Who want's an amateur psychology lesson? No one? Tough shit, it's about to get heavy up in this bitch.
When people say something that they don't like "makes me so depressed" it's a medical inaccuracy, like when people say something being out of place "makes my OCD act up." For the record, people who get worked up about things like that, are fucking retarded, people exaggerate shit all the time, if you can't deal with that you might have a genuine condition of your own. Depression is not an extreme form of sadness it is an impairment of brain functionality. Think of this way, alcohol is a depressant, but doesn't just make you sad. Of course sadness is a very common symptom of depression, especially in females.
The way I feel, often without any reason, is angry and alone. As I write this I'm in the middle of the only significant down time during my exam season, so it's no surprise I'm a little frayed and burnt out at the moment. Take away a stressor and you enter exhaustion. (What's that? A diagram? Shit yes!) So naturally I'm in a temporary bad spot. My brain is not filled with the immediate threat of an exam tomorrow, panic leaving creates a vacuum that causes crazy to expand and fill the void. It's been causing me to act strangely bipolar (remember the exaggerations I mentioned earlier, this is one, that's not the condition I have) I'll be revising happily (well it's revision so not happily really) then I'll have the overwhelming urge to curl up in bed and fantasise about breaking things or hurting people. With the possible exception of my bathroom wall, I've not actually caused any harm with my anger yet, so that's all good.
One thing that annoys me is the logical coping mechanism my brain has started using. It's very hard to feel angry or isolated when you're in love, so that's become a big part of my resistance to my depression... Except I'm not in love, I'm single with no romantic interests. So two things have started happening. That weird, fluttering sensation you get in your chest when you look at someone you love? (Can someone explain what that is? Adrenaline maybe?) Well I've started getting that randomly, even when alone or midway through an exam, it's one of the most bizarre feelings ever and I have no idea how to deal with or prevent it, I just feel a little awkward until it passes. The second and more problematic love based 'coping' mechanism is to constantly and uncontrollably think about the people I've loved in the past... You know, the one who came out to me, the one who left me for someone else and the one who was never interested to start with? Yeah them. I admit, the constant flashbacks to my first (and all very vivid) memories of them always makes me smile, but of course my subconscious gets excited and starts shouting "And that was just meeting them! Think about how it progressed from th- oooh yeah..." Most of the time my romantic history is a fascicle comedy that always makes me giggle, when it's an attempt to alleviate feelings of loneliness however... It's less funny to me.
I have no way to end this post, so Imma just list some points made. Exaggeration is not a cause for offence in most cases, depression and sadness are not synonymous (Guess who spelt that right first try bitches!), the exhaustion stage of exam stress is a good time to go crazy, my brain isn't good at keeping me calm, I'm a dick to walls, my love life plays out like a badly written comedy movie. That is all, no go do something useful instead of reading my bullshit
Right, lets get this out of the way up front, I'm going to use the word nigger in this post. Some of you will be offended by this, some of you might even defy logic and label me a racist as a result, nothing is changed by that. I understand the historical prejudice attached to the word, but this is true of so many offensive terms and yet of the extensive list of these words, only nigger is condemned and censored/punished universally... Except it isn't, is it? Herein lies the issue, having a word that belongs to any one specific race is a racial divide in itself, and a catalyst for tensions to arise.
The simple fact is this: equality is not the same as reversing a prejudice. Taking a word used against a group and using it to define themselves, but forbidding anyone outside that group to use the word, is a form of segregation. You cannot logically argue with that, anything (be it a word, public office, right, or seat on a fucking bus) that is only for one subset of society creates a divide in that society. Saying that black people are the ones allowed to use the word nigger is akin to saying only straight people are allowed to get married: illogical, immoral, and the product of past evils.
Now sit the fuck down and pay attention, this is the important bit. I'm not saying that any use of the word nigger is ok, it is an offensive term with an especially dark past, but words like faggot, paki and the like are all (while rightly censored in a lot of public media) in common use. Not only gays use faggot, not only Pakistanis use paki. Derogatory terms are not acceptable in the context of purposefully attacking anyone for being different to you. Out of context however, the word is just that, a word, nothing more. People need to learn the difference between a word and a label.
In this post so far I have used the word nigger only 3 times before this paragraph, so one per paragraph. All of these uses are about the word itself, I have not referred to anyone as a nigger, or called black people as a whole "niggers," I never have done and never will (if you're about to type a comment telling me that this sentence is me doing just that... I'd prescribe a swift course of euthanasia applied via a back-flip into the grand canyon) because I understand the power that words have to separate and hurt people. This applies to the examples above among other terms, but that power to separate is shown just as much and I'd argue in just a dark light by splitting people into the groups "ok to say nigger" and "racist if they say nigger" based on nothing more than race. No one should be labled a nigger, and either no one should say nigger, or no one should be branded something they're not as a result of using the word.
Finally, regarding the event that lead to this post: I think that a rhyme with the line "catch a nigger by his toe" is inappropriate for use anywhere on the BBC, however veiled. That said, it's use does not make Jeremy Clarkson a racist and the whole thing has been blown hugely out of proportion.
Finally for real this time, there will be three types of people who react to this post: Firstly, those who agree with me, fairly self explanatory. Those who read this and take it as proof of my racism, these people are idiots. Then the ones I most want to connect with, people who disagree completely with what I say, but argue their case reasonably and respectfully. I accept that this issue is controversial and will remain so for generations I'm sure, so if you think that the word nigger should belong to black people, then by all means let me know why.
You tube likes top tens doesn't it? Well I like you tube and top tens, so guess where this is going! No I'm not just going to link you to YouTube and say "Go watch things!" Ok... I guess that technically did happen but shut up! The actual point of this post is to share with the world my 10 favourite you tube channels. Thats current favourites, the ones I watch all the time now, not all time favourites per se. Being my personal choices there are of course some shared themes that represent my interests, 70% of the list will be film and game related channels, two will be comedy channels and the last is... Well it's Laci Green's channel, representing one of my keenest interests. Right list time, I'll link you to the channel and put one of my personal favourite videos right here.
Ding! I love this channel for it's simplicity. In 60 seconds you get the back story to a video game, or the story behind it's development. They also have longer videos for fast facts: Easter eggs, story secrets, leaked information and such like. The channel covers everything from the birth of the RPG as we know it to modern games as soon as they come out. A constantly changing mix of animators, voice actors and writers mean that Lore is always feeling fresh while remaining true to it's mantra of delivering what it promises: Lore, in a minute.
Ding!.. I didn't realise there were two dinging channels at the end of the list until just now, ah well. Cinema sins works entirely on delivery, be it plot holes, continuity errors or just bad work by a member of the cast or crew, everything is simply pointed out and dinged. For reasons I can't really explain my favourite videos on this channels are the ones laying into to the films I love. Search through the archives of this channel and I promise that you'll quickly find one of you most treasured cinema memories, then love it even more as it's shown in plain witty English that no film is without sin.
Ah lets players, one of the simplest types of you tube channels there is, a guy (or girl, just a guy in this case) plays games and that's it, the good ones talk while they do it to differentiate themselves, some with a facecam, done. They can churn out videos at a rate most channels could never match, making lets plays a great type of channel for time wasting video binges. I know that Felix holds the top spot for his lets plays, but I've always felt Pewdiepie is too much of an invented character for my liking. Brad is not that, he's much more human and easier to relate to as a result. Plus lets be honest, Pewdie is generaly not that great at gaming, I do like to see a bit of progress in the videos I watch.
Arin 'Chinagan' Hanson is one of the most talented and popular animators and voice actors on the web. With over 1.3 million subscribers on YouTube and almost 20% more fans on Newgrounds than any other author, it's hard to imagine him going anywhere soon. Even today I keep finding out that animations I've loved for up to a decade have featured Egoraptor as an animator or character's voice. His unique take on video games in the Awesome Series shows his brilliant comedy and then Sequelitis displays the man's critical abilities and logic. A talent that shows that being a high school drop out can be the right decision for people with the talent and drive to get things done in their own way.
PBG has a channel dedicated to game 'reviews' the inverted commas being his own addition to the word as it's not the standard score, pros and cons, value for money and whatnot you get in a traditional review. The system is more akin to a highlight reel from a lets play with the commentary dubbed after editing. Regardless of you define the formula, it works. Austin's videos are consistently funny, his rambling style and personable charm carry his videos and though you only get a basic understanding of the game in question, you'll still be glad you watched the video. His game play channel is just a good, especially the two minecraft hardcore series that feature many great you tube faces.
See? The internet is not all American. A brilliant sketch comic most famous for the bizarre and random asdf series. Personally I prefer his live action sketches, they stand up better upon re-watching. Part of a group of British comics that make up some of the best comedy this country has to offer, the collaborations between these men and women are one of the main reasons I barely watched TV even when I had on in my room. There are things independent small teams can pull of better than multimillion pound company like the BBC.
It's a well known fact that a Jewish love god and a psychotic ninja cannot fail in any endeavour related to comedic music. This point is only proven further by Ninja sex party, Danny Sexbang and Ninja Brian take the most beautiful subject for music (carnal relations) and somehow not only manage to find humour in it, but also make it even more pure and perfect... Okay that's the opposite of true. Their music follows the life of Danny Sexbang, a man with more confidence than people betting against man united this season, as he manages to disappoint or simply disturb every woman he meets. Seriously though, I own both the NSP albums, they are hilarious and genuinely good musicians. The video game parody band Starbomb they formed by teaming up with Egoraptor (yeah he raps too) is just as awesome.
A very similar style to PBG but in my opinion at least smoother and just generally better. Jon was the first YouTube channel I was ever truly a fan of. I was subscribed to others, I watched bands channels a lot, but Jon was the first person to really win me over with nothing over than some stupid internet videos about games. Constantly improving on his style and delivery, I don't think that Jon has even neared his potential and yet he already stands head and shoulders above his peers in the YouTube reviewing niche.
I love this woman, she is truly one of the most brilliant things the internet age has ever produced (beating all social networks, internet pornography and even delivery motherfucking dominoes pizza!) So far all 8 previous entries on this list have got there purely through entertainment value, Laci not only manages to blow them all so far out of the water they dry out to the point of dust before landing, but she also endeavours to make the world a better place by educating the masses with over 150 videos on some of the most amazing, surprising, shocking, essential and enlightening pieces of information on the most important topic there is. Well over 99% of animals have a desire to do it, it's the driving force behind evolution, it's quite possibly the most enjoyable thing there is... You guessed it (or looked at the video for more than 0.006 seconds) she talks about sex. What makes Laci so good at this is that, as well as being genuinely qualified to, her ability to stick unyieldingly to a perfect standard of maturity without becoming an awkward sex ed lesson keeps the video engaging and not preachy. She is funny and she understands her audience, Laci's jokes manage to remain clean without going off topic, there's absolutely no awkwardness in her delivery on any subject, no matter how personal or seemingly taboo or unusual. Laci is adorable and deals with people who disagree with her, or act inappropriately towards her (either as a topic for a video, or frequently in response to one) in the same way she presents her show; with charm and maturity. That being said, she is a champion against true injustice, if I were a sexist or homophobe I would genuinely be afraid of this woman. She makes me giggle like a child and grin like an idiot while making me think like an adult and hopefully act a bit smarter (with her subject matter you'll have to be a special one of my readers to know if she's succeeded on that last one). Laci Green is an amazing woman and I love her to bits.
Honourable mentions
Before we see what could possibly top the love I have for Laci, I just want to point in the direction of the channels I cut from the list, be it because I spend less time on them, or they're a fun but simple time waster or whatever, these are still worth checking out... Go linkfest! Cosmo Jarvis, Game theory, Caddicarus, did you know gaming, Rubberninja, OneyNG and finally: everyone who ever posts a game grumps animated/remix, which leads us on neatly to...
Since I spent well over 2 hours sat with Emma watching Danny and Arin play video games today, I couldn't justify putting any other channel in this spot. Although they try not to admit it, the grumps are essentially a lets play channel like any other, except for one simple difference, there's two of them. The addition of the second host makes the grump channel like none other, the flow and chemistry of duologue makes it so much easier to watch and enjoy masses of game grumps without getting bored as you would watching a monologuing lets play. This channel recently overtook Arin's Egoraptor channel because, as I mentioned earlier, they can put out so much content as a lets play channel, so the best lets play channel on YouTube, is my number one channel overall.
I know, I haven't written anything here for a long time now, but I was getting ready to move to university when I wrote that last post so I've been busy, deal with it. Anyway, that's not related in the slightest to this post.
I was having one of those nights last night, the ones where my brain gets really fixated on one very specific random topic. Specifically the emotive meaning of words verses their actual meaning. I've talked about how cunt/pussy/vagina all have the same literal meaning, but obviously you'll get very different reactions if you use one instead of the other. Word to the wise, don't talk about a cunt in reproductive biology. (I don't do that module, just fyi, so that was just a joke, don't panic).
This time however I was thinking about positive, non sweary things (yeah, I was pretty shocked too). I was thinking about being referred to as "perfect" (no I was not called that, we both know that was a stupid question for you to ask). It's not something I say often, or at all really, because to me it feels cheap, meaningless even. No one is perfect, perfect is an absolute, perfect is an omnipotent high of goodness. You are not at that level, no one is, even Helena isn't (She spent new years at David Cameron's house without hitting him). Even if we talk about how physically attractive one person is to one other, the odds of you meeting their preference for every distinguishing feature is going to be billions to one. Certainly more than there are people on the earth, so odds on that there is no one perfect for you out there. Then we move on to everything else, mannerisms, opinions, accents, you really think that one person will have your number one choice for all of them?
And yet, after all this, I leave you with one of my rare positive endings. Who cares that your partner has flaws? We all have a fair few. The myth of perfection perpetuates the myth of the one. There is not one perfect person out there for you, but there are people out there who will make you happy, find one of them. Don't pretend they're perfect, just make sure they're beautiful to you, on every level.
I was talking to Heather about Syria and she asked me if I was scared. Unfortunately, it's got to the point where frankly, not be scared is illogical. We are on the brink of the third world war, it sounds like I'm being melodramatic but I honestly believe that.
Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya all had one difference to Syria that makes this so, no powerful countries tried to stop an invasion. Syria is backed by China and Russia, two of the largest and most powerful countries on Earth and both Permanent members of the UN security council.
Despite this fact, Obama drew a line in the sand, he made it very clear that America would not tolerate the use of chemical weapons... Chemical weapons were used. So, like it or not, Obama pretty much needs a war to maintain his credibility. I can tell you exactly what will happen if and when the American troops land in Syria, because it has already happened once before.
On Sunday the 28th of June 1914 a 19 year old Gavrilo Princip shot and killed the Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria, this is the WW1 equivalent of the sarin, the spark in the powder keg. So Austria invaded Serbia, much as America seems poised to invade Syria. In both the past and all too likely future events, Russia steps in to defend it's smaller ally. Obviously Austria called on its allies and Russia on its, leading to WW1. The same thing will inevitably happen in Syria, America will bring in its European allies and Russia will be joined by China and Iran.
For the third time the world's superpowers will be at war with one another, millions will die and the reason for the war starting will be lost among the fighting, the assassination of Franz Ferdinand was not enough to warrant the first world war, just as the use of sarin gas does not justify the third.
Something needs to be done in Syria, but invasion is not it.
My brother did a post on how dangerous it was for David Cameron to use a phrase used to refer to "the bad guy" to talk about Russia. Cameron was right though, not something I'll often say, Putin is clearly an evil and insane excuse for a human being.
For those of you who don't know, Vladimir Putin is openly moving to make being gay illegal. Any "promotion" of homosexuality in media is treated in the same way as pornography, because if your child sees two men kiss it's life will be permanently damaged won't it? No Russian child can be adopted in Britain now, or France, or Canada, or any other country that has legalised gay marriage. Even if a straight couple adopts them, this country is no longer allowed Russian children.
Next in line is Putin's master stroke, the one that if allowed to go through will forever be remembered as his legacy. He wants to legally remove all children from homes with a gay couple. Not only adopted, but biological children too.
Putin is the head of a broken and medieval regime. A lieutenant colonel of the KGB sitting in the Kremlin pretending the soviet union never fell. Public opinion means nothing to this man but governments and the UN might be able to do something. The plans off the Russian government show a blatant disregard of human rights, wars have been started for far less.
Russia is large and powerful, but not untouchable. Putin believes he can act like Muammar Gaddafi and Saddam Hussein with impunity. The civilised governments of the world and the UN need to let him know that this is not the case. Putin has been at the top of Russian government, in one form or another, since 1999. Clearly it's time for a change.
I got dumped a few days ago... That was fun.
Shockingly though I am not going to focus on that (it will influence the post a lot though) that was my original plan but I don't think I can without feeling cruel or petty. Part of me says I have the right to be just that, but I love her too much for that.
Luckily an alternative presented itself to me while watching a film (fun size, its brilliant, go watch it) As you'd expect, a bunch of shit happens to the main characters that makes everyone very unhappy. This inspires character development and dramatic adventures and whatnot. All perfectly fine.
My issue comes at the end of the film (and almost every film ever, hence it being an issue) Everyone good ends up happy, everyone bad ends up unhappy. Take fun size as the example, Wren leaves the popular good looking guy to be with the nerd who loved her, April stops rejecting the guy who likes her in favour of coolness, Wren's mother isn't angry she's just happy to be with her children, etc, etc... That is not the way the world works, deserving to be happy is not a good enough reason in the eyes of the universe. The person you love will not suddenly realise they loved you too all along, bad people will not get the punishment they deserve. It's bothered me a little for a long time, it's hardly surprising that I'm more bothered this time.
Films are supposed to reflect real life to some degree, even things that seem totally insane and off the wall have to connect with reality in some way to be enjoyed. So why does no film have a realistic ending? Every film ends in a world where justice has been done to everyone. That's not how it works, life is not just, the world is not fair. Unhappy endings are a part of life and films need to accept this. I'm not saying I want everyone to end up depressed, no one would watch that film, but having one main protagonist end the film suffering at the hands of fate, worse off than they started, would not only be a poignant dramatic device to make for a memorable ending, but it would also be a much more realistic ending. I know why they don't do it, happy ending are meant to make the watcher feel just that, happy. To me they've always just said one thing "if your life isn't perfect, then you must be the bad guy, only they end up unhappy." The idea that everyone gets their fairytale ending is bullshit, filling people with ridiculous dreams, vous ne revez pas, the world will never be kind to you. So we have to keep going, don't let one thing or person dominate your life, because it will be gone one day. You may never have a happy ending, but a happy life is something worth fighting for.
I'm encouraging commenting on this post more than any other I've done. Our topic for today is "How much freedom should a teenager get from their parents?" Obviously if you're a teenager or the parent of one I'd like to know how things really work as well as how you think they should. Are you parents too controlling, or your children too rebellious? Are there any cases where it's the other way around, where you feel like your parents don't care about keeping you safe, or that your children can't function without you?
The two situations I'm aware of in enough detail to write about are mine (obviously) and one other who I won't mention by name but you all know who it is anyway. Rather nicely from a blogging point of view, they're very different situations. That's not a good thing from a personal point of view, for reasons you will see later.
Firstly, my family. My mother is fairly relaxed about when I go out, I am expected to sleep at my house and not drink on school nights, that pretty much covers it. If I can tell her who I'll be with, so she knows they're not strangers from the internet or whatnot, then all is well. If I go out early in the evening I don't get told when to be home for dinner, I get a text while I'm out saying "Will you be home for dinner at *whenever*?" The answer is generally yes, but I know that it is my choice. If I go out later than that I obviously get asked when I'll be home, if I don't know (I often don't, I don't know much) then that is the answer I give and it is fine. I don't even ask if people can come over any more, it's not uncommon for me to tell my mum "Heather is on her way over" and that's the first she knows of it. The system for the sister (15) is pretty similar, she just gets told to be home at 10, she of course turns up at 10:15 most nights (it's a 15 minute walk to Jamie Walker's house, coincidence? I think not)
I might be biased because it's a system I'm obviously very used to, but I think it works rather well. My mother makes sure I am safe, then lets me live my life. As long as I am with people I know and have a way of contacting/getting home, all is well.
The other situation I'm concerned with is ever so slightly different. Like I said, I may be biased by my own family, but lets be honest, if you have a 17 year old child that has been out and eaten dinner at someone else's house, but you still demand they be home for 7:30, you are an overprotective cunt. Frankly if you can't cope with your child being out of the house all the way to (gasp) 8pm! Then you're probably just going to drive your child away and cause arguments. I'm not saying all parents should let their children be out for as long as they want, but unless they stopped growing up at 12 years old, then 7:30 is a stupid curfew.
All parents (with a few exceptions) just what their children to be safe and I know that letting them do whatever they like whenever they like is madness, but bubble wrapping your child is just as bad. Protect your children, keep them safe and catch them when they fall, just give them the chance to make their own choices, they will make mistakes, let them, help them deal with it and make better choices, don't force them to hide those mistakes and make everything worse. A parent's job is to raise their child to be able to live their life, not to run their life for them.
I know a lot of parents will think this is just a teenager thinking they know better than any adult, but that's far from the case. (No one show this next part to my mother) I am so grateful to my mother for the way she treats me. I know if I do something stupid, like getting really terribly ill from drinking too much, I will be rescued and made better, then mocked about it mercilessly. Now I don't drink on an empty stomach, I made the mistake, I learnt from it. If I wasn't free to do so I would just make the mistake away from the safety net of my mother later in life, then I could end up hospitalised or worse.
This has not been an angry teenage rant, this has been logic. If you agree, or disagree, or have anything to say about teenagers and parents, then the comment box is right down there.
Obviously this post will have spoilers, a fucking fuckton of spoilers, let's not joke about here, it's going to be a massive list of spoiler after spoiler after spoiler. I think that should do as a warning, if you complain to me about spoiling it now, I have the legal right to kill you.
My 3rd ever post on this blog was named after a single episode of something (15,000,000 merits, black mirror, season 1) and now, 49 posts later you have this one (doctor who, season 7 part 2) I've only seen the episode 3 times so far, so this won't be perfect, but people have been confused on twitter, one even directly asking me for an explanation. So sit back and prepare yourself for the angry nerd's guide to Trenzalore "fun for all the family"... Well not really, it's a mass war grave.
Trenzalore
The site of one of the doctors battles, described by the great intelligence as "a minor skirmish" the entire planet appears as a desolate burnt out rock, whether this is a result of the battle on the surface is never explained, but one thing is clear. This was not a minor skirmish by human standards, the entirety of the surface that is shown on screen is covered in gravestones, varying in size based on rank. Of course that cues a dramatic camera pan up a hill, upon which stands a 'grave' that would tower over the largest structures on earth. It is of course the final resting place of the doctor. I put grave in inverted commas there as the monolith is in fact the ruined shell of the long dead tardis. Point of confusion 1, the doctor refers to "a size leak," where a dying tardis's dimension dams break down and the tardis swells to the enormous size of the one seen on the hill. So is the massive size of the doctor's grave a sign of his unquestioned authority over the forces on one side of the battle, or is it merely a coincidental side effect of the size leak?
One thing is for certain, the doctor would have no shortage of allies. Davros said it best in Journey's end (the one with the 3 doctors) "The man who abhors violence, never carrying a gun, but this is the truth, Doctor: you take ordinary people and fashion them into weapons." I would be shocked if the doctor fired a single shot on Trenzalore, but it would definitely have been his battle to win or lose. One more thing we're not told (have you noticed how many more questions are raised than answered?) is the outcome of the battle, all we know is one key casualty.
The Tomb
I think there's some media trickery going on here as I can't seem to find a proper picture of the grave/timeline, so rather than take a screenshot on iPlayer and risk a serious (however unlikely) fucking over from the beeb, you can have a reaction shot instead, deal with it.
The final resting place of the doctor is in the only place it could ever be, the control room of the tardis. The command console has been removed and replaced with a glowing tangle of light lines that represent the damage done to the universe's natural timeline by the doctor's journey to and fro throughout time. The lines are described as "an open wound," quite how this works is probably not known to anyone... or really possible, lets be honest. However we must accept that the open wound model holds as it is central to the whole reason the great intelligence summoned everyone there. He enters the timeline to unleash a rather impressive clusterfuck on the doctor's entire life, or as he put it "I can turn every one of your victories into defeats, poison every friendship, deliver pain to your every breath" what a nice bloke. Entering the timestream allows the great intelligence to appear in and influence multiple key events in the doctor's life, appearing as both the same person and many at once... Now who do we know who's shown that impossible trait before?
Clara Oswald
Bingo. From the moment the intelligence explained his plan, the truth about Clara was made painfully clear. Once again we were all wrong weren't we? Although without the knowledge of a timelord's grave, it would have been a miracle if someone had called it. Obviously Clara follows the intelligence into the timestream to undo everything he has wrought. From the theft of the tardis to Victorian London, Clara is there steering the doctor in the direction he was meant to go. Apart from River (we'll get to her, don't worry) Clara is the only companion to my knowledge (I did a little research, I'm not 100%) that has willingly and knowingly sacrificed her own life for the sake of the doctor.
She jumps into a tear in spacetime that scatters her life across the entire existence of the doctor (somewhere between 300 and >1,000,000 years... Yeah, he isn't consistent on that) She doesn't just sacrifice herself at Trenzalore, she dies for him again and again, living life after life, dying death after death, with only one constant factor, she has to save the doctor. Now lets be honest here, who wouldn't want to have Clara waiting around every bend as our own guardian angel? I mean she is (second time I've quoted this on my blog) a total screaming genius, but modest and a tiny bit sexy. Well more than a tiny bit, I mean look at her!.. *ahem* moving on
River Song
I'm not sure if it's essential or blasphemy to include a section on River in a post this filled with spoilers, but we missed her didn't we? (hint: the answer is yes) This is the first time we've seen River post library from her point of view, quite logically you might think seeing as she died in the library. Her body is still there in fact, what we see in this episode is the digital conciousness stored in the library computer. Summoned to the "conference call" by madame Vastra and kept present throughout by a psychic link with Clara, River continues to influence the doctor's life despite the minor setback of being dead. River is the one who speaks the doctor's name (cleverly at one of the points where she cannot be seen by the TV audience) to open the tomb door when the doctor refuses. Anything else I could say you already know about River, so let's get to our final point.
The Doctor
Shockingly I don't have a huge amount to write here. The doctor's name is not revealed, so we can't speculate as to it's significance. I am a little miffed as to how the monumental paradox of the doctor visiting his own grave had almost no effect on anything, far less than Rose meeting herself as a baby and without the huge tardis based machine used by the master. Really we are left with one thing to discus, but it's a big one. What event lies in the doctor's future that requires him to act "without choice, in the name of peace and sanity"? To renounce the name doctor and become something I don't dare speculate about? Is the event even in his future, or his past? The doctor clearly knew what he was talking to 'himself' about, was it that event that made him become the doctor? I don't have any answers in this section of the post. Only questions that we must make do with until November. Obviously priority question 1 is, is John Hurt the next doctor? The next master? Some other ally to the doctor? Or another enemy? Or put simply, who is he?
Yesterday was fucking awful. Specifically between about 4:30 and 6:30. It's ok, I'll only do a little Katie moping, then I'll get to the point (the point is my reaction, so the moping is context). I told you that Katie came out to me a few weeks ago ("you" being the whole internet... fuck) well obviously, considering my feelings for her, it changed... nothing. You see the issue here? Well luckily we agreed that our "more than friends, less than a couple" thing, was not working before either of us (me) had a full blown breakdown. Unfortunately that meant discontinuing said thing. Have you ever tried to work out how much closeness you need to lose with someone you love is needed to maintain your emotional well being? It is not a fun thing to do, but it was needed so it was done.
Shockingly this put me in what is often known as a "bad mood" spectacularly bad in fact. However I've already cried over Katie once and I'm damned if I'm going to cry for the same reason twice in one lifetime (excluding Les Miserables of course) So instead my brain decided the best thing for it was to go fully in the opposite direction. Since yesterday evening I've been weirdly and inexplicably hyper, I'm surprised I haven't broken any more furniture around school. I must say, double biology in that twisted emotional state is a rather difficult task. I just wanted to carry on "flouncing" as Morbey insists on calling it.
A surprising little side effect of this temporary manic state is a (slightly weird) forwardness with Heather and Lucy, something I would to say sorry for while I'm slightly sane... However the background to my phone is not being changed any time soon.
Right that's all I have for you on manic responses to depressing events, at least without getting super serial. So goodnight my sweet little audience.
This is my 50th post, I know mad isn't it!? We're coming up to 10,000 hits as well, hardly ground breaking but it's a strange thing to think that people across the globe from Britain to China, via Canada and the FYR of Macedonia have read the bullshit that pours from my mind onto my keyboard. So this is a simple little post to say thank you I guess. I like to think this is a place where I can be me, away from the real world, but I doubt I'd keep going if I had no readers.
I'm genuinely curious, why are you reading this? Don't get me wrong I'm grateful for every hit, but it hurts my brain to think that there are people thousands of miles away, people I will never meet, who read this little blog and get to see into my crazy mixed up mind. Like I said, I know 10,000 is nothing too special, but it's my (almost) 10,000 and it means a lot to me.
Anyway, that's all I have for you, not much of a milestone entry, but I only wanted to say thank you for reading my pointless little storied. Now, onwards to 100,000 hits and more!
I'm coining that term to refer to a person who is only attracted to homosexuals of the opposite sex, a term made necessary by the fact it applies to me. If you've read my post Nothing Worth Saying, or you know me in the real world, then you'll be aware of Katie and how bloody wonderful she is... Well except for one small issue, I told her I loved her on Sunday morning (just after midnight) and so, just as happened last time I confessed my love for someone, she came out. It was almost the same comment, they both said they were "80% lesbian", which I'm now pretty sure translates as "100% lesbian but not totally come to terms with it yet"
Now you should be able to appreciate just how impressive it is that I've managed to hit 2/2 closet homosexuals, but I want to know just how probable it is, so lets do the maths... Oh come on! It's that or I get depressing and mopey. The maths is better right? Good.
So the current scientifc estimate is that 1.4% of women are openly lesbian and 7.5% report "same gender desire"
Obviously they weren't out when I fell for them so the odds of me meeting them while they were in the closet is 7.5%^2=0.5625% More exactly that's the odds of you picking two random women and them both being in Narnia.
Then we have the more difficult question of "what are the odds of me falling in love with them strongly enough to admit it?" Even if we assume everyone has an equal chance after a certain point, how close is that point? So lets assume some simple numbers.
An apparent formula for people you meet in life is "Your age X 365 + leap years you've lived through X 2" for an average of meeting 2 people per day. I'm not very social so lets loose the "X 2"
18X365+4=6574
half it to eliminate men=3287
now lets assume I only care for about 1/20 of those 3000 women, that the rest are just passing acquaintances, classmates and whatnot=164.35=164 no decimalising of women.
Again, I'm taking estimates here, but apparently the average is 4 real loves in a lifetime, now all 4 coming before you're 19 is insane, so we'll quarter it (giving my lifespan a rough estimate of 76). therefore the odds of me falling in love with any one person I know is 1/164=0.6097%
So multiplying the two together gives us a final estimate of 0.006097X0.005625=0.0034299%
That gives us a rough estimate that there will be somewhere around 240,000 heterosexual homosexualphiles in the world. That's an insanely small number, I'm almost proud to be one of them.
Now before someone like Jonny, or Katie actually, she said stats was easy, turns up to criticise my maths, I want it to be clear that there are a lot of assumptions and estimates going on. Reasonably there could be anything from 1 (that's me) to 2,000,000 of us in the world. Of course if there's a fundamental error going on, feel free to point it out.
240,000 out of 7,000,000,000 though, that's nothing really is it? It's half the population of Liverpool, spread over the globe, I very much doubt that any one in the same situation will ever read this, but if you are a heterosexual homosexualphile, you are not alone!
Is that not just the most cynical title you've ever read? Considering the title of my blog it's hardly likely that this is a problem for anyone now is it? If it is a problem for you let me know, so I can laugh at you. Now, to the cheery business of calling you all selfish cunts.
Selflessness is the act of performing an action that offers no benefit to you, and is in fact often detrimental to you, purely for the benefit of others. A fairly simple and certainly honourable cause to stand for, but think about this: if you enjoy acting selflessly, does the fact it makes you happy not therefore mean it can no longer be called selfless?
Maybe an example would help, so imagine yourself in this situation. Someone you care about texts you late at night, clearly in a bad mood. You stay up to try and cheer them up, but appear to be getting nowhere. Now you're losing sleep and almost certainly dragging your own mood down to try and help someone else, you're not the reason they're unhappy so have no obligation to help. It's a pretty selfless way to spend the night is it not?
So why do you do it? We all know the answer, it makes us happy to see the people we care about being happy. So when you go out of your way to make someone else happy, are you doing it for the sake of their mood, or your own?
You may come across as the loveliest fucking thing there is, but in reality we're all as selfish as each other. Don't get me wrong, you are still doing good, still helping others, but it is done for the sake of the person performing the action not the one benefiting from it.
I know I've said I'm opposed to writing out of a feeling of obligation, but it's been almost a month so I'm going to, sorry. The problem is, I really have (as the the title suggests) nothing to write for you. It seems odd as so much shit has happened recently, especially in Korea and the US, but I just can't seem to get into my normal angry ranting mood that powers those kind of post.
So I'm deeply sorry, but to explain to you why (not that you're likely to care) I'm going to make one of my rare personal life posts. I won't blame you if you just move on now, go read the post about Helena or the pope again, they're much more fun. Those of you still here, I owe you a cookie.
I'm pretty certain the lack of anger and therefore the lack of posts can be traced back to the only significant change in my life for... ages, damn my life is exciting. For those of you who I don't know in the real world (I have hits from all over the world, but no idea why this is) the change I speak of is the addition of something small, welsh and exceptionally pretty to my life... No I have not brought a lamb! It is of course a person, a female person so I'll stop referring to her as it now.
I know what you're going to say "But Marshall, any time you have any interest in anyone you turn into the lamb you didn't buy!" Well firstly can you stop going on about the bloody lamb? More importantly, I somehow seem to have bypassed that, fucking irritating to everyone, phase. Maybe all my crazy and seeming irrational fears had a logical basis, because I'm feeling none of them now. I am as obsessive as ever, but not in a dramatic downward spiral this time, but all happy and excitable, like a small child at Christmas, so that's definitely better, but probably still irritating to some people.
Well fuck, I'd promised myself this wasn't going to be a post about Katie, but it sort of is now isn't it? Ah well you know what I'm like. One of you reading this might even be Katie, although you shouldn't be because I told her not to read my blog as there's a good chance of political opinions that are... Oh what's the word?.. Oh yeah, correct.
And just like that it's the blog you came here for.
Because correct is the right word for left wing politics, being left wing isn't some vapid hippy ideal, nor is it a totalitarian socialist nuthouse. It is the logical and moral belief in equal rights and equal opportunities, in a society where the people who put the most into society get the most out, as it should be. Right wing politics is the great system of "them and us". The rich own the money and have the power, therefore only the rich deserve money and power.
I am not a communist or any form of leftist radical, all I believe is that everyone should have the chance to make something of their life based purely on merit.
It's the same logic that props up my republican ideals, no one should be born into a position of unquestionable power, monarchy is the perfect example of true right wing politics. You are born, you therefore have the right to be head of state. That is not logic, that is madness, why is it still in effect?
So in summary: Katie is beautiful and causes a lack of anger in most things, but generates anger at politics... also, the royals are all a bunch of pointless tax draining cunts.
If you're reading this and my view of my reader is anywhere near accurate, then you've already watched the Dr Who episode "The Bells of St. John" (that's today's for those of you to stupid to think (which is of course non of you, but I have to be prepared for muggles to come along now and again)) If you haven't then go fucking watch it! Both to avoid the spoilers and so what I'm saying makes sense... Ok are we all caught up now? Good, let's proceed.
No wait, one more thing before we do. Do you think because Matt Smith is the youngest Doctor ever that someone high up decreed that the companions must be younger and hotter than ever before? I mean when they unveiled a leggy redhead in a policewoman's uniform I was pretty certain that was not to be topped, but then, well... this happened:
I mean seriously! She is properly hot. The only reason Jenna Louise Coleman is not on "the list" is because she's on both my father's and brother's, if there was ever something that you shouldn't share with your family, it's list entries (find the post "the Lovell list" to explain that)
Anywho, now I actually am going to get to the actual timey-wimey, nerdy-wordy things I came here to say. To avoid (or possibly create) confusion We'll be using this system from here onwards:
Clara=Victorian
Oswin=Dalek
Jenna=This episode (and series, but that's not relevant yet) (yes I know that's the actress's name but what other option do I have? "Oswald"? No, that's an old man's name! Don't be so silly)
The most obvious question the writers have made us ask is "Are Clara, Jenna and Oswin all the same person?" which obviously leads on to the more interesting "If yes, how is she resurrecting?" or "If no, what connects them?"
I know I came here to express my theories and thoughts about these questions, but I can't answer the first of them. She's met the Doctor for the first time 3 times now, but she never knew him beforehand. So this means that surely they're not one person being resurrected, otherwise Oswin and Jenna would remember the meeting Clara had with him wouldn't they? So they must be different people surely?
However, it seems that knowledge is passed between them. Clara is in the past and not a genius, Oswin is in the future and she's able to hack a whole dalek prison at will. Jenna, at the start of the episode, knows nothing about computers, she then gets uploaded, downloaded and all the other sorts of loaded (that sounds rude now I write it) and becomes a total screaming genius but modest and a tiny bit sexy, much like Oswin is. That implies some sort of consistent conciousness that allows knowledge to be passed down on a linear timeline. So maybe they are the same person but why is knowledge passed and not memories?
Besides, there are a few subtle differences between the 3 of them. Oswin's first name was, obviously, Oswin, Clara's middle name was Oswin, but then Jenna didn't recognise the name. How can a name flit in and out of the timeline for a person/people?
Let's be honest, I've answered nothing have I? I've just listed all the options. Well to quote Neil deGrasse Tyson and Jean Valjean "Sometimes, one must be content to love the questions themselves." "The truth is given to us all in our time, in our turn." So put the kettle on, put your feet up, and watch the pretty woman and the mad man in a box.
This is going to rambley, I can feel it. Try and stick with me on this... Yes of course rambley is a real word, why would you even question that? Anyway, to business.
I'm not a fan of naming fandoms, in fact I'm not a fan of the word fandom itself, but I concede that they do make things neater. Especially on (the main focus of this post) twitter, where everything is neatly condensed into tiny snippets of information. It does make life easier to just look and see Belieber, Directioner, and all that other shite and just sit there going "nope nope, oh wait! Nope!" I'm sure plenty of them are good and interesting people deep down... well some of them, maybe, but if they care enough about awful music to make it that obvious, I'm not going to dig that far before giving up. Anywho, I came here to extol the virtues of these people (Fandom people, not beliebers) not complain.
I see people complaining about boring and generic tweets on a daily basis, but I never see the original problem. I got bored of pointing out that you only see boring shit from the people you follow, if you stop following them it all goes away. Related to this is people who feel obligated to follow everyone they know in the real world, I hate most of the people I know in the real world! I can see why people would want to avoid real world people on the internet, I only occasionally have to deal with Kelly questioning my... *sigh* fine I'll say it, Helenaist nature. If I had that shit on a daily basis I'd do what I know at least one other person I know has, get another account to be me on, and just be Marshall on the one I have now. I say at least one as the point of the second account is it stays away from people from the real world, so maybe there are plenty of them are out there.
Right, we may as well get to the point in the title now shall we? I follow 127 people on twitter and I'm followed by 102 (at least while I'm writing this) only 30 people (well 29, 30 accounts) are on both lists. This is because I follow people who I find interesting, whether someone follows me or not has no impact on my choice to follow them or not, even if they get pissy about me not following back. About 6 of those people make up well over 3/4 of my interactions. I've only met 2 of them and can only tell you what 3 of them look like, that is because the other 3 all have pictures of Helena Bonham Carter as their icons (The other one I don't know is Katie... We don't talk about why she's in my interactions). Now finally I get to make a genuine point! It doesn't matter that I may never meet these people, that isn't important. We share interests (no, not just Helena, not always) and the whole point of twitter is to connect to people you share interests with, not people you know. I spend a ridiculous amount of time on twitter and essentially none on facebook, because I'm much more interested in strangers I share interests with, than I am in acquaintances I don't give a shit about.
Basically, there is no reason to complain about what people tweet. There are so many accounts out there that you can have a perfectly full timeline that all interests you. Just unfollow the boring people and follow interesting strangers in their place.
Earlier today Josh left one of the study rooms at school by (according to all sources) jumping on a table and heading, as the crow flies, straight out of the room. Now I wasn't there so all I have is information gathered afterwards but apparently the issue he had taken was with Megan "existing" (that was his one word answer when I asked him what she was doing wrong)
Now I know this is probably a lot like the Joan Rivers thing the other day, I'd be much less concerned if it was other people involved, but nevertheless, what sort of a problem is existing? Everyone does it, literally everyone, so that is no reason to rage at any one person. Thinking about it, a disproportionate amount of the people I know have a talent for inexplicable rage, this one though is noteworthy for the sheer sustained passion of it all. Generally episodes like these (be they mine, Josh's, Jonny's or someone else's) are either a massive sudden outburst over one specific (generally minor) offence, or a sort of simmering anger (normally explainable, sometimes not)
However it was demonstrated on the bus (in a rather entertaining manner) that this was something spectacularly different. I'll spare you the details but every time I removed my headphones (they were in to prevent me arguing, I'm hardly the perfect audience for an anti-Megan rant) I was greeted by some more (in some cases rather creative) abusive ranting, even a random thing like a child outside the bus or being in Seaton would somehow swing back to the same angry point. I was actually quite impressed, I don't think I could keep being that angry for more than a few minutes. Yet the only reasoning I could get for it was that Megan exists, just like I do and Josh does and everyone you've ever met does. I don't know what the real reason for Josh's anger was (we all know it wasn't "existing") but I hope Megan continues to do it, just for the entertainment it provides.
To justify writing this (I really just wanted to share a story of crazy anger) I'm going to try and crowbar a point on the end here. It's perfectly ok to hate someone, even to the point of table vaulting to get away from them. Just try to have a reason for it, you can't hate everyone, so target your anger at things that shouldn't be accepted, not just existing.
I'd told myself for a long time that I wasn't going to write this post, but after the blasphemy that was this Monday's tutor it was essentially inevitable. The fact that Megan is currently tapping away at her keyboard for the exact same reason I am was just the trigger that set me off. You know exactly how I feel about Helena Bonham Carter so now you just have to sit back and I will explain why this is and, more importantly, why you should feel that way too. I've known who Helena is for as long as I can remember and been in love with her since the Order of the Phoenix came out in 2007, incidentally one of the worst Potter films but the one that introduced two of the best characters in cinema, Bellatrix (obviously) and Luna. Anyway, we're not here to talk magic, but rather about this magical woman. (see what I did there? Good wasn't it? Oh fine we can just move on)
My first point is so blindingly obvious it even goes in the title, she is bloody beautiful isn't she? I realised in chemistry the other day that if you doubled my age I'd still be a decade younger than she is, but at 46 she is still one of the most attractive people on this planet. Certainly when you only look at people over 40 there isn't really anyone to contest my point. What makes Helena so brilliant is that she's unique, a bloody rare quality when so many celebrities seem to be pure carbon copies of one another, I know there are other celebrities that stand out from the crowd but no one does it quite so well as the "corset queen" (a title I'll get to later). Take awards ceremonies as a nice easy example, as soon as I say that you can get a pretty clear idea in your head of what an average actress would be wearing. Fancy but fairly simple dress, certainly shoes that match at least but not Helena. You might argue that it's a desperate bid for attention like the sort of thing lady gaga would do, but I don't think so because she always looks almost uncomfortable when photographed in public, like she'd rather be avoiding the attention and that's why she isn't dressed up in the same way as everyone else. In photo-shoots and when acting she always seems far more relaxed than she ever seems as herself, so I don't think she dresses like that to try and stand out, I think she dresses like that because she is truly unique and lets be honest with ourselves here: normal is boring, unique is sexy. Right I think 282 words just about covers beauty enough to get by, if I don't stop now I might go on forever. So lets get on to why she's so much more than a pretty face.
Part of the blasphemy I mentioned at the start of this post is essentially "Helena Bonham Carter plays one role through all her films" now I agree the two examples, Lovett and Thenardier, have quite a bit in common but take more than 15 seconds to think about it and you'll see how ridiculous a statement that is. In fact I don't even need words to deal with it, just a picture of a few of the roles she's played will do, you don't even need to recognise them all, just see that they're clearly quite different. There's a possibly imaginary psychopath, between the queen mother and a chimp. The same role? Far from it.
Roles like Mrs Lovett may be what people expect from Helena now but they are a far cry from what made her famous and gave her the nickname I mentioned earlier. Roles like Olivia and Ophelia in adaptations of Shakespeare, as well as things like Elizabeth in Frankenstein (none of which feature above) are all the sort of "Prim Edwardian" style characters that previouslydefined her. She said she wanted to shock people and if you'd watched her carer from the start (obviously I didn't, I was -10 when she started making films) I think you'd have experienced a fair deal of shock over the course of it. Unfortunately I don't think there are many roles left that will give her the chance to shock people any more, she's covered such a ridiculously wide range that nothing would be a surprise in the future. Of course she could always act badly, that would be pretty shocking to me at least. I've seen 15 films which have a credit for Helena Bonham Carter, all of them were good. I know that only covers 1/5 of the films she's in but I can't think of anyone else who's so consistently good across so many genres and roles. A range that greatly exceeds that of Tim Burton, who is a brilliant director don't get me wrong, but there are people who insist that Helena is famous because of Tim. There is no other way of putting it, that's just pain bullshit. Helena and Tim met in 2001 while filming Planet of the Apes. By this point Helena ha appeared in 41 films across 18 years. Working with Tim has been a significant part of her recent career, but even since 2011 she's been in Harry Potter, Great Expectations and Les Miserables, none of which involved Tim Burton, all of which were very successful and the two I've seen were both brilliant. So Helena Bonham Carter is definitely not Tim Burton's "wife and actress". She isn't even his wife, they're an odd pair like that, but like I said, odd trumps normal any day.
Ok it's coming up to 11 o'clock so I'll leave this here for now. Let me know if I've missed anything, or if you disagree with anything I've said let me know. I'll leave you with one (more if I ever work out the way to make photos behave on blogger) of my all time favourite photos of Helena, aren't I good to you?
Today it was announced that we will see something at the end of the month that hasn't happened since 1945; the worlds most powerful Nazi is giving up his power. I'm taking of course about Joseph Ratzinger, pope since 2005, who is the first pope to step down from the post since 1415 (you'd think he could hold on for 2 more years for neatness sake) blaming old age and ill health (the ill health is probably punishment from god for being at the head of the worlds largest paedophile facilitating organisation.) Of course at this point you'll be thinking "So an old man is retiring, what's your point Marshall?" It is this: is there any point in replacing Ratzinger?
I'm not saying we get rid of religion, we should do of course but I know that some people are just incapable of growing up enough to stop believing in fairy tales. Organised religion on the other hand, a religion that has it's own UN recognised state, that's something else entirely. I fail to see any need for the pope, or frankly the church. If you want to blame your problems on the will of your imaginary friend then go ahead, but do you really need an international ring of tax avoiders, paedophiles, homophobes and racists to tell you how to be a good person? It's time we do away with the church and live good lives because it's right, not because we are compelled to under threat of eternal damnation.
In fact lets go further than that. Let's take this resignation as a sign from the pope's boss. Just like the resignation of 1415, this is the herald of a new age in human society. A time when we can tear down the ancient institutions that take so much from the people and give nothing real back to us. Religion, monarchy, bigotry, these are things that hold society back from development. The world is changing faster now than it has for centuries, now is the perfect time to prune away the old useless branches at the top of the tree. No one is truly free until we live in a land where all people answer in equal measure to the government and that government answers in turn to its people. Yet as it is there is so much power invested in mystical beings and arbitrary powers with no accountability.
If we want to move on we need to trim the fat, prune away the wasteful medieval structures of society and replace them with justifiable, fair, democratic practices. If someone wants to be head of state they should require the will of the people to take that post, no one should be born into power. If organised religion must continue, treat it and tax it like any other organisation and never hold the will of the church above the law. These are fair requests for a fair society, a true republic free from state religion.
This is not an issue anyone should remain silent on, we all have a voice to demand liberty from those who govern us, to declare our freedom from those who would tie our hands and silence our words. Your country belongs to its people, not their government, never believe otherwise. Demand democracy, demand liberty, demand the freedom that is your right as a human.
So naturally I'm in a temporary bad spot. My brain is not filled with the immediate threat of an exam tomorrow, panic leaving creates a vacuum that causes crazy to expand and fill the void. It's been causing me to act strangely bipolar (remember the exaggerations I mentioned earlier, this is one, that's not the condition I have) I'll be revising happily (well it's revision so not happily really) then I'll have the overwhelming urge to curl up in bed and fantasise about breaking things or hurting people. With the possible exception of my bathroom wall, I've not actually caused any harm with my anger yet, so that's all good.
