australia, who do you think you are?

over the past few weeks i have given a lot of thought to tomorrows national holiday. australia day, synonymous with bbqs, beers, fake/real flag tattoos and the wife beater. sad really, i have no real inclination for celebration. why? i mean, it's our nations day of celebrating uuuummmm yeah we commemorate the...., well that is to say, there is triple j's hottest 100 and yeah.... ok so i had no idea what the day was meant to be about and i assume not many others do either so i researched. the day is in an effort to pay tribute to the arrival of the first fleet in sydney cove in 1788, when the british hoisted the union jack and claimed the land under their sovereignty. wooooohhh!

this act is the reason why various aboriginal people declared the day, 'invasion day'. seems fair enough really but, my problem isn't with history so much as it is with the present. the day is seen as nothing more than a bank holiday in the sun and an excuse to get completely trashed and bitch about angus and julia stone's song 'jet plane' reaching the number 1 position of the hottest 100 (yest that's my ominous prediction btw). not that there is anything wrong with such past times, especially the last, but it does indicate how this country is missing something. a sense of national identity.

another criticism of the indifference that occurs on australia day is the fact that it falls during the school holidays. some teachers believe that due to this children are not as engaged as they are with other national holidays, like anzac day, and have no real concept of the importance of such an event. this lack of engagement in my mind has cemented the one dimensional hedonistic self image of australians. we like sport, having a laugh with a drink our hand and chilling on the beach. surely, there is more to us than that?

be it a result of our countrys short history, or our connection to britain and the united states, we haven't been given a chance to really branch out on our own. no civil wars or wars of independence, we haven't had the opportunity to grow as a nation by ourselves. not that wars are good things, but they do see change and a rallying of people behind a cause. we are still a member of the commonwealth because we seemingly can't be bothered or want to become independent knowing if we do, we can't win gold medals in sport at the commonwealth games. sad really.

getting back to my original gripe. australian tattoos have become a bogan trait. either through un-originality or a lack of understanding many aussies will proudly show off their 'patriotic' ink whilst subtly trying to say they have gone through pain for their noble homeland. now THAT pisses me off! mostly because i'm quite convinced that they have no idea what it means to be an australian. i know this, because i'm not even sure what it means anymore. but, having 'australia' or the apparently 'un-british' part of the flag (the southern cross) tattooed with abandon across your ass is about as offensive to me as burning the flag right in front of my eyes.

ok alright so, maybe it isn't all that bad, but it no longer posses the ideals it once encompassed. a symbol of perceived patriotism and egalitarianism was hijacked by racist thugs and well, the brand seems to have been irreparably damaged. blogger henry stones described the average southern cross tattoo holder in a smh article as possessing many traits, including: "you call rum and cokes 'rumbos' and you drink a minimum of two cartons a month"; "you have started a conversation regarding matty johns' innocence" and "you have a rat's tail".

perhaps a bit harsh, still it is concerning. this is how we show we care for our country? widespread apathy i fear will be the theme for tomorrow and whilst being wholly depressing is also scares the bejesus out of me. what's going to happen when the day comes we have to stand up for what we as a nation believe in, and can't think of a single thing worth fighting for?

banned from wikipedia!

i have been banned from editing pages on wikipedia for some kind of slander infringement. seems fair, i probably deserved it. BUT the fact of it is, i have absolutely no idea what i did. i went back through my blog posts and facebook status' looking for what exactly i was doing that day that might have pushed me too far and caused me to lash out on wiki. NOTHING!

One piece short of a puzzle?

so now i have been forced to take out my abject rage on the encyclopaedia website. i'm not silly though, won't be getting my ip address banned again.... lets just say, that people at the university of wollongong probably won't be able to edit pages for about a month. i do have to admit, i did find out i had been banned when i intended to go on a page and call someone a slut. but, i didn't get the chance. i mean i did today, still not the point. i would like to call some idiot keyboardist verve-frontman-loving person whatever names i like, from the comfort of my own home.

the biggest problem is, i can't even find out what i initially did to get banned. my conduct is not up for negotiation. it's like living under a fascist regime, except online and it doesn't really matter. i have found a way around the issue and begun my 10 step plan to destroy wikipedia. at the very least, i may mildly irritate them. still, not sure where to start. pick a sweet spot and poke it with a hard stick seems apt. any suggestions? anyone you really dislike or maybe someone you do like that you wish for me to make up a whimsical lie about?

suggestions please! i need my archduke-franz-ferdinand-first-strike to really kick off the annoying.

mellowing in my old age....kind of. ok maybe not.

a few weekends ago i attended a lovely wedding. the best kind, with a bride and groom that you actually like and can stomach how much in love they are, without day-dreaming about taking a firearm to the crowded reception. not that i'm bitter. well, that's not entirely true. i am, but i wasn't that day. furthermore, i think the experience of actively enjoying a wedding, sans feeling the need to get completely trollied on free wine, has softened my view on god.

ok so let me explain. religious weddings usually make my very cynical atheist side come out. that day, i tried really hard not to mock or giggle. right, so i giggled a little bit.... still, in my active repression (of which i have years of catholic church-going practice) i found myself listening. i'm not saying i believe in god now. i haven't seen the light and i still think strong belief in god is a bit mad BUT maybe, just maybe, denying the existence of god is as moronic as believing in one.

as a result of this, i did what i have always done. go a reading. so i read-up a bit. philosophy is generally fun for me, saves me having to think up my own ideas, and i found a very interesting guy called robert g. ingersoll. an american political leader, don't worry he wasn't very 'good' at that, and orator during the 19th century. he gave a speech in 1896 entitled, 'why i am an agnostic'. it spoke to me, answered some questions i hadn't known to ask.

ingersoll wrote, "is there a supernatural power-an arbitrary mind-an enthroned god-a supreme will that sways the tides and currents of the world-to which all causes bow? i do not deny. i do not know-but i do not believe. i believe that the natural is supreme-that from the infinite chain no link can be lost or broken-that there us no supernatural power that can answer prayer- no power that worship can persuade or change-now power that cares for man.

i believe that with infinite arms nature embraces the all-that there is no inference-no chance-that behind every event are the necessary and countless causes, and that beyond every event will be and must be necessary and countless effects.

is there a god? i do not know. is man immortal? i do not know. one thing i do know, and that is, that neither hope, nor fear, belief, nor denial, change the fact. it is as it is, and it will be as it must be."

i like this on many levels but, to name just two. nature, science, evolution and humanity in my mind are all linked. to stop looking to the heavens for answers and instead look at each other i think is, not only powerful but, also sensible and practical if you want actual answers about life, the universe and everything. secondly, his ideas of prayer as essentially scripted hoping. this desire for certain things to happen if we hope/pray really really hard will make some blind bit of difference. good people that do good things for the right reason, is in my mind, far better use of their time on earth than spending hours and hours of their life in a draughty old church (where god lives) and recite barely remembered scripture like it was a song from childhood.

so this is me softened. hmmm maybe not in hind sight, but still i was genuinely happy for the bride and groom even if i do think they were brought together by a random series of events over thousands and thousands of years and not god. because if so, where is my knight in shinning armour? ok maybe a lot bitter.

congrats guys! hope you like the egg rings.

wish-list!

so summer is coming and i couldn't be more excited. summer fashion, sand and my albino skin rarely sit well with one another, but i have found some amazing new things that could just make this season bearable. slut wear, it seriously just not me. a winter full of stocking, scarfs, army boots and skinny jeans are much more up my ally. still, my latest finds give me hope for the coming sweltering season.

and. here. we. go.

(top to bottom: SHIN MultiDress $198, Necklush Inkdrop $74, Galibardy Apple Ring Red $34, Paola Loves To Shop Subway Map Wayfarer Sunglasses $10, Black Milk Cape $70, Underground Fred - Cuban Heel Gold Beat Boot $79.50)

seriously, who cares?

answer, the governator!

as i put of studying for a psychology quiz, i began having a look around the new yorker online site for blog post inspiration. i forgot how much i really enjoy writing on this thing. what i expected to find was not what has me angry today. i thought, i would uncover some cool new book, movie, play or music review to pique my interest but instead, i found this.

last wednesday in california a lot of people thought that they would be getting married. not a big deal, people get married every day. except this day all wedding parties were disappointed. the 18th of august, 2010 was set to mark the day when preventing same sex couples from marrying would be deemed unconstitutional. a federal judge thought that this would be a great day to appeal the decision of 'perry v. schwarzenegger'. hence gay marriage is still illegal in the state until at the very earliest the 17th of september or the latest after a supreme court decision in 2011.

ok so what is in a month? it's surely isn't that long, and what is one more year? the answer is, a lot! i have a few friends who are planning weddings and really excited about starting a new chapter of their lives with the person they love. i can't imagine the heart ache they would all go through if, on their wedding day, they were told, 'sorry not today, maybe sometime in september. though, i wouldn't start re-organising'.

my problem with this decision is obvious. but, i guess i don't understand why there is such a fuss over same sex marriage. how can we live in a society that openly allows gay people all other opportunities, but legally binding themselves together is for some reason offensive to the publics moral sensibilities? i'm not going to speak for the christian right who oppose such a union, but i will ask them this. gay people don't choose to be gay, they were born that way, there is nothing wrong with that. it isn't a disease that they caught and the gay men and women i know are good people who deserve to be afforded the same rights as any straight person. moreover, how does it at all affect you?

the answer is, it really doesn't. one line, in a deeply disturbing historical text (i'm speaking of the bible, of course) is all it takes for religious people to oppose gay marriage. god said, "sorry boys if you like streisand and eachother 'like that' you can't get married". ok so that might not have been his exact words, but the sentiment is there. and lets face it, gay people are not the only people to be excluded by doctrine. the catholic church, continues to receive its tax exempt status from the government when its institutional sexism runs rampant. they don't allow women to become priests and openly gay men are disallowed from entering seminal school under the very vague excuse, god said no.

but, most people who aren't religious, and this is a large chunck of the australian population according to the latest census data, don't really mind. and why should they? gay marriage affords couples with legal rights regarding their children, spousal privilege and tax incentives that are made available to all straight married citizens.

seems fair to me. gay couples are just asking for what is given to straight people without question. vermont had the right idea, 10 years ago. come on australia, catch up!

twitter validates my existence!

a few weeks back i posted on my facebook, 'omg john larrouquette is now following me on twitter.... the same day he decided to follow leonard nimoy! omg!' and SHOCK HORROR no one cared! heathens! so, i felt the need to repeat myself with a melodic tune from the master comedian and actor from the hilarious, boston legal.

check it here. cue applause!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

also, obviously quitting twitter didn't take.... gillard began her run world domination and twitter became essential. sue me!

oh please, i barely lindsay lohaned.

today lindsay lohan was sentenced to 90 days in jail for failing to attend alcohol education classes after she missed a court date. her very public struggle with drug and alcohol related problems has sparked something very odd in me. i honestly thought i would be cheering for her decline, we all like it when pretty people fall. famous attractive successful people is like hitting the hilarious trifecta. we enjoy it all the more. still, this weird popular culture fascination with celebrities concerns me on many levels.

my first instinct is to rant. why the hell do these people have so very many issues? vices that we 'normal' non-famous people don't struggle with nearly as often. yes, some of us have the same addictions but this is a relatively small closed community (the entertainment/music/fashion industries) and it is prevalent. OR at least it seems to be. i think, we don't understand their lives and through the media seek to gain some understanding and/or perspective. we think if we had that perspective we might somehow get how these very talented (or not so talented) wealthy people manage to screw up their lives so royally when we think they have everything so much easier than we do. i mean, these people don't ever have to worry about money and.... well, that is really it.

it was then that i began to get it. lindsay might be rich but, she has the same wants and fears that we all have. self worth, the wish to be loved unconditionally, to matter in the world and later, leave a legacy that has helped the future in some way. we all desire these things. i'm not saying money doesn't make this easier, it most definitely does but her wealth does come at a price. fame. she became internationally famous at the age of 11 yrs and if you have ever read or watched anything about her parents it really is no wonder she has the problems she has today.

a legacy of child stars has taught us that going into the entertainment industry at a young age is not a good idea. yet, people still push their children into it. this thirst for fame is uncontrollable for some. i don't get it. lindsay might not have been old enough to choose this life as a child but that is no excuse for her behaviour now. she could walk away from the spot light, get some help, do a natalie portman and go to school. do something else. but she hasn't and she won't. thus, we all won't be surprised to see her, like so many other famous people with issues, die a premature death. this is goulish!

when heath ledger died last year, the media went nuts trying to get us all the information we needed to fully understand what happened. they gave us, the public, what we wanted then we turned around and called them vultures for doing exactly as we asked. now, i'm not about to go into journalistic ethics (and yes, they do have them, sometimes) but, we should take some responsibility for 1. the news we receive, 2. the insidious way it is procured and 3. the down side of this 'cult of celebrity'. audience models for media analysis are very complicated and boring, by the way. still, what media we consume and why are central to all theories.

i can't say i ever expected to see these words typed by me but, i've got to the point where all this celebrity/social decay has to reflect something in me. i enjoy when pretty people fall, this is wrong. i should never find myself cheering for another persons self destruction. but, hey when the person is famous then it's perfectly acceptable. if it were my friend i wouldn't, even if it were a friend of a friend, i wouldn't. just because i don't know lindsay doesn't make it is ok.

then again, i'm not proposting we go out and sponser a celebrity, to get them back on their feet. but seriously, i think it's enough to simply feel sorry for these people and have just the smallest amount of human compassion. because, not matter what their situation everyone deserves that.

---------------------------------------------------

note - the title of this post is a quote from the tv show 'will & grace'. grace almost faints after feeling sick at a wedding.

suicide's easy, what happened to the revolution?

stephen fry - the sydney opera house - 27th of july - 8pm

foals - manning bar - 28th of july - 8pm

the strokes - the hordern pavilion - 29th of july - 7pm

black rebel motor cycle club - the metro - 1st of august - 8pm

....going to be a big week of AWESOME! woop can't wait. now, i got to go practice my thrash dancing.

detag, delete and decorum.

my three rules for preventing future problems for the pictures taken today.

re-blog alert!

the camera never lies, well not when there are so many of them now: thousands of images taken on cameraphone do tell the truth - in all its mundanity. bit of perspective regarding photography and the value/truth of the photo in today's society.

check it out right HERE.

hope there really isn't a hell or i'm pretty screwed!

i have recently begun reading a book called 'the end of faith' by sam harris. it is a continuation of my research into the idea of atheism and how it is connected to the way i feel about the existence of god(s). i have come to the conclusion, that, i in fact don't believe in god. an all knowing, all powerful being who participates in the day-to-day affairs of human beings to me seems ludicrous, but more than anything that such a baseless belief is actually dangerous.

now, before you get your angry typing fingers ready this is what i think. this isn't what i think everyone should think and i'm certainly not so deluded that i posit that i can change a single persons mind about the importance of religion/god to them. that is not the point of this post. all i seek is a conversation on the topic that is civil, thought provoking and honest without it descending into anger and/or fear mongering.

as such, i'm going to tell you a bit about what i think. firstly, i do 'think' as opposed to 'believe' when talking about faith. the only reason is because thoughts can be changed, beliefs seem, to me anyway, more solid and i'm not sure they should be. we as people are forever changing is seems slightly silly to have a belief that can't be altered or even reversed when given further consideration. ok moving on, i was raised catholic and the dogmatic way that such an old church conducts itself never really appealed to me. i suppose, all the poetic revelations spoken about by devout people, in all the iconic literature was never experienced by me and as a result it left me feeling as though i was missing something that everyone singing in church clearly understood. the 'oh. huh. cool.' revelations about the world came to me rather from books. poetry, literature, philosophy, psychology, history helped me understand why i was standing here, now, living the life i lead.

most simply put, i have no faith in god and for a long time was really very angry about that. that was until i realised, you can't be angry at god and then not believe in him/her/it. i'm happy to say i'm no longer angry at god, and haven't been for some time, but rather was just ambivalent. this came from the realisation that the ceo of the universe could never be understood and so i devoted my time to understanding other things.

in most circles that i travel in being an atheist isn't a good thing, not that i habitually share the fact, but rather you instantly get the response, 'oh michelle that's really sad.'. but, it isn't and why should it be? oh, i'm going to hell? well according to the old testament, as i haven't been to church in about 5 years and even then my heart really wasn't in it, i'm going there anyway so i may as well leave the world slightly better off than i found it. so, i go to university, i learn some stuff, i go to work, i hang with friends, be good to my family, vote with a conscious and pay my taxes. that's better than some people and god hasn't even entered into the equation yet.

by the way, i just realised this might be a long post so buckle up kids. next, i have a rather large problem with the thing most religious people (specifically christians, it's what i know so...) habitually and very successfully seek to ignore. the past. i'm not about to go all richard dawkins on your ass' mostly, because he is far too militant in his views. declaring war on organised religion as a fantasy that needs to be extinguished, as an example. not my view, but he does have a point. it is the almost stereotypical point presented by atheists for their lack of belief in god. still, it needs to be said. the crusades, inquisitions, the burning times (witch trials), priests interfering with children, and even the current war on terror have links to organised religion as one, if not their entire, root cause. genocide is a common theme. it is even thought by some historians that the dark ages, that followed the fall of the roman empire and saw about 800 years when all science and critical inquiry were considered religious heresy, had not occurred we today may have ventured outside of our own solar system. this is all academic of course, and entirely my point.

most atheists that i've met merely transfer their faith from god to science. i'm not usually one to follow a crowd but i do agree with this. not that science is our saviour or anything but rather is can be rationally argued. it has a rich history of great thinkers who dared to look past religion and seek for an answer that was tangible. moreover, in our growing secular society this is also more relevant. we all like to think there is something bigger than ourselves, something for us to hitch our wagon to. for some that is god, and for others that is science. it's a social reflex. we are primates, we enjoy the comfort and security that a community provides and if that community believes as you do, then the group is strengthened. so, i guess i hope for the day where, dare i say we become evolved enough. or a future when we don't feel the need to rely on a personal god, to steer us in the right direction and then judge us for our ability (or lack of ability) to follow instructions BUT rather put that faith and trust in ourselves.

this brings me to what i believe in. as the atheist range is large, simply because it is linked with defining 'god' or 'deity', there are many different types of atheism (not even including agnosticism) and i suppose i find myself sitting in the 'practical atheism' corner of the metaphysical boxing ring. individuals live as if there are no gods and explain natural phenomena without resorting to the divine. the existence of gods is not denied, but is designated unnecessary or useless. it is seen that gods neither provide purpose to life, nor influence everyday life. i agree with this and perhaps most strongly think that belief in gods does not motivate moral action but rather that people are innately humane and make decisions about their moral actions according to this code rather than their wish to go to heaven. this isn't to say that the law plays no part. i mean, no one wants to get shived in jail.

i suppose in many ways this makes me a humanist. to me, it is more powerful and meaningful than a belief in god. we shape our own lives. autonomy as opposed to fate. the international humanist and ethical union is an organisation that requires its members to accept one minimum statement about its beliefs and politics. "humanism is a democratic and ethical life stance, which affirms that human beings have the right and responsibility to give meaning and shape to their own lives. it stands for the building of a more humane society through an ethic based on human and other natural values in the spirit of reason and free inquiry through human capabilities. it is not theistic, and does not accept supernatural views of reality". i really like this concept. i guess it's everything i always wanted catholicism to be; a pope without prada? scandalous!

so, not all atheists are angry liberal god haters who despise their own rational nature. i hope i have shown that some of us just have chosen to back a different horse in this race. i hope there really isn't a hell though. oh, wouldn't my face be red!

-------------------------------------

note: the picture that i chose to use is of the eagle nebula's 'pillars of creation' taken by the hubble telescope in 1995. it shows the early formation of a star and thus, is a nice combination of science and things believed to be crafted by god(s).

you can't always get what you want.

don't worry i'm not about to lurch into song with some jaggeresque dance moves. but, what i will do is implore you all to never EVER get talked into writing (or even reading) blogs. sort of an odd topic to choose for as blogger, i suppose, but i'm quite angry at the vicious cycle i seem to have got myself into. one with with no escape route in sight.

some of you may have, and i stress 'may' have, noticed i'm quite the angry ranter. probably because i was miss treated as a child. too late to call child services now. OR, more likely it could be to do with my need for an ego stroking coupled with a safe outlet for my own eloquent brand of meticulously well thought out rage.

even so, now that i have time to actually sit and read a book or watch a full season of glee in one marathon sitting, there is also time to think. serious thinking. life, the universe and everything type thinking. which, like always with me, equates to being bummed out. the things you have always done, or believed in or even just thought were pretty are constantly shifting. to the point that one day you turn around and its 2010 and apparently cargo pants aren't cool anymore.

as i bring this rambling tirade to a close, i really should get to my point. today, i begin 'operation unplug'. taking mini steps back from my computer, very slowly so as not to scare the poor thing. i spend far too much of my time looking at a computer screen and not talking to people. it can't be healthy. as a result, today my twitter account dies. who knows this week i might read 2 books instead of my usual 1, spend less money online and make a new cool handsome shaped friend.

'cause, if you try sometimes you just might find, you get what you need.

flying by the seat of my pants probably isn't going to work anymore....

i'm back baby dolls! and after a hard day of examing, shopping and then drinking, then shopping again i felt my blog calling to me. so here we go.

right, i had my very first psychology exam today and to say that i was scared is a massive understatement. still, i have also never studied that much in my entire life. seriously! my hsc preparation consisted of me watching the x files and well, compared to psych a media degree is a cake walk! sodoku is harder than writing a bcm essay and getting a credit!

this mornings exam was insane! 115 multiple choice questions covering 13 weeks of course content that introduces students to over 125 years of psychoanalytic theory and practice! so in a desperate ploy to, you know, not fail i studied my little heart out. now this need to not fail has never existed within me the entire 3 years i have been at uni! what can i say i'm a masochist. but after failing a 7% quiz rather spectacularly earlier this session it freaked me out so much that i picked up a pen turned away from my precious blog, facebook, twitter, etsy, gmail and hotmail accounts and actually cracked a book.

now the biggest problem is, after the exam was over i felt absolutely no relief. none! if anything, i actually felt worse. yes the session is now over but, i seriously have no idea if i passed todays exam. i have no frame of reference when it comes to academic success with an exam that attacks (yes attacks) key underlying knowledge. i may have failed. i knew some answers, didn't know others and was unsure of a fair few.

oooh well, will just have to wait and see. nothing more i can do now. if i fail, i re do the class. expensive life lesson, but one i probably needed to learn.

ALSO, if anyone comments saying, 'whatever will be, will be' i swear to god i may have to kick you in the face. except when you say it mum, then.... sure it helps.

attention: due to the gfc there will be cutbacks.

i have been feeling over the last few weeks that, although i've blogged daily for almost 2 months, the quality of my posts has begun to decline. so from now on, i won't be posting as often. rather i will let my writing be dictated by quality content as opposed to quantity time constraints.

still, if anyone has anything they think i should write about; or just have a topic you think would suit darth michelle, then please feel free to let me know. am a bit of a shut in till tuesday.....exam. gah!

until then peace out, bitches!

p.s., happy birthday dad. :)

but, her birthday is in april....?

happy long weekend to all! so in the eastern states of australia we celebrate the queen, our monarch's birthday today. the problem is her actual birthday is the 21st of april.... so why do we have it in the second weekend of june? this has always bothered me, until today when i decided to consult the magical machine that is google.

it turns out that there is a very cool and rich history behind why we get a day off work; unless of course you work in hospitality and then, yay extra money. it all began way back in 1788 when governor arthur phillip declared the holiday in celebration of king george the 3rd (who was born on the 4th of june). the holiday did jump around to coincide with the birthday of the reigning monarch until it was decided after the death of george the 5th (queen elizabeth the 2nds grandfather), whose birthday was on the 3rd of june to keep it on its original weekend.

not going to tackle the issue of an australian republic because well, i'm not sure if i have a solid opinion on it. i don't like the idea of inherited wealth and privilege but i also equally like having a long weekend that usually falls around my own birthday.

happy birthday! hope you like your miller's voucher.

so, today is my birthday. yay! the big two-five. eek! anyway, i am a narcissist but i actually wanted to talk about the act of giving gifts. now before you all rush off to return your gifts for me STOP, read this and then decide if the panda jumper you bought me is actually a good fit.

i read a few months back a very cool article about the act of giving someone a complement that i think is appropriate. there is an intricate behind the scenes emotional roller-coaster ride of motives one has when giving a complement (or in this case a birthday present).

the level of intimacy between two people is one aspect of how personal and/or expensive a present is. still, the more specific the gift the bigger the risk. no one likes to be put into the wrong group. you skrew up and give a present that the receiver doesn't like then you are essentially putting a square peg in a round hole. it won't work. BUT, if you get it right then well, perfect present equalling hugs and kisses.

still, this is a minefield. the easiest way around this in today's culture is the wondrous gift voucher. this is though essentially admitting, 'i don't really know what you wanted and it's rude to give cash so here, buy what you want.'. hmmm i'm not exactly sure how i feel about gift vouchers or even cash as a present. i like money but, at the same time it makes you feel as though that person doesn't really know you. that, in my mind, comes down to the gifts recipient not the gift giver.

oooh well, this is all rather redundent. 25 isn't a big birthday and i am truly not expecting more than a drink in my ability to have lasted half way through my 20s. giving a gift is a lovely gesture that even if i don't love i'm sure i will like. plus i'm a good liar so you will never know the difference.

fur coats....yay? or nay?

i personally have nothing against vegetarians per se. still, the wankery ones who do it for stupid reasons or aren't consistent do seem to grate on my nerves! there are many good reasons to become a vego. health reasons, it is proven to be a much healthier life style. environmental reasons, its been reported that the run off from abattoirs causes more damage to the environment than driving a large fourwheel drive. animal rights, concerns that animals are unfairly treated in an inhumane way.

all are good reasons, i suppose. still, seems like a lot of hard work for animals that were they smarter, quicker or endangered wouldn't get eaten. although, i do eat free range chickens and eggs but that's only because i think they should at least get a bit of a run around before i eat them. but, all this comes down to was the douche bag environmental wankers handing out flyers for the ethical treatment of animals at uni a few weeks back.

cows have feelings and are bad for the environment (methane, run off, farming practices) and eating them is also murder. all fine, all true and thus, fair enough. BUT whilst wearing leather boots and drinking bottled water (that is also bad for the environment) they did nothing but piss me off with their inconsistent eco posturing! you are either all in or not at all. but, to me if you sit on the fence and pick and choose what you like and don't like about a cause, that is worse. even if you do do that don't go around bitching to me about tofu and saving the bloody whales!

so quickly, on the topic of fur. i think they are pretty. i am definitely not against the industry or people who wear them. but if you do wear one and then not eat meat you are a hypocrite and i hope you get eaten by a shark!

me + duchamp = a house on fire!

right, i'm back. sorry about that, life encroached on my blogging duties. but here we go, art is the topic of the day.

i have always found a great affinity with the works of the great franco-american dada and surrealist artist marcel duchamp. he was a playful man and his ideas about art and the way we perceive it are all fascinating to me. not to mention during a very successful career, he gave up paining and sculpting to become a chess master.

perhaps his most famous series of work were his 'readymades'. these are, specifically, what i want to tell you all about. ordinary manufactured objects that the artist selected and modified, as an antidote to what he called 'retinal art'. by simply choosing the object(s) and repositioning or joining, tilting and signing, the object becomes art. as this process involves the least amount of interaction between artist and art, it represents the most extreme (maybe even pure) form of minimalism.

he believed, quite strongly, in this, "....it was always the idea that came first, not the visual example. a form of denying the possibility of defining art". he only made 20 readymades, this was to avoid the trap of his own taste. meaning, that once you deemed a piece 'good' or 'bad', it became what he called, 'an enemy of art'. as a result, he never was able to define how he himself felt about the pieces in the series and even the style in general. the enigma that was duchamp is tied up in this fact, he was never able to define 'readymades' fully enough to satisfy him and moreover, felt that defining it wasn't essential to the series of work.

the 'fountain' is easily the most famous work in this series. this is because it took the idea of common place objects that are then defined as 'art' to its most conceptualised visceral extreme. this picture of the piece is the only one of the original, taken by photographer alfred stieglitz. it was lost in 1917 shortly after its installation. it is believed to have been thrown out with the garbage like other duchamp works of the time.

still, this doesn't reflect its worth or importance as a great artwork of the 20th century. in 2004, it was voted the most influential artwork of the century by 500 British art world professionals and the artist-authorised replica (1964) was sold in 1999 for $1.7 million. it is now housed in the tate modern, london. check it out an do what others have done, piss on it. if you love it or hate it....it was after all, what it was made for.

i'm the mascot of an evil corporation!

bart simpson said that, but still, doesn't make it untrue. he was talking about mickey mouse while wearing a black bra on his head but, it has got me thinking again about the choices we make when we buy things. business ethics seem to simply not exist with regard to large corporations like disney. they don't care who they trample on for the sake of economic expansion and simple bottom line profits. so, why should we?

well if the economic crisis has taught us anything, it is that we as consumers do have a collective power. we stop buying cars = general motors goes under. we eat at home to conserve cash and mcdonalds posts much lower annual profits. the first example is true, but somehow, the second is not. this year mcdonalds in complete contrary to their sales, posted profits that exceeded the last two financial years. how is this possible, i hear you ask? like other big companies they cut costs wherever they could to keep their ceo in a nice new jaguar.

a lot of us, i'm sure, have worked as teenagers for large transnational companies for disgusting levels of minimum wage to keep us in new billabong threads and the latest album from britney spears (not that i'm projecting with these examples). at this age you don't even think about what you are contributing to these companies, like mcdonalds, you are immersed in your first real step into the big world of consumerism. ignorance might be bliss but that doesn't make it ok.

if you choose to see a disney movie or wear nike shoes then you have to take some responsibility for the business practices of these companies. you might never see the people, who work for almost nothing in indonesian and chinese sweat shops but, you continue to keep them enslaved. consumer culpability.

i have always managed to somehow ignore this fact. i work, i get paid, i buy shoes, they fit, i look cool and nothing else really enters into it. money for product. it's a simple enough trade. it isn't until you look into where the shoes come from that the little voice in your head (mine is starting to sound like you rob, damn you!) starts to make you feel bad about the decisions you have made.

vegetarianism seems to me quite similar. still, it makes me sad that we live in a world where more people care about animal cruelty than human cruelty. politics text books have told me over and over again that globalisation produces clear winners and losers. the divide between rich and poor is expanding as quickly as globalisation is. just because you are a winner doesn't mean you have to ignore the trail of destruction (losers) you have left in your buying frenzied wake.

next time you have a happy meal i suggest you contemplate your impending heart attack AND the 5 year old child in jordon working for 2 cents and hour. would you like to work for that?

if you want to read into this further, i can't recommend enough that you check out 'the national labour committee' website here. they hope to inform people and 'put a human face on the global economy'. also the picture is by british street artist banksy. his work hopes to make people more socially and politically aware. he is amazing. check it out here.

honorary jedi knight.

this post goes out to all my readers who actually make a habit out of reading the narcissistic crap that spews out my hatch everyday. specifically, obi damo kenobie! the boy who is like a big brother might be a wingey little bitch but he requested a cameo so here it is.

so, if anyone else would like a jedi/starwars related nickname then comment on this post

and i will be happy to supply you with a sexy alias like mine and damiens!

may the force be with you.

baby me, and you'll be peeing through a catheter!

there really is something so very very wrong with my ears and how they really really do not like the word 'baby' in reference to me. 'babe', seems to be slightly more acceptable but it does have to come from the right person. it was pointed out to me this week that such endearments must be earned. with friends through trial and tribulation. still, the independent person in me distinctly dislikes being called 'babe' by any man.

i think that it creates a hostility in me that probably has to do with power struggle and domination. now, before you get excited i don't mean domination in the wips and chains kind of extreme way but, there might be an element of that. being called 'that word' (i'm sorry i can't even type it anymore) by a man suggests some sort of immediate submissive dynamic that, to me, always feels like i am being talked down to. as though, i am just the little woman waiting for the man's commands that, i am an almost infantile sexual partner who will agree to without question.

i don't think so!

there is a reason i have included a picture of the lovely agent dana scully. the title of this post is thanks to her and also as a teenager i saw her as a great example of a strong, independent modern woman. even if she did have a penchant for getting kidnapped and shot at.