replied “oh, just some slurry from around Cronulla.” (Cronulla is a suburb in Sydney’s south.)

One of the biggest stories to surface in recent years was an incident that happened with members of the Canterbury Bulldogs team in 2004. It was during an away game which saw players staying at a Coffs Harbour resort involved in a group sex act with a young woman. There was an investigation. Team members were interviewed, but no charges were laid. There didn’t appear to be any indication the group sex was consensual, and the woman in question was insulted by the players and discarded.

Roy Masters, sports writer and former NRL coach, seemed to believe that players participated in group sex activities as part of a “bonding exercise”. That is the most unbelievably disgusting excuse I’ve ever heard. By way of airing that opinion it is tantamount to condoning it!

Four Corners revealed that two years before the Bulldogs sex scandal, there was another sex scandal that took place while (surprise, surprise, given their high regard for women) the Cronulla Sharks team were on tour in New Zealand.

Four Corners spoke to a woman they referred to as “Clare”. She told the programme she was invited back to one of the players rooms. She was initially accompanied by two players. What was to follow was (in her testimony) NON-consensual group sex. She described aspects of the incident in detail, including mauling and mass fondling of her body and having players sexual organs probed and rammed into her face. Players were either having intercourse with her, sexually abusing her in some other way, or in the room masturbating over what was taking place. Clare was 19 years old at the time.

Over the last seven years she has had a severe alcohol problem, has been suicidal and now has to bare the brunt of Australian public opinion, in which a vast swathe just believe her to be a whore, a trouble-maker and someone who, quite frankly, deserved what she got!

I think that is absolutely disgusting. Clare named one player in particular that she remembered from the ordeal, Matthew Johns. Given what I’ve seen in the past, not the brightest colour in the crayon set. He is now an ex-player and has a role in presenting a tawdry television programme, called The Footy Show, based loosely on discussing the weeks football (NRL), but more about juvenile antics and supposed “funny” segments. Johns has an alter ego on the show called Reg Reagan. From what I’ve seen he’s as about as funny as a tooth canal. What classes for humour in my country of birth sometimes leaves me in despair. But to each their own, I suppose.

Mr Johns doesn’t deny being involved in the incident. In fact, he admits to having sex with her! And he’s a married man, but that’s okay, all is forgiven. But if he had a modicum of decency, he’d at least reveal who the other team members were in the room with him. Oh, but no, he’s keeping schtum, so is his team-mate Brett Firman, who also admits to having sex with Clare. But in a rather un-team-like manner, all other members are keeping quiet and not revealing their involvement.

There was a police investigation at the time in New Zealand, and no charges were laid.

Last week Mr Johns made some pathetic statement about the accusations raised in the Four Corners programme and subsequently through the rest of the TV and print media.

You can’t say sorry enough. Maybe to your family, but absolutely nothing to Clare. Nothing like “If I have caused upset, anguish and pain to the lady involved, I unreservedly apologise”. No, nothing like that. What a man, eh?! What a hero!! Co-host Paul “Fatty” Vautin goes on to say, after the statement, “Alright mate, well said. Alright, let’s get on with the show”. FFS! That’s disgusting.

Channel Nine (makers of the Footy Show) then stood Johns down from his presenting role. Some sanity prevailed.

Sadly, you only have to see the comments on the YouTube clip, and the numerous Facebook groups to know that the tide of support is behind Johns.

One of the most eye-opening things in this whole Four Corners report was the attitude the younger players were shown to have in reference to sexual abuse on woman and men. Shown two video clips in which in the first incident a woman goes to a hotel room with two players, has consensual sex with one, but gets raped by the other, the general consensus by the players was “She put out first”. So the fact that she had consensual sex with the first man didn’t justify her saying “NO” to the second. Other comments went “She flirted with them both.” That, basically, she asked for it! Nice! Asked whether they thought the players might face consequences, the opinion of the players was that male number two (the rapist) might, but male number one (the seemingly consensual participant) might “get away with it” depending “how good his lawyer is” says one player!! My word!

Given a second video to watch in which a drunken man is raped by a member of the same sex, the opinions and views of the young players changes somewhat. I don’t think I need to explain that in this incidence all the players realise that what happened was unjustified, immorally wrong, and actually WAS rape. One player, having a particular epiphany says “You don’t really ask for trouble if you have too much to drink and get raped by a bloke. You don’t ask for that.”

REALLY?

One of the older players there, showing the videos says to the young men “Can we see that there’s some sort of double standard that may apply here? The girl’s gone out to have a drink. No one said that she didn’t ask for it but yet the male goes out and has a drink and it’s crystal clear that he didn’t ask for it.”

Lord help me I can hear the groans of realisation and epiphanies as I type.

I rest my case.

Inject Your Cheeks With Sugar…

for that “pregnant glow”. MORE cosmetic madness from Friday’s Daily Telegraph in Sydney. The new rage is to get hyaluronic acid (which is SUGAR – the new fangled “wonder” being brandied about in nearly EVERY face cream advert I’ve seen in the last 18 months is just flippin SUGAR?) injected into your cheeks so you can have a healthy “expectant mother” glow to your face.

 

What is this world coming to, SERIOUSLY!?

 

 

 

Doctor Who – Planet of the Dead

Just watched it an hour ago. Try very hard not to give away anything in my little review of it.

It’s MY opinion (my opinion okay, and I know my taste differs from others, so just wanted to highlight that it’s MY opinion and I’m not trying to put anyone off watching it. You can form your own opinion) that this was a wasted special.

The script was VERY light. I’d been listening to David Tennant being interviewed all week on the radio and he referred to the episode as being a “romp”. To me that would imply that it was pacy and exhilarating. Neither of these elements were reflected to me in the episode. Perhaps it felt different to David as he was filming it. It certainly didn’t come across on the screen to me.

Michelle Ryan’s character Lady Christina wasn’t a very interesting character. I found her irritating to the highest degree and I saw nothing redeeming about her. I just wanted her to pi** off actually.

Lee Evans’ character, Malcolm, was really good.

There was nothing scary about the aliens in the episode, about the Doctor’s predicament, or the location he found himself in.

There was the VAGUEST hint at what’s to come towards the end of the episode, but for Whovian’s who like their spoilers, it wasn’t revealing anything we don’t already know – POTENTIALLY.

All in all, I just came away from it disappointed. Just four precious episodes we have this year (the next now rumoured to be shown in November), so there should have been something more substantial to this script, but it just didn’t happen. Russell T. Davies and Gareth Roberts worked together on the script. Roberts scripted episodes “The Shakespeare Code” (S3E2) and “The Unicorn and The Wasp” (S4E7), both of which I like, particularly the latter. But obviously together, RTD and Roberts didn’t work writing it together. Sorry guys.

There were some funny elements, but I still come away thinking, “What a waste of one of David’s final episodes as Doctor Ten”. Just disappointed.

6/10

False Prophets.

Or profits. However you want to use it.
Advertising campaigners are…

Two points I want to make. Firstly, the advert for the Venus Embrace advert. The one below is the American version of the advert, but it says the same thing as the UK advert almost verbatim. Let me just point out before I continue, it is a FIVE BLADE razor. FIVE BLADES! And what is the selling point being declared about this FIVE BLADE razor? “Get VIRTUALLY every hair”. There’s FIVE FREAKIN’ BLADES! How can you only claim to get VIRTUALLY every hair? What is the point of having FIVE blades if even five of them can’t get every hair? That’s pathetic!!

The other is the now criminal overuse of lash inserts in mascara adverts. How am I to make a proper judgement on the “best” mascara (assuming that obviously the criteria for the perfect lash is to have the longest) if ALL the mascara adverts show models with lash inserts? You might as well have done with it and buy the flippin’ lash inserts!! Not only now do mascaras offer length, they (allegedly) offer volume – so now you too can look like you have the lashes of a camel. I mean, WTF? For starters, I can’t really fathom the obsession for having longer, fully lashes. They are just eyelashes FFS!

Do the cosmetic companies just prey on all the bubble-headed ladies (and/or men, if they are not using their own targeted MAN-scara) that don’t read the “model wears lash inserts” small print on the screen? I can’t believe the cosmetic companies can get away with the whole “lash inserts” thing, just by needing to declare the model is wearing them. To advertise the product, they should have to show the models with no enhancements…ha ha ha!! Like that’ll EVER happen…

Media_http3bpblogspot_hfkul

This still is from a Rimmel London advert with Sophie Ellis-Bexter. It not only declares that lash inserts were used but also says “enhanced in post production”, so not even the lash inserts were enough of a con job on their own. Shame on you Rimmel!

Just in case you can’t read it clearly, the small print reads “Filmed with lash inserts and enhanced in post production.”

The Passing of Jade.

Jade Goody died this morning after what was NOT a long battle with cervical cancer by any means. She had only been diagnosed in August of last year (if memory serves me).

For those of you reading my blog outside the UK, Jade came to national prominence from being on Big Brother in 2002. She didn’t win, she only came 3rd (I think), but she’d won over the nation. More as an object of ridicule really with statements like “I thought East Anglia was abroad?”, when in fact it’s a region of South East England. She also appeared naked on screen after many weeks in the house when she had gone from her slender size 10 when she entered, to a then size 16. She also appeared to have given a BJ to one of her fellow housemates PJ (yes, you can imagine the headlines surrounding that!). But somehow, despite all this, and the seeming ridicule she was viewed with, she won over the nations hearts.

She ended up in every other way but factually, the BB 2002 winner. She was in magazines, she started dating a TV presenter (and ended up with a much higher profile than even HE had), started to run her own beauty therapy centre, slimmed down and brought out a fitness DVD, had children and was constantly in the lime light. She became a celebrity in her own right.

As a result of this, she ended up in the celebrity edition of Big Brother in 2007. And then the tide of public adoration – which was now less as an object of ridicule as she’d actually seemed to be achieving things with her life – waned as she became embroiled in the racial slurring of fellow CBB housemate Shilpa Shetty. She was by no means the only person involved. She came under a lot of fire and to her credit she always answered to her critics and continuiously and strenuiously apologised for her behaviour in the house.

She was then seen somewhat as a media whore. I never really had anything against the girl and I don’t now but I must admit I was sceptical at how genuine her apologies for what happen in the CBB house were. I was sceptical whether she really was capable of understanding how potentially wrong her actions in the house were. I say potentially, because upon reflection her actions were a “storm in a tea cup” comapred to how other housemates behaved. But she copped the biggest villification.

She did all she could to rectifiy it and win over the nations hearts again, but the damage had been done. She’d lost favour. Lost curry – as it were.

Then last year, she had just entered the Indian Big Brother house when she was notified that a pap smear result from a test she’d taken the previous week was positive. She was advised to return to the UK as soon as possible.

It was revealed a few days later she’d been diagnosed with cervical cancer. There were a few stinging comments from some circles akin to “Good! Couldn’t happen to a nicer person.”. As much as I was resistant to the Goody “charms” for the most part, I didn’t wish the woman ill will. I certainly didn’t see her having cervical cancer as some disgusting vindication or retribution for her behaviour in the CBB house, as some malinged people had.

I’m sorry for her and her family that her life has been cut short. I feel for her two young sons in particular. But I cannot help but feel that some public sympathy is being over emphasised. People making absurd comments, for example Stephen Fry who tweeted comments like “I suppose she was a kind of Princess Diana from the wrong side of the tracks” – erm, as much as I love you Stephen – PARDON? Is Jade now forever going to be known as “the People’s Chav”? WTF?

It is a tragic end to a life, I grant you that one. She was only 27 after all. But I am going to refrain from any expression of actual remorse for her death as I didn’t know her and am not going to pretend I did. I feel pity for those people out there going “poor Jade”, like they knew her. I find that sickening.

My condolensces go to her nearest and dearest. She divided opinion in the end. She was selling on her story to make an income while she could to leave to her sons. I’m not sure if they’ll end up thanking her. I guess we’ll have to find out in several years time.

R.I.P. Jade. It was nice (not really) knowing you.

You’re Not On Facebook?! Am *I* A Loser, Or Are *You*?

The BBC asked people on the “Have Your Say” forums to explain why they were not signed to Facebook (those who are STILL not signed up that is – as those who are signed up are free to leave comments too). Here are some of the misguided and ill-informed reasons why some people have not joined…

I’ve never joined Facebook because…

… I can’t imagine why anyone wants to tell everyone they know about all their personal information, what they’re thinking, where they’re going, what they’re doing. Worse than anything is the Single/relationship facility, which in the event of a relationship break-up immediately forces you into a position where you have to talk about something you probably really don’t want to talk about – either that or you leave everyone misinformed that you’re still in the relationship, and even worse your ex has probably used his/her Facebook to let the world know you aren’t. What a mug’s game.

Maybe because A) No one *HAS* to reveal all their personal information and those that do do it aren’t really hurting anyone – apart from potentially themselves (by revealing too much info). B) No one has to reveal their relationship status and turn it into a soap opera. Again, those that do aren’t hurting anyone, and if the break-up is thrashed out online, well, those concerned are a bit vacuous anyway. But please don’t put ALL Facebook users in the same boat.

…if I want people to know stuff about me, I’ll tell them myself. Facebook is the daily equivalent of a round-robin letter. If a friend of mine has news they want me to know, I’d prefer they made the effort to tell me directly rather than expect me to read their page to find out their news. I’m not going to check my friends’ pages just to read: “Eaten a pot noodle”, “Taken the dog for a walk”. If it’s important enough for me to know, it should be important enough to tell me directly. As for long-lost friends, I’ve not changed my email address nor mobile since I first got them years ago. If they want to get in touch, they can use those, otherwise we’re probably been out of touch so long it would be like chatting to a stranger.

I can understand what this person is saying, re: the round-robin stuff. I get put off by it myself. But if you have a piece of generalised information you want to share with everyone, why would you waste time generating individual emails, texts, etc? My niece informed me (and the rest of my/her family and friends) of her pregnancy via Facebook and I see nothing wrong with that at all. It was a shared experience of us all expressing our joy at her news. It was lovely. For those family members she is closest to (her parents and siblings) she told face to face.

What if a person lost your email address? Okay, so it’s the same one you’ve had for 5 years, but how many email addresses do you know off-by-heart? Many are long-winded and most people just hit “reply” when sending back emails. If you lost information in your email client, say your address book, would you know a person’s email address? Some addresses that people have had for years, I still get muddled, like Bec’s address. So, if someone, tragically, loses this person’s email address, as far as their concerned, it’s bad fuppin’ luck they’ll never have contact again? What a tosser!!

FaceBook is yet another indication of just how self-obsessed and self-absorbed we have all become. It’s nothing more than the online equivalent of jumping up and down shouting “ME, ME, ME, look at ME”.

Well, you don’t have to take any notice of it. You made a comment on a forum, that’s a little bit “me, me, ME” and “aren’t MY opinions VERY important” to me, but no one’s slagging you off! Well, I am 🙂

…it is for losers.
I have a life with real friends….

Well, bully for you. Aren’t you the height of status?! You could have the most vacuous friends on Earth, just because you converse with them face to face doesn’t make you any better than me for not having a Facebook account. What an absolute wanker!

I’ve never joined Facebook because…
I’ve never used a computer.

Erm, how did they leave this comment then, on an online forum?! lol Made me giggle this one. Obviously the person was being ironic.

“Danger! Danger Will Robinson!” The reason I don’t have a ‘presence’ on the web via either a website or a social site is the fact that I wouldn’t control who could and could not access the information. Too much information is often a bad thing.

You are an absolute ignorant f*ck if you think just because you are not on Facebook or any other social network that you are safe to browse the Internet. You have a “presence” on the web by just being ON IT, you dick!!! The fact that you are BROWSING and have an INTERNET CONNECTION is ENOUGH for someone to hack into your system and gather all the information they can about you. How deluded is this idiot?!

I didn’t think I’d be defending Facebook. It has its flaws, granted. You can be secure using it (well, as secure as anyone can be using the Internet and browsing). As another person said, to Facebook’s defence, it’s just another communication tool that is handy for people, especially those with far-flung friends all around the world. No one is forcing you to use it, and you are not a bot or social sycophant for doing so. You’re just using another source available to you for keeping in contact with people.

There. I’ve had my rant. Thank you HYS!!

99 Things – It Was Meant To Be 100, but the last was for tagging.

You know I’m a sucker for a list. Saw this on Facebook, wasn’t tagged to do it, so thought I’d do it here instead.

001. Real name → Larelle Read (ne McInnes)
002. Nickname(s) → Loz, Lozzy, Teds, Teddy
003. Zodiac sign → Scorpio
004. Male or female → Female
005. Elementary School → Busby Infants School
006. Middle School → Busby Primary School
007. High School → Miller Technology H.S./Hoxton Park H.S.
008. Hair color → natural brown, atm
009. Long or short → v. short
010. Loud or Quiet → (in ref to what? My hair? My state of mind?) Quiet
011. Sweats or Jeans → Sweats at home, jeans when out.
012. Phone or Camera → Camera phone
013. Health freak → No, but trying to improve my health.
014. Drink or Smoke? → Drink on the rare occasion. Smoked in the past, but not now.
015. Do you have a crush on someone? → Yes, but he’s completely unobtainable.
016. Eat or Drink → (Pardon? What? As a vice? What do I prefer in general? Who asks these stupid questions?) Both, in moderation…
017. Piercings → 2 in left ear, one in right – all closed over now though.
018. Tattoos → 1 of a rose bud on my left shoulder.

HAVE YOU EVER?
019. Been in an aeroplane → Hell yes, too many times!
020. Been in a relationship → Yes
021. Been in a car accident → A very minor accident – no one was hurt.
022. Been in a fist fight → A very, VERY long time ago.

FIRSTS:
023. First piercing → Ears when I was around 7/8 years old.
024. First best friend → John and Louise
025. First award → Can’t remember
026. First crush → Only remember his first name – David
027. First big vacation→ A trip to Perth, WA to stay with my Uncle in the summer of 1979/1980.

LASTS:
029. Last person you talked to → Em
030. Last person you texted → Em (again)
031. Last person you watched a movie with → Em (yet again)
032. Last food you ate → Cinnamon grahams for breakfast.
033. Last movie you watched → Lars and The Real Girl
034. Last song you listened to → Love Shack – B52’s
035. Last thing you bought → Clothes for Em
036. Last person you hugged → (erm) Em

FAVES:
037. Food → Thai
038. Drinks → Pepsi Max (which I hardly ever have now), milkshakes – proper ones
039. Clothing → Jeans, long tunic tops, cardigans, cotton clothes.
040. Flower → Gerberas, Hyacinths and Frangipani
041. Animal → Birds, big cats and British wildlife (hedgehogs, badgers, foxes)
042. Colours → Pink (I do choose it a lot for things), pastels, and black
043. Movies → Anything really, but mostly comedies, rom coms, zom coms/horror and dramas.
044. Subjects → Science (biology, chemistry) and history

IN 2008….. I

045. [x] kissed someone
046. [] celebrated Halloween
047. [] had your heart broken
048. [x] went over the minutes on your cell phone
049. [] questioned someone’s sexual orientation
050. [] came out of the closet
051. [] gotten pregnant/got someone pregnant- lost it
052. [] had an abortion
053. [x] done something you’ve regretted
054. [] broke a promise
055. [] hid a secret
056. [x] pretended to be happy
057. [] met someone who changed your life
058. [] pretended to be sick
059. [] left the country
060. [] tried something you normally wouldn’t try and liked it
061. [] cried over the silliest thing
062. [] ran a mile
063. [] went to the beach with your best friend(s)
064. [x] got into an argument with your friends
065. [] hated someone
066. [] stayed single the whole year

CURRENTLY:
067. Eating → Nothing
068. Drinking → Tea
069. I’m about to → browse about and check online orders
070. Listening to → Nothing
071. Plans for today → web browsing, tweeting, hopefully knit a little, watch TV, etc (it’s an exciting life!)
072. Waiting for → more online shopping to arrive and the snow to melt

YOUR FUTURE:
073. Want kids? → no
074. Want to get married? → already married
075. Careers in mind → pipedream – vet or vetinery nurse

WHICH IS BETTER WITH GIRL/BOY?
076. Lips or eyes → eyes
077. Shorter or taller? → taller
078. Romantic or spontaneous → romantic
079. Nice stomach or nice arms → not fussed about the arms, don’t want abs either, as long as there’s no beer-belly.
080. Sensitive or loud → sensitive, mostly…loud can be annoying
081. Hook-up or relationship → booty call!!
082. Trouble-maker or hesitant → hesitant (not when it comes to the booty call tho)

HAVE YOU EVER:
083. Lost glasses/contacts → yes, sunglasses
084. Ran away from home → yes, in a very crap way, when I was 10yrs old.
085. Hold a gun/knife for self defence → no
086. Killed somebody → no
087. Broken someone’s heart → I think I have
088. Been arrested → no
089. Cried when someone died → yes (you’d have to be one cold, heartless bastard if you didn’t – I’m sure I know a few ppl who wouldn’t)

DO YOU BELIEVE IN:
090. Yourself → no a lot
091. Miracles → maybe, I think
092. Love at first sight → No, lust is what it is, not love.
093. Heaven → A kind of heaven
094. Santa Claus → Yes!
095. Sex on the first date → Hell yes, if they are fit and all, and willing…
096. Kiss on the first date → Yes.

ANSWER TRUTHFULLY:
097. Is there one person you want to be with right now?→ yes
098. Are you seriously happy with where you are in life? → not really, but who is? I know it could be worse. I’m not complaining…
099. Do you believe in God? → no

I’ve left 100 off, ‘cos it wasn’t a question, it said “tag 10 ppl”. I’m not tagging this time.

Even People At The Darts Want To Know

As Pixie-Anne Wheatley on Fast Forward used to say (if you’re Australian, you might get the reference), “It’s the question that’s on the lips and tips of everyone’s thingies”…

Media_http3bpblogspot_zmfkg

Very strange to see the Royal fraternity at the darts last night. Both Mike Tindle (Zara Philips’ squeeze) and Peter Philips were there. Gawd, even the hoi polloi at the darts. How poosh!!