A Distorted Reality.

Rape victims told alcohol consumption may cost them compensation.

And I don’t understand the outrage. You get drunk and you lose your ability to defend yourself, you lose certain awarenesses of your surroundings, you become more vulnerable: but all of this is voluntary – nobody forced these women to drink. Their drinking led to an increased likelihood of getting into a situation where they would be likely to be raped. I’m not saying that they deserved it, or were ‘asking for it’ (that would indeed be an awful thing to say), but they made themselves accomplices to their rapists. I find it far more offensive and far more concerning that one of the women affected by this was awarded full amount (£11,000 of taxpayer’s money) after her solicitor claimed that the 25% cut amounted to ‘indirect sexual discrimination’: notice how no claim like this has ever been made for the patently direct sexual discrimination of the legal definition of rape excluding male victims of sexual assault. Here is evidenced another example of how the knife does not cut both ways: everyone wants equality so long as it benefits them or makes them a little more equal than everyone else.

This raises another point: I don’t understand the logic behind the existence of CICA, nor do I understand why victims of crimes should be given compensation appropriated from taxpayer’s funds: the sixty-one million people of the United Kingdom did not each commit a crime against any given victim, only a handful (at most) did. These multi-thousand pounds payouts at a time would be better spent improving policing in order to 1) prevent these crimes and 2) catch the criminals behind these awful acts.

Being a victim of a violent crime should not be viable as a secondary income stream.

This scares me no end.

20% of supposedly intelligent, fully trained medical professionals polled in America believe that ‘God’ (whatever form that construct would take) is capable of reversing terminal prognoses. These people who have studied the diseases concerned; seen first hand their effects and their pathology; these people who should understand why ‘terminal’ is given the definition that it is: they are claiming that an invisible friend could reverse the progress of a disease.

Surely this affects the efficacy of the concerned 20%? Rather than attempting the use of empirically-backed scientific methodology, their faith in divine intervention may lead to a somewhat lax attitude in treating the not-quite-terminal-but-not-far-off. Granted, this does assume a huge lapse in professionalism which would not be befitting of the vast majority of hard-working, dedicated healthcare staff; but there must exist fundamentalists within the profession (purely on the rule of averages) who would rather wait for God’s approval that someone deserves to be treated (by God’s own hand, no less) rather than treat them themselves.

OK, I know that I am being beyond sensationalist: but isn’t it a worry that people who could believe that something unprovable may be a better cure for disease than well-researched, heavily-proven science may be in charge of your care? I don’t believe that science and religion should ever overlap: religious, doctrine-instilled ethics should have no bind on medical ethics. The stem cell debate should purely be an analysis of the cost of a handful of potential (and indeed only potential) lives against the benefit of these sacrifices’ to many millions of others; rather than the inclusion of the risk of the incurrence of God’s almighty wrath.

The 57% of ‘average’ people believing in the power of prayer is somewhat more understandable: people cling to whatever hope that they are able to in times of great stress, such as the impending death of a loved one. And I suppose that the emotional stress of watching person after person die helplessly would push doctors inclined to do so into the realms of belief in divine intervention; but the stereotypical ‘consultant’s indifference’ would be a far more palatable alternative to a prayer for me.

I love when the subservients of the Christian (or otherwise) Church commit folly ill-befitting of their supposed ‘higher’ moral stations: it really does, with no reservations make me smile. Today, I had the (admittedly guilty) pleasure of reading of a priest admitting child porn charges. To add further hilarity, of sorts, to this story; he was also the Chairman of Governors at a local school. I’m always reminded of quotes such as this from Luke 18:16:

But Jesus called them unto him, and said, Suffer little children to come unto me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God.

In essence: Jesus loved kids, why shouldn’t you? God’s kingdom does not disallow such things.

And, actually, thinking back on it: you see biblical passages condemning the lying of man with man; but never anything about the lying of man with non-developed woman. A lot of the Christian imagery of Jesus is shown as him being a naked child: some religious sceptics have used this as evidence of a Christian upbringing, surrounded by the imagery, predisposing children to aspirations of the love depicted by this image: young, pure and perfect; innocence which could only be found again in the young.

The bible is full of sexual doctrine-based contradictions. Compare:

Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.

of Leviticus 18:22 and:

In eternity there is neither male nor female.

of Galatians 3:28. Surely if gender is irrelevant in eternity, it should be in the earthly life – it’s only putting one thing in line with another. Of course, we should never forget the inherent contradictions of the sexual guidance given above and the later advice, in Romans:

To be carnally minded is death, but to be spiritually minded is life… The carnal mind is enmity against God … They that are in the flesh cannot please God … If you live after the flesh, you shall die: but if you through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, you shall live.

There you have it: kill your inner shameful pleasures and you shall live for eternity.

A friend and I, following an amazing idea on his part, have a project of sorts on our hands.

We want to, in a manner which will not plainly be ignored (such as the tragic UK Youth Parliament), show the political and social awareness of the 18-29 year old age bracket: with the benefit of looking back upon past election results and presumptions made as to the loyalties of the electorate by the time of the next General Election (assuming the beginning of an economic recession pushing disenfranchised Tories to the likes of UKIP and the BNP), we’ve come to the conclusion that this age group would be substantial enough a force to completely alter the outcome of the Sutton Coldfield constituency election; even with the 26% Conservative majority at 2005’s election.

We aim to show passion in the youth for the future and the realisation of the use of democracy to achieve noble and realistic goals, rather than the centrist monoculture’s continuation of inaction for the youth for at least another 4 years: save the smear campaigns of our rapidly decaying moral fibre in the face of our non-conventional family ‘units’. Our method would be through the formation of a voting bloc of those in this age group: a list of signatories whose votes shall be delivered to he who deems himself most inclined to serve the interests of our group: a potential 11,000 votes, from our math, should we be able to get all of those of our target group involved.

It’s our hope that this will snowball and cause similar movements elsewhere: revolution through the ballot boxes; manipulation through a right given to us.

It’s a noble idea, no?

I was going to write a post about the Conservatives’ Breakthrough Britain policy suggestions this evening, but I then realised that the report is 861 pages long. So, tonight I shall take the easy way out, and just comment upon the delightful fifteen page report commissioned upon only problems in Birmingham (entitled Breakthrough Birmingham); which is apparently the hotbed of ‘worklessness’ of all of the UK’s main cities.

The report starts as would be expected really: a short introduction from Iain Duncan Smith followed by some initial ’state of the city’ declarations: as of May 2007, 21% of Birmingham adults were claiming key benefits being the main point standing out to me. Key failures in Birmingham’s educational system are pointed out reasonably objectively and rationally. Then, as would be expected of a report commissioned by the Conservative Party, the inevitable descent into description of the moral decay intrinsic of non-conventional family structures is hit upon:

Family breakdown

• At the time of the 2001 census, there were 37,696 lone parent households in Birmingham – almost 30 per cent of all households. This figure is 34 percent higher than the national rate of 21.8 per cent.
• In Birmingham, more than one in 20 girls between the ages of 15-17 will become pregnant – this is above the national rate of one in 24.
• In Birmingham 78 children per 10,000 are looked after by the Local Authority – this compares to 55 per 10,000 nationally.

Having a working role model at home increases the chances of a child being in work in adulthood. The worklessness rate for lone parents nationally is 42 percent, compared to 5 per cent for couple households with dependent children. Strengthening the family would have considerable impact on the number of children living in a household with a working role model and would therefore improve their future prospects.
This would also have much broader implications. Children from families that have experienced family breakdown are also much more likely to become teenage mothers or get involved in crime. The family environment is instrumental in the physical, emotional and psychological development of a child and the pressures of economic dependency put considerable strain on its stability.

The shorter version: Birmingham is pretty fucked up, basically. Teenage whores and single mothers abound, producing children bound to be nought but a burden. I must admit: I am biased here, being the product of a single-mother family myself; but their points are made moot by reality. Worklessness is higher amongst single parents in order that they are able to look after their children more readily in many cases: would they rather have the children lack even this supposedly ‘unbritish’ stability? The children’s ‘future prospects’ are not bound by the origins of their parents, but rather the capabilities and support of parents: and that is the true issue, not this structure snobbishness so popular with all three of our centrist parties.

The two areas of Birmingham chosen as case studies are known within the city as being amongst the worst: Sparkbrook and Balsall Heath. Most inhabitants of the Birmingham/Greater Birmingham area would also be aware that these areas being chosen would be indicative of the Conservatives’ slight xenophobic bent, having the highest Asian and Black populations in the city. Educational failure in these areas is put down mostly to English being a second language for many students: surely this is more of an immigration issue than a social one.

People living in deprivation and experiencing multiple pathways to poverty are more likely to be involved in crime, or addicted to drugs and alcohol. Marginalised in society, self belief and aspirations are significantly reduced. People therefore turn to negative sources of affirmation and inclusion.

I call bullshit: I doubt there to be any marginalisation other than that caused by the proliferation of the tertiary sector: if not for the strong desire for supposed ‘professionals’, even the uneducated would be able to find work as, for lack of a better term, factory-fodder. They’d still be living in deprivation, but they’d have work: something which is genuinely lacking in Birmingham.

The supposed solutions also leave a little to be desired; it’s all just advice bordering on ‘throw money at the problem’. Welfare-to-work schemes are hardly a new idea, with the entired organisation of the Job Centre being (admittedly haplessly) in existence solely for this task. An idea (and nothing more) of reinventing the welfare system is suggested, with only the core tenet of ‘incentivising work’ – it’s nothing concrete. Of course, the suggestion is made that the institution (archiac as it may be) of marriage should be recognised and rewarded; and that a two parent foundation should be blessed: I see this as nothing short of a veiled promotion of traditionally Christian values.

They still want nothing but to help those who ‘help themselves’.

My Mr. Dialysis and Astro Reality articles on Starve in Heaven caused somewhat of a shitstorm. This, in all honesty, was kind of the intention; but some of the responses really made my days. The fanboy/fangirl-ism that these two convey is really something special. I’ll take you through some of the amazing arguments on display here, left in their original format:

• Dude you spend far too long saying “i dont like them”. People like you should die young. Prick. – I hate the word ‘dude’, as a starter. It’s just somewhat… disgusting. I suppose the sort of people who would post this are fans of monosyllabicisms – as demonstrated by the universally understood insult of ‘prick’. Besides, being able to express opinions at length is a wonderful skill.
• Mate you sound like a nob – I like how wonderfully fluently my flaws were pointed out.
• Al Young do you have lots of people who adore your music? Al Young do you have better things to do ? – First question: no, but my art > your art. Besides, I wouldn’t want your kind of scene-whoring skanks adoring my work; it would be unsettling, if nothing else. And no, I do not have better things to do: I enjoy doing this.
• al young should be shot in the head for being such a prick. Lots of people like astro and all the other bands he’s critisised. Maybe he’s just trying to male a name for himself but I think he’s just a twat. Who probably writes reviews whilst were all having sex. – This was the best thing that I had read in months, and it only came in yesterday. This has all of the hallmarks of Internet Tough Guy Syndrome: threats of violence, woeful spelling and the almost omnipresent insinuation of sexual inadequacy. It’s almost quaint, really. As for a lot of people liking it making it good, a lot of people liked the execution of Jews in extermination camps. Think about that one. I do not care that I went for the most extreme example possible there.
• I hope you do something good in you life, go traveling or something do something to broaden your narrow little minds. – here, we have the argument of superiority through implied intellectual enlightenment above mine. The use of ‘little’ really undermined my self-esteem.
• So why ruin your argument by putting in something as petty as this? – petty is fun; as well as being a humorous rhetorical device.
• go suck on cream eggs – seriously, the only time ever that I have not had a response to a point in argument. It really threw me off.
• if you’re chicken enough to post a blog about someone you hardly know, who knows if you’re man enough to post a blog including your real name. – conspiracy nut, perchance?
• Anyway, i’ll leave you to post more blogs insulting people and knit-picking their faults, it seems to be what gets you off when most kids tend to prefer to go out and get laid, but whatever floats your boat man. – again, my sexual inadequacy is played upon. I actually measured my penis after reading this to make sure that it was still of an average size. It was, thank god.
• i bet ‘al’ is a full on nerd – this is an undeniable truism. He totally got me.
• Your argument has no direction, meaning, and you probably have no mental stability. – but my argument got in the Alexa top 100,000 for the UK for a couple of weeks, so I don’t really care. And the lithium levels me out.
• You must have spent over 5 hours in this sqwibble writing your “hilarious” responses. - actually, probably more like 10 minutes, but I think on my feet.
• And mate, i have seen a picture of you, i strongly advise you sort yourself out, you cant take the piss out of anyone, the way you are… - the poster of this had skunk hair. His opinions mean nothing to me.
• so go back naw and run to your momy and daddy in your nice well mannered english house hold, and stop being the big rebel on the internet, talking shite about people, see if you do it to peoples faces - this galled me: I’m working-class, through and through. And anyone who knows me would tell him that I do it to people’s faces.
• i bet you havent even got laid yet - another measuring moment. I really don’t get the obsession.
• can the publisher of this stupid article even express themselves in the way ben ryan does…… nocan the publisher of this stupid article even express themselves in the way ben ryan does…… no – I do not wish to express myself through the medium of rap.

I don’t get it. I really don’t.

Unfathomable clarity: such that diamonds could not even compete; a purity unbounded: the whitest of white light.

The night sky shone as only it could: ostentatiously and without inhibition. Arrogantly. Despite the astronomical distance between the stars and ourselves, their nightly communiqués were all that kept me sane. In spite of all that stood between us: from ozone to the infinite vacuum of space, we talked. I talked, they listened; they replied, I heard. Our relationship was ethereal, but more real than any other I had had: this was a true unconditional. Every night, without any possibility of failure, I would have my time with my celestial lovers: and each time it would be the same magic of their light being poured upon me with no judgement of my past. No pretence whatsoever. This action was universal, but it was also mine and mine alone. I felt… I felt cleansed. I felt like my emptiness was being reversed by the filling of heavenly light into every pore and every orifice of my body. I was pure. I was connected with the world. I was everything.

Why can’t people care about things that matter, or even take a direct action for those causes that they supposedly stand for? We have Facebook petitions and groups as a main line in political activities, and it really is tragic. Yes, collecting 1 MILLION PEOPLE AGAINST ROBERT MUGABE (case left as its group’s owners intended it to be) will really pressure a tyrant into submission. He loves the insignificant ‘voice’ of the digital generation’s pleas so much.

Stop Hillary Clinton: (One Million Strong AGAINST Hillary), 2 Million people against Female Circumcision and One Million Faces Against Malaria are just as redundant: the collections of lists of names is not going to change any one of these things. Voting, not having your female children mutilated and vaccination are the respective answers to these huge dilemmas. Doing something oneself would actually serve to combat these issues, rather than just acknowledge them in passing with your name on a fictional dotted line. If you’re going to campaign about something, get the fuck up and actively do something. Peaceful protests, polite letters to government officials, civil disobedience, violence: I do not care; just make your support for a cause count, no matter how trivial this cause is.

Then we have the practically omnipresent ‘ohmygod I lost my phone and need to tell everyone my new number’ groups: what is the point in this? As you obviously have the people to be invited to the group on your Friends list, you may as well just contact them individually. Expediency is not even a valid excuse: you can send messages to multiple recipients these days. It’s like people don’t care for their privacy: yes, just put your number in the name of the group so that friends of friends can easily obtain your contact details, should you wish them to or not.

The abundance of almost meta Facebook-groups-about-Facebook also irks me somewhat: nobody is ever going to shut down Facebook, so stop trying to get people to join your little group in your vain effort to gather a large group in your name, Anonymous God Complex Sufferer. Then there’s ‘I’m a Facebook Addict’ groups – a sad indictment of the weak will of the common man. Of late, we’re seeing ‘boo-hoo, I want the old layout back groups’, much as happened with Last.fm: it truly is a shame that people do not realise that websites (espeically websites owned by media conglomerates like CBS, in the case of Last.fm) are not democracies. And as a true exercise in redundancy, there are also several thousand (perhaps exaggerated, but a large number nonetheless) ‘Get x on Facebook!’ groups: as x is not currently on Facebook, it is unlikely that they’re going to see the group to respond to the pleas of others.

‘Well, nothing lasts forever. The permanence of nothing is guaranteed: we are born, we consume, we die – the only universal truth; the only infallible transience. Sure there are the perks inbetween the three, of course: we’d all just end life prematurely if we know the true sumtotal of our existence. We’d have nothing to aim for, would we? Luckily, we have the immeasurable distractions of sex; of violence; of bad will towards others. The beauty of biologically pre-programmed evils. We have love, my dear friend, and love conquers all. For a few minutes, at least. Goodbye, old friend: you have exuded your usefulness to me.’

The unnecessary verbosity; the pseudo-political, pseudo-philosophical, half-thought out stream of nothingness: it was comforting somehow – there was some truth in the past. The message was more unsettling by a wide margin: he had been used. He had become a pawn, a tool, whichever other DIY/board game allusions can be made to the state of becoming a facilitator of goals above all else.

Flash: the first meeting. Flash: the continued interest. Flash: the illusory ‘closeness’. Flash: the dissolution of his permanent scepticism. Flash: his trust. Flash: cynicism abated. Flash: this end. Years in months, months in weeks, weeks in days, days in hours, hours in minutes, minutes in seconds: time, in all of its transitory glory, dissolved. The larger picture broken down into smaller, more significant wallet-sized memento photographs. There was no construable sequence of a past: just a series of events which formed the ever fading present – a four-year old’s flipbook.

Shoulders sagged in a plainly observable manner, perfectly in line with the increasing distance between the two. Diaphragm relaxed; ribcage lowered: musculature just giving way, as if itself disappointed – an inch for each inch that grew between them. Lacrimal ducts opened, willing for gushes of unnecessary basal tears to satiate their lust – gushes that would not come. Anything for leucine enkephalin; just something to take the edge off of this revelation. His eyes would not yield to this desire.

Then rage. Uncontrollable, inexpressible rage: the rage of a bull. Muscle tensed as the creeping paralysis of ascending anger contracted every muscle in his body. Adrenaline became the main component of his blood: flight or fight his mental prerogative; and a fight was his brain’s preference. Fists clenched, nails bored into his palms: the sticky, sweet crimson’s exit eased by his hot rage. This was symbolic: a reminder for things to come.

‘Oculus pro oculus‘ was muttered through clenched teeth.

So yes: my iPod arrived; and no: I’m not disappointed with it. I love it, I really do: it allows me to listen to all of my music one one device, something that the other two never could. Being honest, that was the only reason for the change. In the past, I had always spouted my ‘Apple is the devil’ rhetoric: partly out of jealousy for my lack of an ability to afford their goods, but also partly out of a genuine feeling against the company; batteries and hard drives that only last a year, tops? Not cool. Super-fragile screens on £100+ consumer goods? Fucking ridiculous. Of course, my possession of two Creative players made me completely overlook the headphone jack issue that still isn’t fixed in even the newest of players. Thinking back, I sent the Micro back four times and still bought the Touch, which now suffers from the same fault – curse my youthful brand loyalty!

Price

Hah, I always start reviews with price: it’s important, I maintain. I paid £120 for the Zen Micro in 2003, I think; £40 for the Zen Touch in 2007 and £60 for the iPod, last week. Granted, I can’t objectively compare prices when one was bought new and the other two used, but it is relevant somewhat, I suppose: it shows the transience of value for such goods, and what a shame that that is. Clearly, the winner here is the iPod, the features:price ratio is much higher than the other two.

Player Firmware and Controls

I’ll treat the Micro and Touch as one entity for much of this: they pretty much have the same firmware and most functions are carried out in the same way; with the only exception of the dedicated volume control on the Touch increasing its usability above the other two greatly. It really is a tragedy that I have to somehow get to the Now Playing screen on the iPod or open a context menu on the Micro to be able to change a volume which I want to change immediately, not after a few seconds’ fiddling.

The Creative and Apple firmwares are much the same (with Apple leasing Creative’s menu style for their players) in operation and in features: with only the colour screen of the iPod allowing for cover art, photos, video etc.

One (unintended) advantage of the iPod (of this generation) is that alternative, non-stock firmwares can be used, such as Rockbox and iPod Linux (the site of which may be down), allowing for a more diverse range of features. As is oft the tragedy of open-source efforts, neither offering is completely feature-complete, with Rockbox in particular suffering from a terrible battery issue. The stock iPod firmware suffers from a little bit of slowdown, but nothing as bad as the Creative players’ 15-30 second large playlist loading time: plus, it has games, and a calendar!

The issue of firmware is another win for the iPod: the execution is a little smoother, a little slicker, and a little prettier. Again: the games help.

Looks

This is not fair. At all. iPod win again: another 3 years of design-schooling for Californians means that Creative’s offerings just look heinously ugly. The Micro is elegant, but the Touch is just blocky. And fat. Below, we have the players in order of sheer sexiness.

Software

I hate iTunes.

There, it has been said: I hate the single most popular computer media player. Why, you ask? It’s fat, it’s slow, it’s not pretty. Again, yes; I said something which could be considered a cardinal sin. Isn’t everything Apple beautiful?, I hear you scream, and the answer is no: it is not. On Windows, at least, it looks so out of place: the screen elements suit OSX just fine, but look so dreadfully out of place on Windows, and indeed in Linux (through Wine). I can’t see the hubbub about not-even-subtle supposedly-metallic gradients which are not at all pleasing to the eyes. I’m starting to think that Apple are putting something perception altering in the Kool-Aid.

Enough about aesthetics: I also hate the functionality. We have a choice between syncing all files with one computer, or managing everything manually: why can we just not sync with a sole computer and add elsewhere? Oh yes, I forgot: Apple’s yielding to the RIAA and MPAA over the ability to copy music/movies back from the player through an Apple-endorsed method (of course, this can be done through other means). It’s really a chore to add new music from a computer that isn’t at home, not to mention backing up music. I know that I could use something such as vPod, but I don’t feel that I should have to turn to 3rd parties for something that the manufacturer should provide as a courtesy for such a fucking expensive purchase – and such products don’t synchronise album art in such an elegant manner as iTunes. All this said, I love the automatic album art downloader, event though it couldn’t find any for half of my music.

Creative, on the other hand, turned to using MTP for both of my players: a universal transfer protocol engineered by Microsoft and reverse-engineered to support Windows pre-XP, Linux, Mac OSX and BSDs. This was wonderful to use: you could copy and back and forth, without the threat of being labelled a pirate. These were the good old days: these were days of trust. Drag and drop anywhere, without the computer moaning about syncing and possibly destroying everything that you have on your player: they way things should be. The Creative players win here, undoubtedly.

Durability

They are all awful in this regard.

The Verdict?

I like my not-so-new toy: I really do. If I didn’t have to use iTunes, I would like it more, but I will cope with my lack of coding prowess and not expect someone else to fix it for me.