Keir's blog: a blog entitled Keir's Blog: A Blog

For better or for worse

2010-11-29T11:14:00.001+08:00

AHHH! They're devaluing my institution! *shakes fist*

Gay marriage is, depending on how you look at it, either unimportant or very important. It's unimportant in that there are other more pressing social issues. It's very important because there are people who are being discriminated against at an institutional level for no reason at all, and it would take very little, and hurt no one, to change the situation.

The issue is simple. Gay people exist. Gay people aren't allowed to get married. That is unfair. The debate is complicated because people make it complicated. I've never heard an argument against gay marriage that I haven't instantly dismissed. I'm not gay, I don't have any close friends who are gay, and I don't have an "agenda" (a word that appears altogether too often in this debate, which is, or should be, about human rights and not politics).

Many people who oppose gay marriage are religious to some degree. It's not unreasonable to suggest that many such people are not only opposed to the marriage aspect, they are opposed to homosexuality itself. It's not just marriage that is between a man and a woman, it's same-sex relationships full stop. The religious arguments range from old-testament craziness - as seen in various letters to The West Australian last week - to relatively progressive "I support equal rights for gays but please don't change the definition of marriage" arguments.

Of course, religious people are entitled to their opinions - I wouldn't have it any other way - but I fail to see how allowing (or not allowing) homosexual people to get married affects anyone, apart from homosexual people. To say or imply that allowing gay people to marry devalues heterosexual marriage or the traditional family unit is inherently homophobic and unfair, and it's a shame that such people are part of this debate.

The faithful often (correctly) point out that marriage began as a religious institution, and for some people that is what it still is. Fine. However, I daresay for that many, many more people than that - and this is a point that has been made countless times - marriage is simply a commitment between two people who love one another other so much that they want to grow old together. No matter how many times the religious right shriek that Australia was founded on the principles of Christianity, Australia is a secular society. I've never even been to a wedding in a church. The only weddings I've been to have been outdoors, performed by female civil celebrants licensed by the Government. My own mother is a marriage celebrant and happens to be an atheist.

The Prime Minister and other senior Labor ministers such as Penny Wong have been accused by the Greens of lacking courage in their refusal to engage in the debate. It was refreshing and surprising to hear Labor Right faction heavy and Roman Catholic Mark Arbib call for a conscience vote against the general party line - and definitely against the Right line - earlier this month. He's been accused of cynically kowtowing to the Greens, which may be true - the man knows politics after all - but it's certainly a positive step. Two weeks ago Labor backbencher Stephen Jones publicly supported Greens MP Adam Bandt's successful motion to allow MPs to seek the views of their electorates on the issue, and other prominent ALP MPs such as Anthony Albanese are on the record as being in support of gay marriage.

Conspicuously silent on the issue had been Penny Wong, until this week when she finally spoke in favour of changing the Labor platform next year at the ALP National Conference. Many had been disappointed that a half-Asian, openly gay senior Labor minister - who by her own account has had first hand experience of discrimination - refused to publicly speak against her party's stance. Her reasons were of course political, as she explains in this clip: (Check out Graham Richardson springing to Wong's defence at 4:45)

Wong was clearly biding her time.

With more and more senior Labor people from both factions going against the party line, it seems that the Prime Minister is under growing pressure to revise her own and the ALP's position on the issue, which is good news for gay people and fans of common sense.

Still, the debate continues to get mired in irrelevant and infuriating non-points. Consider this recent article by Australian journalist Christopher Pearson, which starts off with the line:

THE most obvious thing about arguments for same-sex marriage is their shallowness.

Wait - arguments for gay marriage are shallow? He's pulled the old switcheroo! Pearson goes on to describe arguments in favour of gay marriage as specious, "vulgar inevitabilism", before claiming that he is pro-gay after all:

Few have argued more consistently over many years than I have done that same-sex partners should get a fair deal on superannuation and other entitlements of that kind. Labor's reforms in the last parliament mean that couples are treated pretty much equally except in the matter of marriage.

Sounds like token and insincere political correctness, but I'll allow it. Besides, there's a good chance he is sincere on this point, more on that later.

But the few remaining privileges reserved for matrimony are there for sound, practical reasons.

Here we go.

Most men are not naturally disposed to be monogamous, for example. One of the purposes of marriage is to bind them to their spouses and children for the long haul and to give the state's approval to those who enter such a contract and abide by its terms.

Well, that is contentious at best, and even if it's true it is certainly not an argument against gay marriage. If two guys want to get married, isn't the monogamy problem (if we accept it) twice as bad? If we let guys get married there's less chance they can run amok spreading gay everywhere!

Another of the purposes of marriage is to affirm that parenthood is a big, and in most cases the primary, contribution a couple can make, both to their own fulfilment and the public good.

Couples whose biology does not allow them to have children should be banned from being able to marry. I'm not even going to point out the obvious problem with that, because it has been written about so many times already.

It follows that societies which want to sustain their population size, let alone increase their fertility level, should positively discriminate in favour of stable, heterosexual relationships...

It's discrimination, but it's positive. I've never heard anyone argue that gay marriage will destroy our population growth before. I mean, what is the percentage of homosexuality in a given population? I was told once that it's about 10%, a figure which I have always felt to be about right. A quick Google search suggests that it is significantly lower than that, although there has never been a definitive study performed. In any case - and I'm sure I don't have to point this out - there is absolutely no way that allowing gay marriage would affect population in any way at all. That kind of conclusion can only be reached if you believe that homosexuality is not just a choice, but a disease that can be spread.

...and assert the preferability of adolescents making a normal transition to heterosexual adulthood.

There it is. Heterosexuality is normal and homosexuality is abnormal. Again, this has been written about so much it's almost clichéd at this point, but that kind of thinking is outdated, unrealistic and unhelpful. You can't guide a child into heterosexuality. Gay people just exist. Gay people have always existed, it's part of the human condition, get over it, move on.

It should be obvious to unprejudiced observers that, while there are plenty of well-adjusted gays who manage to lead satisfying and productive lives, rational people do not of their own volition choose to be homosexual.

This is a badly-structured and ambiguous sentence, but what I think he is saying given the context of the article is that gay people should not choose to be gay because that is irrational. Stop being irrational, gays. Make the right choice.

This seems like as good a time as any to point out something that might surprise you if you didn't already know: Christopher Pearson is - and I'm being serious here - gay. He's also religious - Catholic to be specific - but you might have already guessed that.

Among the reasons the Greens are so keen on same-sex marriage is that they want to reduce the population and drive down national fertility. Their refusal to discriminate positively in favour of heterosexuality and uphold the distinctive value of normal marriage shows their political project yet again for what it is: a dead end.

If the Greens think that gay marriage is a good way to reduce population growth then they are even more dangerously misguided than The Australian thinks they are. Pearson is really stretching here. Next thing you know he'll bring up abortion.

Speaking of dead ends, some American bishops have recently given a persuasive account of why same-sex marriage has come to look like a modest reform. They put it down to a culture where contraception and abortion are so widely practised that the crucial differences between a fertile couple, a couple childless by choice and a gay couple have been largely obscured and each partnership is seen as morally equivalent. They also lay some of the blame on a UN version of entitlement, in which marriage could be reduced to an unqualified abstract right.

!

Pearson goes on to claim that Labor should not change its stance on gay marriage because they would lose "faith based" votes, and questions the validity a recent study that found the majority of Australians support gay marriage.

See what I mean about muddying the waters? Pearson is a gay man who (unsurprisingly) fully supports equal entitlements for same-sex couples, yet at the same time his conflicting religious conservatism forces him to split his brain in half just to be able to form an opinion. Not surprisingly, his arguments come across as rambling and confusing.

I am too often a fence sitter. Too often I'll look at all sides of an issue then throw up my hands and say "well there are a lot of grey areas" and go do something else.

I don't see any grey areas in the gay marriage debate.

There's Something About Mares

2010-07-18T16:18:00.002+08:00

As you either know or don't know, well-regarded Perth gourmet butcher Vince Garreffa was recently granted a licence to sell horsemeat for human consumption, a move that has perhaps unsurprisingly led to a good deal of controversy and, according to an ABC report, death threats. Some animal rights activists have seized the opportunity to grab some publicity (and who can blame them, they are after all right - more on that later), but most of the outrage seems to have come from regular Joes like you and me - Joes that like nothing more than a rare steak, or a good lamb souvlaki, or a whole extra-hot Nando's chicken in one sitting - Joes that simply cannot countenance the notion of eating horse but lack the words or wisdom to properly explain why. Someone who doesn't lack words and knows exactly what he's doing with them is Cormac McCarthy. Let's go to him now:

He spoke of his campaigns in the deserts of Mexico and he told them of horses killed under him and he said that the souls of horses mirror the souls of men more closely than men suppose and that horses also love war. Men say they only learn this but he said that no creature can learn that which his heart has no shape to hold. His own father said that no man who has not gone to war horseback can ever truly understand the horse and he said that he supposed he wished that this were not so but that it was so.

Lastly he said that he had seen the souls of horses and that it was a terrible thing to see. He said that it could be seen under certain circumstances attending the death of a horse because the horse shares a common soul and its separate life only forms it out of all horses and makes it mortal. He said that if a person understood the soul of a horse then he would understand all horses that ever were.

They sat smoking, watching the deepest embers of the fire where the red coals cracked and broke.

Y de los hombres? said John Grady.

The old man shaped his mouth how to answer. Finally he said that among men there was no such communion as among horses and the notion that men can be understood at all was probably an illusion. Rawlins asked him in his bad spanish if there was a heaven for horses but he shook his head and said that a horse had no need of heaven. Finally John Grady asked him if it were not true that should all horses vanish from the face of the earth the soul of the horse would not also perish for there would be nothing out of which to replenish it but the old man only said that it was pointless to speak of there being no horses in the world for God would not permit such a thing.

All The Pretty Horses - Cormac McCarthy

To Cormac McCarthy horses are mystical, beautiful creatures that share an enigmatic and profound affinity with humans. In All The Pretty Horses the bond between horses and certain people – such as the protagonist John Grady – is born of both natural instinct and otherworldly providence, and horse and man need and complement each other in a sort of spiritual symbiosis. Read this description of John Grady:

The boy who rode on slightly before him sat a horse not only as if he’d been born to it which he was but as if were he begot by malice or mischance into some queer land where horses never were he would have found them anyway. Would have known that there was something missing for the world to be right or he right in it and would have set forth to wander wherever it was needed for as long as it took until he came upon one and he would have known that that was what he sought and it would have been.

Grady breaking in a wild horse:

The horses were already moving. He took the first one that broke and rolled his loop and forefooted the colt and it hit the ground with a tremendous thump. The other horses flared and bunched and looked back wildly. Before the colt could struggle up John Grady had squatted on its neck and pulled its head up and to one side and was holding the horse by the muzzle with the long bony head pressed against his chest and the hot sweet breath of it flooding up from the dark wells of its nostrils over his face and neck like news from another world. They did not smell like horses. They smelled like what they were, wild animals. He held the horse’s face against his chest and he could feel along his inner thighs the blood pumping through the arteries and he could smell the fear and he cupped his hand over the horse’s eyes and stroked them and he did not stop talking to the horse at all, speaking in a low steady voice and telling it all that he intended to do and cupping the animal’s eyes and stroking the terror out.

The interesting thing in this passage is that to Grady wild horses are not horses at all, they're nothing but animals, and to achieve that special and holy level of existence of equinity they require communion with man, and only man. The implication is that humans and horses are unique in that they are part of the animal world yet above it, and the kinship that each were destined to share elevates them further.

McCarthy's hypnotic and powerfully simple prose makes it easy to find oneself nodding inwardly and saying things like "Yeah, I guess I do love horses a bunch" and "I agree, the shared soul of horsekind is the one path to gnosis" but obviously the reality is that he's talking a whole lot of bullshit.

But there is truth even in fiction, and the simple fact is that there is a connection between horses and people, and if nothing else All The Pretty Horses serves to illustrate just how deep that connection can be.

Now let's turn to some guy called Paul:

I wish to express my disgust at the Government allowing butchers and restaurants to sell horse meat. How dare they do this to such a noble beast. Horses have been man's best friend long before the dog. Here's why. Did we ride a dog into battle during the war? No. It was the Light Horsemen, not light dogmen. Did we ride a dog into town for shopping purposes? No. Did a dog plow our fields? No.

Horses have served man well over the times. We even had one as a hero in the 1930s. Anybody remember Phar Lap or Makybe Diva – three times Melbourne cup winner? To this day the noble horse still serves man well and does not deserve to be on a menu at a restaurant. I will not support butchers, supermarkets or restaurants that support the sale of horse meat. I hope everyone will do the same.

Paul Smyth, Munster (The West Australian letters to the editor July 17, 2010)

A bit of a change in terms of quality of writing I know but give the guy a break will you? He's a Munster, not a Writer (that or Munster is a place and he's from there, but this is beside the point). On first reading Paul Smyth, Munster seems to be arguing that horses have worked damn hard all their collective life in service of their human masters and he'll be damned if they deserve such shoddy treatment as being killed and eaten after all they've done for us. Like, that is what he's saying, however I can't help but feel that Paul has more than just a soft spot for horses, he wants to express something similar to Cormac McCarthy and just lacks the words.

The fact that he objects so stridently to eating horses obviously suggests that he considers them to be above the status of animals. He refers to horses as noble (twice) and heavily implies that they more than mere pets by comparing their achievements with that of the dog.

I thought dragging the canine community's good name through the mud was a bit unnecessary at first but he raises an interesting point - horses are generally used as, er, workhorses and don't exist solely as objects of affection the way that pets do, yet the love for horses and the aversion to eating their meat is arguably as great or greater than it is with say, dogs. (Incidentally, I'd like to take this opportunity to nominate "Did we ride a dog into town for shopping purposes?" for national Sentence of the Week).

Of course this taboo is far from universal and generally only exists in English-speaking countries. We don't get upset about other people doing it though, I guess if the French want to eat their cheval all the damn day then it's their own business. That's all the way over there, there's nothing we can do about it. As vile and disgusting as we apparently regard it it's just not worth going to war over. I mean Jews and Muslims don't write letters to the editor complaining about people eating swine - they just don't eat it themselves. People only get upset about things that are in their own backyard, which is obviously a very common phenomenon. But as soon as Australian horses start getting killed for people to eat the uproar starts.

In fact, Australia already has a horsemeat industry and has done for decades - it's just not for domestic consumption. Vince Garreffa claimed in the ABC article I cited earlier that Australia has the sixth largest horsemeat export market in the world. I tried to verify this but only got Wikipedia and a bunch of old broken links, so I suspect Vince did too. This was meant to be a short opinion/rant and not an investigation - maybe later?

Obviously, despite some people's McCarthy style spiritualism, the aversion to eating horsemeat is nothing but a cultural taboo - meat eaters haven't really got a rational leg to stand on when they complain about it. Animal liberationists however do, and they are two vast and trunkless legs of stone.

The philosopher and author of the Animal Liberation bible Animal Liberation Peter Singer rejects the idea of absolute rights when it comes to the treatment of animals, and that the assumption that humans are superior to animals on the basis of intelligence is discrimination on par with human racism. He argues that intelligence is not a logical boundary between humans and non-humans – for example young children and severely mentally disabled people might have equal or lower intelligence to some animals – therefore intelligence doesn't present a basis for affording animals less moral consideration than children or disabled people.

Instead he argues from a position of preference utilitarianism: that the ability to suffer should be the primary concern when dealing with the treatment of sentient beings, and given that there is no absolute divide between humans and non-humans, the interests of any two animals, human or otherwise, should be afforded equal consideration. A man and a goat both have an interest in not having their throats cut and their blood drained into a bucket, because both would suffer as a result. When considering their respective interests there is no moral or logical justification for not considering those interests equally. Singer argues that the extent to which a being can suffer is the crucial factor.

Singer doesn't absolutely argue that we shouldn't kill and eat animals if we make sure they live and die without suffering, but since this is rarely the case the only logical step is to become vegetarian.

It gets more complicated and his system is not without problems (also I'm far from being an expert on this) but you get the picture: he's really got us on the ropes, at least as far as I'm concerned. The fact is there is no reason for us to eat meat, in fact there are compelling reasons not to. It's more than possible – in fact it's easy – to adopt a healthy vegetarian diet. The only reason we eat meat is because it's so goddamn delicious, and we're capable of some amazing feats of cognitive dissonance in order to keep our delicious diets intact and squash-free.

As a meat eater I have no right to object to eating horsemeat. Nevertheless, despite my fairly staunch aversion to anything spiritual or supernatural I can't help but feel that there is something about horses - something undefinably special that goes beyond simple affection. I'm not a horse person. I've never ridden a horse, I've never worked with horses - yet I can't help feeling that eating horse is somehow just wrong, and wrong in a way that I'm not able to put to one side and ignore like I can with all the other types of meat I eat. Kind of like eating monkey, or a talking dog or something.

Of course my attitude has probably largely been shaped by the attitude of my culture and books like All The Pretty Horses - I'll be the first to admit that the descriptions of horses in that book has stuck with me pretty solidly since I read it maybe two years ago. That man can really suck you in with words, and he's the only writer I've read that can get away with not using punctuation.

I consider myself a good and moral person, yet I eat meat without qualms and enjoy it. I know the animals I eat probably lived and died in at least some pain, and I don't want to know about it. My brain and stomach generally get along fine. But this horsemeat debate makes me think - and I don't like to think about anything that might lead me to not eat meat so...

...this blog ends here.

Conspibrities: Bald Edition

2010-06-15T16:58:00.000+08:00

Part one here.

NATALIE PORTMAN - SINEAD O'CONNOR

MICHAEL CHIKLIS - MATT LUCAS

MATT LUCAS - BLACK FRANCIS

BLACK FRANCIS - PRUITT TAYLOR VINCE

MICHAEL BERRYMAN - PETER GARRETT

PETER GARRETT - NOSFERATU

FRED DURST - BILL RAWLS

MICHAEL IRONSIDE - V.I. LENIN

KARL PILKINGTON - FUCKING ORANGE

Former model back behind bars

2010-04-18T13:57:00.008+08:00

Sexy former model Eva Scolaro is in trouble again only days after being released from jail, this time for a spat with diners at a western suburbs restaurant.

Witnesses were transfixed by the sultry brunette as she murdered a family of six with a steak knife at Pata Negra in Nedlands.

The incident occurred after eight year old Suzy Jenkins stepped on Scolaro's $1200 Ruth Tarvydas overcoat, which was draped over her chair.

Sen-Sgt Ralph Littleton described Suzy's actions as obnoxious.

"This snotty little girl has unfortunately stepped on Ms Scolaro's beautiful coat, which has understandably angered her," he said.

"The gorgeous young lady has unfortunately overreacted and in the heat of the moment has grabbed the little girl's hair and cut her head off.

"The mother has then come to Suzy's aid and unfortunately has been stabbed in the brain.

"The rest of the family have verbally abused Ms Scolaro, which understandably angered her further and she has unfortunately stabbed them all to death."

Friend of the Jenkins family Danny Rossetti says that the olive-skinned beauty's actions were unnecessary, but stopped short of calling for jail time.

"Look, we all have bad days. I'm sure that on any other day Eva wouldn't have even thought of murdering an entire family," he said.

"Her coat got soaked in blood and is probably ruined so I think she's probably learned her lesson.

"It was a really nice coat and she would have looked great in it."

The 24 year old former model became a local celebrity last year after photos of her looking attractive appeared on the front page of The West Australian.

Popular opinion has been overwhelmingly in support of the stylish socialite, who is also a budding pop star.

A Facebook group entitled "Free Eva Scolaro" this morning reached 70 million members.

A similar page entitled "Eva Scolaro should go to jail" was removed after Facebook deemed it a hate-group.

*UPDATE* - Eva has been released on bail again and has accepted a job as a Channel 9 fashion crime reporter.

GALLERY: Sexy Eva Scolaro

I, ELEGY

2010-03-17T18:48:00.001+08:00

She calls to me, expectant, insistent
And trembles at my touch familiar
We embrace but swiftly my heart is rent
She slips my grasp, and falls toward the tar

Time slows as if it were a dying tree
A cruel and wicked jest from up on high
For though the universe has stopped for me
I’m impotent, I can do nought but cry

Like jagged webs scars wend across her face
Her loveliness is gone, I cannot look
Empty, tainted, bitter is her embrace
This pain, this tragedy - I cannot brook

Top 5 best burger joints in Perth

2010-02-03T14:43:00.004+08:00

Time for a scientific, largely non-ironic and mostly factual post everybody! I've decided to do a countdown of the five best burger joints in Perth, using an advanced three-way scoring system. Think of it as a "Hottest 100" of sorts - but the results weren't leaked last week and instead of songs it's about burgers.

Quick rundown of the advanced three-way scoring system:

FIRSTLY I consider that a burger meal consists of the burger, PLUS chips and aioli.

FURTHERMORE the chips-aioli combo is of almost equal importance to the burger itself.

With this in mind, I will be scoring each burger joint according to the followed advanced three-way scoring system: I will assign the burger itself a score out of 600, based on factors such as taste, and whether the beef is cooked or not, bun quality and whatever else I come up with.

THEN I will assign the chips a score out of 200, based on factors such as crispiness (vital), salt balance and "aioli-readiness", i.e. whether the chips are "aioli ready", i.e. whether they are "ready for aioli".

THEN I will score the aioli out of 200 based on factors such as garliciness, viscosity and taste.

600+200+200=1000

Incidentally, all these places are roughly the same in terms of expense. Also, if the service is obnoxiously bad or anything else offends me I reserve the right to deduct points from the final tally.

Let's hop to it!

5 - Australia's Finest Burgers AKA FAB

Aside from the fact that it is clearly not Australia's finest if it's only fifth on this definitive list, AFB runs into problems from the getgo with the frankly incorrect acronym FAB. Aside from the breathtaking arrogance of the name "Australia's Finest Burgers", rearranging letters willy-nilly like that in order to spell a word (especially a word such as "fab", which isn't even a complete word) is irritating to say the freaking least.

Anyway, AFB is a "burger restaurant" (as opposed to the takeaway style cafes of the rest of this list) and is fully licensed complete with wine list. I went in there this week at lunchtime and I was literally the only person there (there is a good reason for that - see below). Trundling up to the counter, I studied the menu under the expectant gaze of the startlingly fat woman behind the till, a tumbleweed quietly rolling past my ankles. I opted for a takeaway cheeseburger, and shattering the eerie silence, related this information to the woman who spent the next 45 minutes trying to figure out how to use the till. "I'm new here! Ha ha!", she'd cheerfully declare every seven and a half minutes, her chubby fingers furtively stabbing at the "cancel order, start again" button repeatedly.

Finally, the order was completed and I handed over my cash and went and sat down to wait. After about 10 minutes, the lady peered over the counter three feet away from me and yelled at no one in particular "takeaway for Kerr".

BURGER - 350 / 600

The burger was big and "good". The beef was undercooked, but in a way that I like - and tasty. Bun was average - toasted but not enough. The Coon cheese was undermelted. The relish passable. That's about all I can say about it. A decent quality burger.

CHIPS - 140 / 200

Chips were good - French fry style, nice and crispy. Slightly too salty.

AIOLI - 100 / 200

Way too garlicy. Obviously a mix of cheap mayonnaise and raw garlic. Barely a pass.

TOTAL - 630 / 1000

AFB is currently being destroyed by hip newcomer Jus Burgers which is about 2 minutes walk away (Jus is easy to find - just look for the place that is literally always crammed full of people eating delicious burgers).

4 - Madlily's

Madlily's is very close to the beach and, like any other beachfront eatery, has a license from the government to deliver absolutely shithouse service. Wrong orders, lengthy waits, disinterested teenage staff members - Madlily's has all this and more.

For example, last time I went there I ran into some trouble with the chips. See, the chips at Madlily's cost $6 and are enough for two people. My friend didn't want chips and couldn't fucking be convinced to share so I asked the bored looking unfeasibly attractive 18 year old blonde girl if she could give me a half serve. "What" she deadpanned in that ultra-bitchy way that only extremely beautiful teenage girls are capable of. "You know, just a half serve for me thanks!" I said, chuckling nervously. She looked at me with such vicious hatred that a little white flag popped out of my fly and my balls retreated up into my body with a barely audible "fuck this". I started to say, "Oh never mind! Ha ha!" but then I straightened my mind-fedora and thought, "I'm almost ten years older than this broad, who does she think she is, Rita Hayworth?" I sent an internal message to the boys to get the hell back out there, and lighting a Marlboro growled, "Look toots, this ain't gonna be a problem for you is it? I want half the chips. Half of six is three. It ain't fuckin' rocket surgery."

I slammed a twenty on the counter and leaned forward, blowing smoke in her face. Her delicate jaw dropped, and she gazed dumbly at the man who had tamed her. Keir met her gaze, the slightest of smirks emerging on a mug so steely it could deflect a .357. There was a silence - a silence longer than her legs and just as sexy. A silence as pregnant as she was about to be. Her face was an open book, and this one was open right to the centerfold.

"I want you." she breathed.

"I know."

Keir grabbed her with his arms and roughly yet somehow tenderly threw her onto the counter. He brought is face close to hers and with his lips ordered a chicken yakitori burger, which came with wasabi mayonnaise as the condiment (this was the selling point for me).

As is usual the service was preposterously slow, but that was to be expected - at least they got the order right.

BURGER - 420 / 600

Chicken burgers (not pictured) can be hit and miss, but this was good. The chicken breast was good quality and tender. The wasabi mayonnaise was a pleasing fusion.

CHIPS - 150 / 200

Good quality, crispy thick cut chips.

AIOLI - 140 / 200

Solid, but a bit unremarkable. Not quite garlicy enough.

TOTAL - 710 / 1000

FINES: -100 for bad service, + 100 for being next to a pub and the beach.

3 - Bilby's

The original western suburbs gourmet burger place and a long-time favourite of mine, Bilby's new owners seem to have let the standard slip slightly in recent years. It's moved two doors down into a bigger place with a little outdoor eating area, which is pretty nice, all things considered.

I've tried almost all the burgers on the menu over the years and they are all consistently great. On my most recent visit I went for something different - a limited edition crocodile fillet burger. The wait was was approximately the same amount of time it takes to wrestle, kill, clean, fillet and cook a crocodile, so I suppose it was reasonable under the circumstances.

BURGER - 500 / 600

(Crocodile burger not pictured) Imagine if science created a new meat in the lab that was a cross between chicken and white fish - that is what crocodile is like, except with a bit less flavour. Nevertheless it works as part of a burger, which was high quality, as they always have been at Bilby's. Excellent bun, fresh salad - generally a well put together burger. Probably wouldn't go the crocodile again though.

CHIPS - 70 / 200

You know the soggy chips you get at service stations that come in those rectangular Red Rooster style cardboard containers that say HOT CHIPS on them? Well, Bilby's have recently started modeling their chips on the service station style, right down to the actual literal same cardboard containers. Chips have never been Bilby's strong point - but now... damn. The sogginess means that they are not particularly aioli-ready.

AIOLI - 145 / 200

Still too runny, but still tasty as all hell. Improves the shitty chips, that's for sure. Incidentally, Bilby's was the first burger place I know of that served aioli.

TOTAL - 715 / 1000

2. Jus

A relative latecomer, Jus currently is currently grinding Perth's gourmet burger scene into dust, forming patties out of the dust and serving it back (to the scene) in the form of delicious burgers.

Jus's Leederville joint seemed to appear out of nowhere one day fully formed, complete with a mob of hungry Leederville hipsters queuing out onto the pavement. I finally tried it only recently after a series of aborted attempts in which I couldn't be bothered dealing with the ridiculous number of people it attracts.

I finally tried it during arguably its busiest period - a Saturday night, which is the ultimate test of a burger joint. My mate and I managed to get a table almost immediately, despite the alarming number of people milling around out the front. We ordered and sat down to wait with a couple of BYO beers.

I've heard of well-oiled machines before, but let me tell you the Jus kitchen (which is fully open and visible) is so well oiled that I was afraid some of the oil might leak onto the floor and I'd slip and bust my spine. Our waitress - (pretty, efficient, friendly, hip hairdo, probably likes Tegan and Sara) - kept us stocked with the beers we brought and presented us with our food within 15 minutes of ordering. It was all happening so fast! I'd been expecting such a long wait, and now here we were with our burgers already! I was all a-flutter.

BURGER - 540 / 600

I went for the cheese and bacon burger. It was fucking fantastic. Imagine an almost perfect cheese and bacon burger - that's what it was. The turkish bread buns which I was mildly concerned about are really good, although they get a big sloppy towards the end. Excellent burger.

CHIPS - 150 / 200

The chips are made from fresh potatoes. In fact, everything at Jus is fresh. The don't (they claim) even have a freezer. This is good in theory, but the chips this time weren't quite cooked enough and still tasted a bit potatoey. Also, the chipping process seemed to leave a lot of the chips less than an inch long. Still, good chips. Also: the serve is pretty small.

AIOLI - 150 / 200

Good aioli, a little bit runny though. Also, the flavour was different from the norm in a way I couldn't put my finger on. Further research is required.

TOTAL - 840 / 1000

Excellent score for Jus - well done for living up to the hype.

1 - Flipside

There isn't that much to say about Flipside. Unlike some of the others on this list, Flipside keep things traditional and simple. Don't get me wrong, they're gourmet, but they're not fancy or pretentious in the way that Jus are (Jus offers foie gras as a condiment, for example). Of the two locations (North Fremantle and Wembley) I think Wembley is slightly better, but there certainly isn't much in it.

BURGER - 550 / 600

The BBQ cheese and bacon burger is a near perfect burger. Excellent bun, fresh iceberg lettuce (ain't nothing wrong with iceberg) and the BBQ relish is genius. The bun, unlike at Jus, holds together until the last bite.

CHIPS - 180 / 200

Thick cut, crispy as a motherfucker and extremely generous serves. Best chips on this list by a wide margin.

AIOLI - 175 / 200

Thick, creamy and exactly the right amount of roast garlic. Rivals Little Creatures for world's best aioli. Again, clearly the best aioli on this list.

TOTAL - 905 / 1000

While all these burger joints are great in their own way, the simple fact remains that some of them aren't. So despite a good challenge from Jus, Flipside is the clear winner.

A couple of things to note: this was a scientific study conducted scientifically, so if you're thinking something along the lines of "well actually I like FAB better than Flipside" or "hey, Bilby's chips are great!" you're WRONG. This isn't opinion - it's science.

I Want A Midget* (For A Friend)

2010-01-14T17:31:00.004+08:00

*If I was friends with a midget, it would be alright for me to use that word.

I would like to be friends with a midget. My midget friend would be called "Mondo Limit" and would be quite a character. He would refer to himself as a "midget" and allow me to do the same - partly to reclaim the word, but mostly to make people feel uncomfortable. Such would be his sense of humour.

Mondo and I would rib each other good-naturedly. I would tease him about being short, he would tease me about being tall. He'd say things like, "What's the weather like up there Robert Wadlow" and I'd say, "A LITTLE cloudy with a chance of some SHORT showers, funsize".

We would have quite a time together. At dinner parties he would ask me to pass the gravy, and I'd say, "What's the matter, are your arms too short because you're a midget?" We would let the shocked awkward silence linger for a few agonising seconds then both burst out laughing. If anyone else laughed, we'd immediately stop laughing and glare at them. Then we'd start laughing again.

We would have quite a time.

THIS IDEA IN POEM FORM:

I Want A Midget (For A Friend) - a poem

I want a midget, for a friend
A wry one would be prime
His name would be "Mondo Limit"
And we'd have quite a time

He'd rib me, friends, about my height
His favourite pastime
I'd do the same, because he's short
It is not a hate crime

"What is the weather like up there?
Is it a diff'rent clime?"
"A LITTLE wet, some SHORT showers
But otherwise sublime."

We'd play pranks at social events
At drinks or dinnertime
"HEY! Pass the peas, you funsize twat!"
I suddenly would chime

A pained silence; an awkward lull
One lasting a lifetime
Until, at last, we'd start to laugh
And drink our gin and lime

I'd use the term "midget", my friends
And Mondo wouldn't mind
Forever friends, Mondo and I
We would have quite a time

Forever friends, Mondo and I
We would have quite a time

Note: you can sing this to the tune of "Amazing Grace"

Muse follow-up. OR: How I learned to stop worrying and love the Jews.

2009-12-15T16:30:00.024+08:00

Well shit and goddamn people, what a couple of weeks it's been in Blogdenville. The salty and delicious (and completely accurate) Muse bait that I dangled across the toxic turdpuddle that is the internet received more bites than all my other posts combined, and predictably led to an absolute goldmine of digital stupidity and terrible grammar.

I was going to follow John Cadaver's lead and do a round-up of some of the best comments from last week's post and the various forums and blogs it popped up on, but as I started writing it I realised how long it would have been and now I just completely can't be bothered. (Incidentally, you should check out J.C's posts about the lamentable "band" that is Short Stack here: part 1, part 2).

So, maybe I should just explain why I wrote the last blog. First up, I should come clean and admit that I posted the link to the blog on the Muse forum that started the whole thing off. Does that make me a troll? Sort of, but not really. Allow me to explain. Despite what you may think, I didn't actually write the article (blog, post, whatever) with the intention of annoying Muse fans. Believe it or not, I actually like Muse (just not very much). The idea came to me when I heard the song Uprising on the radio and wondered, as I had a few times before, who the vague, non-specific "they" could be that Matt Bellamy is always on about. While it's obvious that his clumsy lyrics are on some half-understood NWO tip (with a bit of 1984 thrown in), the notion that he might be a secret Nazi singing about Jews struck me as severely hilarious. That's all. Sometimes I think of things that amuse me, what? The other night I woke up and wrote the phrase 'evening eggs' down because I thought it was the fucking funniest thing ever. You know what? I still think 'evening eggs' is funny, and I still think the Muse-as-Nazis idea is funny.

Anyway, after I had posted it I thought to myself, "I wonder what Muse fans would make of this. They would be too stupid to get the joke, I'd warrant. I should post the link at Muse.com so that I might witness what occurs."

I did that thing, but immediately felt a little guilty about the overly serious tone of the article. I fretted that it might be too difficult for Muse fans to perceive its inherent irony (even though clicking on a single one of my other posts would give the game away). I added the following text:

It looks like someone has found this blog and posted it on the official Muse forums.
They're going a bit crazy over there, I'm getting all kinds of hate mail and messages.
Shame they cant just accept the truth.

Absolute fools.

Join me, people - we have to let the general public know about the dangers of Muse.
Or we ignore it, and run the risk of having an entire generation grow up to be racists.
Knowledge is power people - and now we know the truth about Muse we are powerful.
Everyone get the word out. It's important people know the truth.

As you can see (unless you're a Muse fan), it's a simple acrostic that spells 'ITS A JOKE' downwise (I know, I know - but I couldn't begin a line with an apostrophe, could I?). Thus, I gave readers a huge clue as to the true nature of the blog. After a looked at it, I worried that the linebreaks weren't short enough and the acrostic would be ruined if people had low resolution monitors or zoomed the hell out of their browser text etc, so I made the 'ITS A JOKE' letters a different colour. "Unmissable", I thought. "Wrong", answered the internet, over and over again.

Some of the people who did get it accused me of being a troll. I reject this. To me a troll is someone who pretends to have an outrageous opinion just to elicit responses from people or a particular group of people. Now, I know what you're thinking - "that's exactly what you did, you twat" - but just let me fucking finish will you? Jesus. To continue: a troll doesn't give away anything that might let people know that he/she isn't for real, which isn't fair, and their antics are usually (but not always) only funny for the troll.

In the case of the Muse blog, the very nature of my other posts are the biggest clue that I was being ironic, or sarcastic, or whatever I was being. Add to that the clue that literally said that the post was a joke, and I think I was being more than fair. So nay I say to the naysayers. Nay. I'm no troll.

Anyway, if you've read it you'll have noticed that the article generated a lot of comments. You also might have noticed (unless you're a Muse fan) that a lot of them were absolutely balltearingly hilarious in their stupidity. To be fair, a certain percentage of Muse fans did realise it was joke, and began pointing this fact out quite early on in the stream of 150+ comments. Of course, this being the internet, it made no difference, because people on the internet lead such busy and active lives that they don't have time to read each other's comments before adding their own idiotic rebuttals to a joke post. As some one said about halfway through:

Dear readers,

To avoid making redundant comments, please READ THE WHOLE BLOG AND THE COMMENTS preceding yours. Your thoughts may already be expressed and your questions already answered.

Of course, none of this will work if you aren't reading this. Let's see shall we?

Kindest regards,
Logic and reason.

Logic and reason? In my blog? Not on my watch.

So anyway, instead of posting the best actual comments, I might just go through the general types of comments that cropped up. Yeah, let's do that.

First off: people who didn't get the joke would usually say something like "OMG, how did you get THAT from the lyrics! Ur crazeeeee!"

Other people who didn't get it would say something like the above before comprehensively rebutting all my "points" and then offering their interpretation of the lyrics, which would usually involve various half understood NWO and 1984 concepts. One guy's comment was longer than the original post, and surprisingly well written.

People who did get it were split into two groups: those who thought it was funny, and those who didn't. The people who didn't often had the same two criticisms. One guy included them both quite succinctly, so I'll quote him.

Anonymous said... (They were mostly anonymous - pussies)

(1) i was laughing at the fact that you actually don't have anything better to do with your life.

(2) why you feel the need to make jokes about the fact that millions of innocent people were killed, i have no idea.

To counter point (1) - I write my blog because I like writing. I don't believe that writing is a waste of time.

To counter point (2) - that is fucking ridiculous. Obviously I wasn't making jokes about the Holocaust - the joke is the idea of Muse being Nazis. There is a BIG difference. I resent having to explain irony, but a lot of people said basically the same thing as this guy. A lot of people are idiots.

A subtle variation on point (2): quite a few people understood the post's ironic aspects, but still complained that the Holocaust is too serious a subject for humour to be involved at all, in any way. I call bullshit on this. I don't think there are any taboo subjects for comedy - if they're handled the right way.

Another subtle variation on point (2): other people complained that I shouldn't have posted the blog, because despite the fact that it's a joke, some people might take it seriously and be turned into Nazis. As ridiculous as that sounds, I can't confidently say that it's impossible. People are extremely stupid after all. So maybe these people are right, but it's not my fault that people are fucking idiots. Is it?

Anyway, I should wrap this up. How about a list of links to the forums were this blog ended up? OK then! I'm not directly responsible for any of these, except the first one. There are some fantastic comments on each of these, you should read them.

The original Muse forum post (the one I started)

Another Muse forum

The Australian Gamer forum (this one is fantastic)

PerthBands.com forum

Flickr thread

Some Norwegian blog (translated for your convenience)

And of course, if you haven't already you should read through the comments on the original post. They're much funnier than anything I could ever write. By the way, thanks to everybody who said that it was funny.

So that's it from me, hope you... hold on... HOLD ON - I just thought of something ----- Muse ----- Mews ----- Jews?!

OH MY GOD

Muse are dangerous racists

2009-11-29T11:47:00.008+08:00

Muse have always made me a bit uneasy. Their ludicrously bombastic "us against them" anthems seem on the one hand to be nothing more than the rantings of an overly emotional simpleton, however the level of popularity they have achieved in recent times has left me with a bad taste in my ears.

I could never quite pick what bothered me about them. On one level their admittedly huge tunes are perfect for teenagers to bounce around to at music festivals, so in that sense they are just another rock band. Nevertheless, there was always something about them that made me anxious, something I couldn't put my finger on.

When I actually listened to the lyrics it hit me. Who "they" are. The "they" that Matt Bellamy refers to in every damn song. It seems so obvious now.

Please walk with me as I analyse the lyrics to "Uprising", the first track on their latest album "The Resistance".

The paranoia is in bloom, the PR
(uh) transmissions will resume
They’ll try to push drugs
Keep us all dumbed down and hope that
We will never see the truth around
(So come on!)

Another promise, another scene, another
(uh) package to keep us trapped in greed
With all the green belts wrapped around our minds
And endless red tape to keep the truth confined
(So come on!)

These verses refer to the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, a (discredited) text that describes the ways in which Jews control the world using complex social and financial manipulation.

Chorus
They will not force us
They will stop degrading us
They will not control us
We will be victorious

The chorus is a (perhaps vague) call for Muse fans to rise up against their Jewish oppressors.

Interchanging mind control
Come let the revolution take its toll if you could
Flick the switch and open your third eye, you’d see that
We should never be afraid to die
(So come on!)

This verse clumsily references eastern mysticism whilst also advocating martyrdom in Matt Bellamy's imminent anti-semitic "revolution".

Rise up and take the power back, it’s time that
The fat cats had a heart attack, you know that
Their time is coming to an end
We have to unify and watch our flag ascend

(Repeat chorus)

Clearly, Matt Bellamy and his bandmates are dangerous racists, but just how dangerous are they? Well, just take a look at the lyrics to "United States of Eurasia".

You and me are the same
We don't know or care who's to blame
But we know that whoever holds the reins
Nothing will change
Our cause has gone insane

This verse clearly refers to Bellamy's belief that world leaders have no real control over world events. Whomever ostensibly "hold the reins" doesn't matter, because the Elders of Zion hold the real reins.

And these wars, they can't be won
And these wars, they can't be won
And do you want them to go on
And on and on
Why split these states
When there can be only one?

Here we go. Up until this point, Bellamy's insane beliefs were largely obfuscated by his use of vague language, but now he is about to get explicit.

And must we do as we're told?
Must we do as we're told?

Bellamy is sick and tired of being controlled by imaginary Jews.

You and me fall in line
To be punished for unproven crimes!
And we know that there is no one we can trust;
Our ancient heroes, they are turning to dust!

"Ancient heroes" clearly refers to Adolf Hitler and the Third Reich.

And these wars, they can't be won
Does anyone know or care how they begun?
They just promise to go on
And on and on
But soon we will see
There can be only one

United States!
United States!
Of...

Eurasia!
... sia!
... sia!
... sia!

Eurasia!
... sia!
... sia!
... sia!

Eurasia!
... sia!
... sia!
... sia!

And here it is. Bellamy's Final Solution. This maniac wants to finish what Hitler started - to create a Fourth Reich that covers the whole of Eurasia.

This kind of insane pro-Nazi attitude, while disheartening, is usually nothing to worry to much about, because people who actually believe that stuff are always too stupid to actually do anything meaningful. Muse however are extremely popular, which is something to worry about. They have been carefully grooming countless thousands of impressionable teenagers over a number of years with ever-more inflammatory propaganda disguised as music, and we have just sat back and watched it happen.

We need to do something. Muse must be stopped, time is running out.

EDIT:

It looks like someone has found this blog and posted it on the official Muse forums.
They're going a bit crazy over there, I'm getting all kinds of hate mail and messages.
Shame they cant just accept the truth.

Absolute fools.

Join me, people - we have to let the general public know about the dangers of Muse.
Or we ignore it, and run the risk of having an entire generation grow up to be racists.
Knowledge is power people - and now we know the truth about Muse we are powerful.
Everyone get the word out. It's important people know the truth.

Review: The earliest known recording of the human voice

2009-09-23T14:38:00.000+08:00

The best thing that could be said about Au Clair de la Lune, Édouard-Léon Scott de Martinville's first single and the so-called "earliest known recording of the human voice", is that it's over quickly. The French inventor and would-be pop star made so many mistakes in this abortion of a song that it's difficult to know where to begin.

Okay, first off: the length. It's 10 seconds long! This, as I've already mentioned, is a blessed relief due to its general shittiness (more on that later), but seriously, how many songs can you think off that are half decent that are a minute long? The Phlo and Eddie Theme by Flo and Eddie, Her Majesty by The Beatles - that's literally all I can think of. 10 seconds is simply not enough time for any kind of interesting song structure.

Then there's the choice of song. I've got no problem with covers as long as they're interpreted well - I think we can all agree that All Along the Watchtower belongs to Jimi, just as Hallelujah belongs to Jeff. They were talented artists who took those songs and made them their own. This version of Au Clair de la Lune on the other hand is performed so lazily and is so bereft of emotion that it is impossible to connect with on any level (again, the length doesn't help). In actual fact, it's not strictly a "cover" at all, it's an old folk song. I hate it when artists attempt authenticity by recording traditional songs. Here's a newsflash Édouard-Léon, it doesn't make you authentic, it makes you a twat.

Which brings me to my next point: the language. It's bad enough when English speaking artists record folk songs - at least they're in English, but Au Clair de la Lune is in French. There is nothing more pretentious than a song performed in French (I'm looking at you, Muse). By the way, I don't even care if you are French. Fucking learn English, or shut up.

All these are good reasons to hate Au Clair de la Lune, but we haven't even got to the production yet. De Martinville recorded the song in 1860 using a phonoautograph - a machine that scratches waveforms onto sooty paper. All well and good - but he forgot to invent a machine to play it. I don't know about you, but if I was trying to break in to the pop world and needed a mechanical means to record and play my voice, I wouldn't leave the job half-effing-done. It took 149 years for the technology to be become available to play the recording, and let me tell you, it was not worth the wait. The recording itself is extremely low quality. The vocals are distorted and clipped - so much so that it would be difficult to make out the lyrics if they were in English, let alone French. There are no instruments (unless you consider "white noise" an instrument).

All in all, a very clumsy and very boring effort.

0.7 / 10

The Top Ten Must-Have iPhone Apps

2009-09-02T19:45:00.004+08:00

It's no secret that the iPhone is the go-to phone for people on the, you guessed it, "go". Everyone knows about the iPhone's great touchscreen, built-in maps and et cetera, but many people still don't know about the best thing about the iPhone: they don't know about the app store! About the app store: at the app store (the app store is not a real store, it's inside iTunes) you can buy literally billions of apps, which are little programs that only run on the iPhone ("app" is short for appliance). With so many great apps available at the app store it's sometimes hard to sort out which are the good ones (and also which are the BAD ones!), that is why I compiled this list of the very best apps available at the app store. Here are/is my top ten must have iPhone apps:

10. Dettol Plus ($4.99)
Perfect for those painful knee-scrapes. Just swipe your finger across the touchscreen and then onto the afflicted area. Add it to your home screen today!

4/5.

9. Spare Change ($5.99)
Do you feel guilty about pretending not to have any coins for bums? Well Spare Change should put those feelings to rest (you communist). Spare Change makes it easy to send virtual coins via either wifi or bluetooth straight to any hobo's iPhone. You can choose to give a tramp any figure between 35 and 75 iCents (inclusive). He then has 48 hours to redeem them at the iTunes app store.

4/5

8. Virtual iPhone ($249)
Fantastic virtual version of the iPhone in full 3D. Only 60% of the price of a real one!

4/5

7. Sim Stew ($2.99)
Onion, garlic, stock: these are just some of the ingredients available in Sim Stew. Many more are unlockable. IGN called it "the most realistic stew simulator in years". Get it while it's hot!

4/5

6. Stab Stab Ringo Pro ($12.99)
Stab Ringo as many times in the face as you can using the iPhone's touchscreen. Even more fun than it sounds!

4/5

5. The Shed ($5.99)
What is in the shed? A red jerry can? A rake handle? Part of the door of the shed? Unravel the mystery today. Very realistic depiction of a shed.

4/5

4. Mount Franklin ($2.99 per use)
Recreates the feeling of drinking a cool crisp 600ml Mount Franklin almost perfectly (1.5L available as a paid upgrade). Includes a history of Mount Franklin and a Mount Franklin quiz.

4/5

3. Virtual Halpert ($8.99)
Jim Halpert from TV's The Office comes to the iPhone! Watch as Jim looks at you and smugly smiles whenever someone in your life does or says something socially awkward. Very charming at first then progressively more and more irritating. Still, it's a bargain at any price!
4/5

2. Sideways Celebs ($9.99)
Have you ever wondered what your favourite celebrity would look like if they were sideways? Well look no further. Celebs stay sideways no matter the orientation of the iPhone thanks to its accelerometer. Comes with 15 top celebs including Angelina Jolie, Michael Ironside and Kristen Bell.

4/5

1. M*A*S*H Watch ($28.99)
Do you sometimes find that you don't have enough time to watch M*A*S*H? Well, this is the app for you. How it works: You download the app and register an account. When you miss an episode, a paid transcriber ascertains your location via the iPhone's built-in GPS locator. Then, using techniques, the transcriber finds out which episode of M*A*S*H you've missed. The transcriber then watches and transcribes the episode for you to peruse at your leisure.

*New in version 2.01*

A list of Hawkeye's quips from the episode
A plot synopsis
A warning if it's one of those serious ones

M*A*S*H Watch has been the number one app in the app store for over a year for a reason, get it today.

Well folks, that's it! Those are literally the best ten iPhone apps money can buy! Hope this helped!

Conspiracies, Celebrities: Conspibrities

2009-08-30T14:42:00.011+08:00

KATY PERRY - ZOOEY BESCHAMEL

CHRIS ISAAK - PAUL RUDD

HALLE BERRY - PAULA PATTON

COLIN FARRELL - ANDRE AGASSI

ANDRE AGASSI - ED KOWALCZYK

ANDRE AGASSI - GEORGE MICHAEL

JAMES HETFIELD - MICK HUCKNALL

MICK HUCKNALL - AXL ROSE

AXL ROSE - JESUS CHRIST

WAKE UP PEOPEL GET YOUR HEAD'S OUT OF THE SAND

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/

http://www.conspiracyarchive.com/

http://www.freemasonrywatch.org/

http://www.davidicke.com/index.php/

http://www.reptoids.com/

An Inconvenient Marriage*

2009-08-23T16:10:00.008+08:00

Background: Henry Pumpkin and Mary Hunibunè are in love. Their pairing is vehemently opposed by both their families; Henry, despite being the heir to a handsome estate is technically not genteel, and Mary despite her beauty and her family's standing is considered quite abominably wild in her ways. The pair therefore elope (to the great chagrin of their respective families) and are both summarily disinherited. As Mary has close relatives in France, they couple decide to flee to Paris. Henry, not without a wild side of his own, is tempted by Mary into a rather extraordinary new way of life.

The cafè, as was the case most mornings, had attracted a healthy clientele. This morning, a certain pair at a table by the window had attracted mild interest among the mostly bourgeois throng. The couple were exceedingly well dressed and seemed to have the air of gentility about them. They were deep in conversation.

"Egad woman!" Henry said. The risk is surely too great."

Mary smiled and inclined her head slightly. "Dearest Henry," she said. "Have you not made similar pronouncements in the past?"

"Fiend seize you!" Henry said irritably. "I know what I say and what I do not. I ask you: have I not been correct in each instance?"

Mary's smile remained. "But of course sir, however I feel compelled to remind you that you are inclined to forget these things in a matter of days."

Henry scowled. "Nonetheless my love, the days of my forgetfulness have ceased. I assure you that my memory will be immaculate henceforth."

Mary's amusement only seemed to grow. "Oh Henry", she exclaimed delightedly. "I am sure that you are just as a duck when you speak so." To Henry's outward chagrin, Mary proceeded to imitate a duck.

Despite her lamentable impudence, Henry could not help sharing Mary's mirth. Her wild and mischievous streak, while sometimes exasperating, was partly why he had fallen in love with her. Nonetheless he felt compelled to maintain his facade of weary irritation.

"My dear, I vow and declare you will never again be forced to hear me quack about this issue, since we will never again be indulging in such an activity," he said.

"After tonight?" Mary laughed.

Henry's facade finally cracked, and despite himself he laughed with her.

"My love, you are correct. I am sure that I have all of tonight to quack."

They were interrupted by a servant, who asked whether or not they would like more tea. Mary replied in the affirmative. Deep in thought, Henry absent-mindedly took a pinch of snuff. He suddenly spoke.

"I am sure Mary, that our 'activities' up until this point have been a sight too risky. Egad, we should just as soon start robbing banks! I feel sure that it would be less trouble. Indeed, I heard tell of a man who walked into a bank with a letter, which he handed to the proprietor. The letter purported to inform its reader that the man's infant daughter was being held hostage, and if the bank refused to consign money unto him then an ill fate would await her."

"Voyons! Was he successful?"

"Mary! But of course he was, that is the point."

"Was the infant harmed?"

Henry scowled. "That of course is irrelevant. The girl likely didn't even exist. The point of the tale was to illustrate that the man robbed a bank armed only with paper."

"Am I to take it that you wish to begin robbing banks?" Mary inquired sweetly.

Henry was irritated that she refused to take his point. Undoubtedly she did it deliberately. He again cursed her mischievous temperament.

"My dear, that is not my wish at all. I am simply suggesting that were we to do so, we would assuredly suffer less trouble."

"Then what, love? Back to our families?" Mary replied with an almost imperceptible air of hostility.

Henry's eyes narrowed. "Of course not."

Mary met his gaze. "You have a notion. Pray, tell me what it is."

Henry paused. "This place".

"A cafè?" Mary replied, incredulous.

"And what is wrong with the idea?" Henry asked, testily.

Mary paused to consider. She didn't speak for a full minute. Finally admitting to herself that it was an intriguing prospect, she spoke slowly. "I'd wager a cafè would not expect such a frightful occurrence."

"Do you mean, dearest Mary, that you have, upon reflection, perceived the wisdom of such a plan?" Henry smiled.

Mary said nothing, but her eyes shone.

"The concept came to me as we held up that last gambling house." Henry explained.

"Yes?"

"And you were struck by the notion of seizing the patrons' purses."

"Mm."

"That seemed to me to be quite an agreeable notion."

"Thank you, Henry."

"The purses yielded a greater return than the coffer itself."

"Yes, love."

"Many people frequent cafes."

"Many purses."

Henry smiled. "Quite clever, no?"

Mary's demeanour had changed from her usual public air of polite gentility to one of quite lascivious impishness. "Quite clever indeed, dear Henry. I vow and declare that I am in readiness this instant."

"Excellent, dear. Let us proceed as is usual; you control the patrons, I will oversee the servants."

"I love you, Pumpkin."

"I love you, Hunibunè."

With that, the pair both unsheathed their pistols and stood.

Henry spoke first in a calm but emphatic voice. "I say, all and sundry! Be not alarmed, but larceny is afoot!"

Mary, as was often the case in such situations, was much more forthright. "If any one of you cursed devils does but quiver, I vow I shall be forced to bring violence upon you!"

-fin-

*I'm not sure why I did this, but it's done now. The style of writing is inspired by Georgette Heyer, for some reason.

In defence of Kyle Sandilands

2009-08-03T16:33:00.008+08:00

This blog relates to an ongoing issue regarding a certain fat and talentless radio jock. You can help by reading it. Sorry if it isn't funny.

You most likely already know the background to this, but in case I have an American reader (you know who you are), I'll just run through it quick-like.

Up until this week there was a breakfast radio show in Sydney called "The Kyle and Jackie O Show", hosted by Kyle Sandilands and Jackie O. It was known mainly for being "controversial", and often featured mean-spirited phone pranks, fake callers and general asininity. It was one of the most popular shows in Australia (sigh).

Last week it all came crashing down. One morning, Kyle and Jackie O had as live guests in the studio a woman and her 14 year old daughter. Apparently, the mother was worried that her daughter might be experimenting with sex and drugs, so live on air, they arranged for her to be connected to a lie detector, live on air, so her mother could grill her. LIVE ON AIR. I know what you're thinking and I agree: fair enough. Fuck the kids, they have no rights. They are stupid, that's why they're still kids. I totally agree with you. So anyway, Kyle being the compassionate gent that he is starts off by asking the girl how she feels, to which she replies, "I'm scared, it's not fair!" Whiny little bitch. Anyway, they ignore her whiny pleas and get on with it. The mother begins asking questions, and quickly getting to the crux of the matter asks the crucial one:

Mother: OK, Have you had sex?

Girl: I've already told you the story of this. Don't look at me and smile because it's not funny. (awkward silence, then shouting:) Oh, OK, I got raped when I was 12 years old.

Well, this is awkward. Luckily, Kyle knew just what to say:

Sandilands: Right. (Pause.) And is that the only experience you've had?

Fair question, I think you'll agree. What say you, Mum?

Mother: I only found out about that a couple of months ago. Yes, I knew . . .

Girl: And yet you still ask me the question.

Mother: I was, the question was, have you had sex, other than that.

"Oh, you meant had I had sex other than that time I got raped when I was twelve. Well in that case, yes! I have sex all the time! I love the cock! My mistake Mum! Sorry!"

Seriously, what were they hoping for? How is forcing a young girl, even one that hasn't been raped, into appearing on live radio to answer questions about sex entertainment? And what about the mother? (I just re-read that paragraph and I'm starting to sound like Alan Jones, so that's enough of that).

Perhaps unsurprisingly given Kyle Sandiland's reputation as a complete knob, this is quite the hot topic in Australian media circles at the moment. He has been universally and mercilessly attacked by, well pretty much everyone, even the Prime Minister. He is not well liked. In a subsequent blog Kyle even apologised (as only he knows how):

"As for what I said, it wasn’t intended to hurt. If people have found it appalling or offensive I’m sorry for them that feel that way, but I would ask people to put themselves into the situation where someone says to you during a live radio show that they have been raped".

He actually has the balls to ask people to feel sorry for him. Unbelievable twat.

Anyway, I'm getting carried away again. The point of all this is that due to intense and sustained media pressure, The Kyle and Jackie O Show has been taken off air, and Kyle has been sacked from his other high profile gig as a judge on Australian Idol. "Good!", everyone seems to be saying. This might seem to go against my previous comments, but I don't think it is good, not at all.

Don't get me wrong, I think Kyle is one of the most obnoxiously witless media "personalities" that there ever was. He's nasty, vindictive and completely lacking in humour. When I read that Kyle had been sacked from both his jobs, like most of the rest of Australia I was smugly happy that such a reprehensible cockhat was off the air. As for Jackie O, she seems to have no personality of her own and apparently exists as an attempt to defuse Kyle's utter repellence with blonde hair, so she's a little hard to care about.

But the whole thing got me thinking. I've never actually heard their show. I don't even have the opportunity to, they're in Sydney, I'm in Perth. My opinion on Kyle has largely been formed indirectly, and while I seriously doubt that opinion would change if I did listen to them, who am I to say what is and isn't entertaining? They were very popular after all.

Kyle and Jackie O were forced off the air largely by the public outrage created by talkback radio hosts and eastern states news outlets, none of whom were Kyle Sandilands fans anyway (quite the opposite in fact). They all simply seized the opportunity to sink the boot into a common enemy of decency. The ACMA hasn't acted, or even commented. They haven't needed to: the righteous conservatives and general Kyle-haters have done their job for them.

I don't think that's fair. The people who are outraged are so far out of 2DayFM's demographic, I can't help but feel that they have no right demanding Kyle's head on a plate. The thing that annoys me is the way that the girl (who is after all the centre of the issue) is just being used as ammunition. People don't really care about her, they care about lynching Kyle Sandilands. Their problem isn't really with this latest stunt, it's with the crude and immoral content that they haven't even listened to for the last eight or so years. I think that rather than pull him off the air, Austereo should have had the balls to stand by Kyle Sandilands, after all, crude and unfunny as he is, he has given them consistently outstanding ratings for years.

This reminds me of a similar situation last year in the UK regarding Russell Brand's extremely funny BBC radio show, which I used to download every week. I was going to get into it in detail but I think this blog is long enough already. Basically, Brand and guest Jonathon Ross were meant to be interviewing Manuel from Fawlty Towers, who wasn't answering his phone. Brand had been in a relationship with his daughter. They subsequently left this message.

The BBC received two complaints in the following week because of the use of the f-word, then 38000 after The Mail on Sunday tabloid reported on it. Just like in the Sandilands case, there was a huge media backlash amongst outraged conservatives, who, of course, had never listened to the show. Ultimately Russell Brand resigned and Jonathon Ross, the highest paid entertainer in Britain was suspended for three months. The outraged public still wasn't satisfied, so the controller of BBC Radio 2 was forced to resign. You can read all about it here if you like.

Anyway, as much as I hate Kyle Sandilands, I can't help feeling a sense of disillusionment when reminded that ill-considered moral panic is still such a powerful social force. It worries me when conservatives have such a victory using nothing but vaguely reasoned moral outrage.

Thoughts?

Blog lite: Observations about a model

2009-07-28T17:04:00.005+08:00

Hello again friends, how are you?

In case you, my loyal reader(s), think my previous blog entries have been bloated and overly long, here is one that isn't.

To start, please watch the short clip below, which is from the hit TV quiz show "Talkin' 'Bout Your Generation":

I don't care how gay or female you are, you just fell a little bit in love with that girl. If you didn't catch it, her name is Alyssa Sutherland, and she's a model.

That's all, good night!

Just joking.

I won't take up too much of your time, I just had some thoughts on Alyssa (and her kind).

The first thing I want to say about her is that despite her general lovability, Alyssa is weird looking.

Look at her: she's too skinny, her neck is too long, her ears stick out, her mouth is too big for her face and her face is too big for her head. It all comes together though, doesn't it? Nevertheless, I bet she was a gangly freak until she was about 16.

The second thing I want to say about Alyssa is that people like her don't exist in real life. Sure, there are plenty of good looking regular folks waiting tables and digging ditches, but they never look like that.

It seems to me that becoming a model isn't a choice. Girls that look like that, no matter how old they are, no matter where they are, will always be sucked into a life of sultry looks and ridiculous outfits. Even in the unlikely event that a girl didn't want to become a model, people would constantly be telling her that she should, and inevitably, she would.

I'm not going anywhere groundbreaking with this, I imagine that when Loreal or whoeverthefuck offers you fifty thousand clams to take photos of you pouting for an afternoon, it must be pretty hard to say no. I just think that modeling shouldn't be so highly valued, that's all. Being able to wear clothes and turn around isn't something to aspire to, if you ask me. Nevertheless, if I ever have a warehouse full of perfume that I need to move, I'd certainly like Alyssa on my side, preferably topless and in black and white.

Don't stop me if you think you've heard this one before

2009-07-23T13:10:00.017+08:00

This week's blog is about the critically revered rock band The Smiths.

Despite their reasonably huge popularity, The Smiths are still largely regarded as a "cult band". As you know, this means is that although they don't have as many fans as say, Oasis, but the fans they do have are far more serious about their fanishness. Sure, a hardcore Oasis fan would likely punch you in the face for calling anyone named Gallagher a twat, but if you said the same thing about Morrissey to a Smiths fan they'd probably take you back to their house and spend the rest of the day playing you Smiths songs and explaining exactly why they are brilliant. There is a lot that is ridiculous about The Smiths. (Well, actually there's only one thing, more on that later). As much as tried, I've never properly got into their music. So why can't I dismiss them and move on? They compel me for some reason. Let us now join me now as we take a look into the world of...

THE SMITHS

Like anyone, I've had my musical phases. I've rocked, I've thrashed, I've bebopped. I've hipped, and also on occasion hopped. I'm over all that though, what I seem to like these days now that I've hit old age is nothing more than a good tune. If a band can write a good catchy pop song that's under 5 minutes long, that's about all I need. Everyone knows rock and roll will never die, but I really don't think we need any more metal or punk, and it was scientifically proven at Caltech last year that all the good jazz has already happened. Guitar shredding impresses me about as much as fast typing. No, it's tunes that I love, and tunes that I want.

All this brings me to The Smiths. I've wanted to like The Smiths for a while now. On the face of it, I should already. They conform almost completely to my current musical tastes; they had solid, catchy songs, a fantastic but understated guitarist, good production and a singer with consistently great hair. Yet despite all their good points, I've never got into them in the way that I got into, say, Metallica or Ween. And I've tried, believe me. I've listened to all their records, I've read interviews, I've seen what they were like live on Youtube. In short: I've done the hard yards. Still, something eludes me. There isn't quite that spark I get in my netherlands when listening to bands that I really love.

I know what you're thinking, "But Keir darling! If you hate them, why do you need to listen to them at all! There are plenty of other bands, you can't like them all!" First of all, don't call me darling. I can do without that kind of condescension, thanks very much. Secondly, I never said I hated them. In fact, there are a few Smiths songs that I really like. All I said was that as of this date they haven't quite managed to grab me. Maybe read a bit more carefully next time? Thirdly, don't be so dismissive. Despite the fact that The Smiths' music hasn't seized me by the nutballs as yet, various things about them suggest that it could happen in the future. After all, some of my favourite music seemed pretty inaccessible for a start. It took me years to get into Frank Zappa. And if it wasn't for my friend and life-coach John Cadaver, I still wouldn't cross the street to piss on Ween (or however that one goes).

Again, I know what you're thinking, "Yes Keir, but you haven't really explained why you think The Smiths are even potentially worth listening to". This time, you're quite right. You've correctly surmised that the question this blog is exploring is why I continue to want to like The Smiths. OK then, why don't we study some good things about them?

They had a good sense of timing

It took some balls to start a guitar pop band in the early eighties without a single synth or programmed drum beat. People seemed to like hearing nice jangly melodic guitar work for once. They are often credited with bringing guitar bands back into fashion.

They wrote good tunes

The Smiths weren't afraid of writing melodic, guitar based 4 minute pop singles, and this is a good thing. Just listen to "There Is A Light That Never Goes Out":

Johnny Marr is a great guitarist because he isn't completely a noodling twat

You can take your Malmsteens and your Pages and shove them, it's Johnny Marr who is the business. Just listen to the intro to "This Charming Man", it's genius (until Morrissey comes in and ruins it, more on that later):

I tried to learn the guitar part to this song and it is outrageously fucking hard. Take if from me that it takes serious talent to write such a complex but simple sounding guitar line.

They had nice production

Somehow they largely escaped that curse of 80s records, overdone short snare reverb. You know what I mean.

They were unique

They were a guitar band that wrote melodic pop songs, but somehow were very different to anything that had come before.

This all leading to the crux of the matter, the one thing about The Smiths that I theoretically love and actually hate:

Morrissey

Let's face facts, the lead singer is the identity of any band. If you don't like the lead singer, you don't like the band, it's about as simple as that. Or is it? I stated above that I hate Morrissey; that isn't completely true. As annoying as he can be, I have a certain fascination with "the Mozzer". In a way, Morrissey is a lot like a pimple that keeps coming up in the same spot; one that half the time pops satisfyingly all over the bathroom mirror, and half the time isn't a pimple at all, but is some kind of blood-thing that won't pop, but you can't leave it alone and you end up with septicemia and a scar on your face.

So the question is then: is Morrissey a lovely pus splatter across our collective mirror, or is he a mysterious and scary blood boil thing? Make no mistake, this is a vital question, the question that this blog was supposed to answer. Regard this:

On the face of it, it's cut and dry. Someone who dances like that has no business fronting a rock band, even if it's ironic. As always, Smiths apologists have an answer; this was a Top of the Pops performance which was, as they all are, lip-synced. Morrissey supposedly refused the fake microphone and was doing that ludicrously awkward flail-dance to bring attention to the fact that he was not really singing. Is that an excuse? I just don't know. One thing I will say is that The Smiths were not afraid of being ordinary, and white. Have you ever seen anyone as white as Morrissey in that video? I have to say, I respect that.

And then there is his vegetarianism. These lyrics are from The Smith's song "Meat is Murder" from the album of the same name:

Heifer whines could be human cries
Closer comes the screaming knife
This beautiful creature must die
This beautiful creature must die
A death for no reason
And death for no reason is MURDER

Ugh. But he's also capable of really great lyrics, for example, "Girlfriend In A Coma":

Girlfriend in a coma, I know
I know - it's serious
Girlfriend in a coma, I know
I know - it's really serious

There were times when I could
Have "murdered" her
(But you know, I would hate
Anything to happen to her)

NO, I DON'T WANT TO SEE HER

And then there is his voice. On some tracks, he sounds great (like the above There Is A Light That Never Goes Out), on others his voice devolves into that goddamn ridiculous tuneless croon that he's famous for.

Nevertheless, Morrissey is a rare thing; a truly unique frontman. No one else looks like him, no one else sounds like him and no one else writes lyrics like him.

I'm not sure what the point of this blog has been other than, "I'm not sure if I like The Smiths or not", so let's try to reach some kind of meaningful conclusion. OK, here it is: The Smiths were an iconic, influential and unique band, and for those reasons it is worth listening to them.

Wow, that's a lame conclusion. Has this been a complete waste of time? OK, wait, let me try again: Love them or sort-of-hate them, there has never been a band like The Smiths. Morrissey is a compellingly unique lead singer, something we need more of these days. In a way he's like Elvis or Michael Jackson, an instantly iconic star who doesn't seem to fit any pop-icon archetype, and is rightly revered and celebrated for it. He is also a huge inscrutable dickhole. Morrissey is the reason I want to call myself a Smiths fan, and also the reason I can't.

Is that better?

There is only one thing left to do; play the song that for me sums up The Smiths. "Paint A Vulgar Picture" has everything that they do well; great lyrics, great guitar (listen for the solo in the middle), a great pop structure and Morrissey not sounding like a goose fart on a muggy day (to paraphrase Leo Kottke). Listen, if you can.

No leeway in eBay mêlée*: Keir may be on the freeway to an eBay fee day

2009-07-14T12:09:00.050+08:00

*Please pronounce this "meelay"

Dear blog and reader(s) of you (the blog)

Since moving my blog from the Fisher Price "My First Internet" to the "world wide web" it has come to my attention that every person on the internet, and therefore the world, is both mean and alarmingly stupid. Regard the following case:

In the last year or so I've got back into playing guitar. This has involved buying a new guitar and amp. Anyone in a similar position will know that once one starts looking around for guitar gear, it is very hard to stop looking, even once the gear has been bought.

To cut that story short, about two months ago I spotted a classified ad for a crappy SG copy guitar and a very decent Peavey Classic 20 valve amp. I went and spoke to the guy and quickly discovered that he was unwilling to separate the two (I wanted the amp, you see). To cut the story shorter, I ended up buying both for $325 which I knew was a decent price for the amp by itself. It just meant that I was stuck with the cheap Chinese guitar. "No problem", I thought to myself, "I can sell it on eBay".

I did in fact do that thing, and got $140 for it in a smooth hassle free transaction with a gracious gent from Gosnells or Girrawheen, or some other such G-spot.

The Peavey was a sweet little amp, and for a couple of weeks I tossed up whether to keep or sell it. I had recently bought a Fender Hot Rod Deluxe amp which is very nice, but realistically a little too loud for me. Nevertheless I decided that the Fender was too good to sell, so the unsuspecting but compliant Peavey found itself on eBay, starting at 99c (this attracts more bidders and more often than not ends up with a higher selling price. That's a tip for you folks *winking smiley face*).

I should say at this point that the Peavey in its natural state looks like this:

As you've noticed, it's lovely looking tweed amp very much in the style of a Fender Pro Junior, even down to the backwards facing "chickenhead" knobs on the top (not visible). No doubt you've also noticed that arse-ugly Peavey logo on the front. I wasted no time in unscrewing that and replacing the Classic 20 badge with a Fender one. It looked like this:

Below is what a real Fender Pro Junior looks like:

Pleasingly similar, you'll agree.

As is my wont when selling on eBay, I wrote a nice spiel extolling all the good points of the amp, focusing on the fact that it was a mid 90s, tweed , USA made (as opposed to real Fender amps which are all hecho en Mexico) 100% valve amp. I pushed the fact that it was a Fender lookalike, but made it explicitly clear that it was a Peavey. The item title (i.e. what comes up when you search) was something like: "Peavey Classic 20 (Fender Pro Junior) tweed". This way it comes up when people search for Fender, but it's still clear that it is a Peavey.

I was 100% honest. I described how I replaced the original badges and mentioned that they'd be included in the final price, I included photos of the back of the amp clearly showing the Peavey logo, I even listed the shortcomings the amp had (a buzz on low frequencies and noise when it's turned all the way up). I went out of my way to make it clear what the amp was and what it wasn't. I even embedded a youtube clip of me playing it so people could hear it for themselves.

Anyway, it was all good - people were bidding, I had lots of watchers, lots of questions about postage, what kind of speaker it had etc etc. Then, from nowhere, a DICK:

Dear k_tunbridge,

It will be awesome mate.....especially when fender sues you for violation of trademark...what the hell are you thinking???

- ************

*surprised Scooby Doo noise*

While it is true that companies with iconic brands such as Fender do have people looking for fakes on eBay, I wasn't even pretending mine was a Fender, so straight away I had my doubts I'd end up in court. My response:

Dear ************,

I doubt Fender are going to sue me, but thanks for the advice.

- k_tunbridge

You're probably thinking, "That was a reasonable response from old Keir, I'd wager the matter ended there". Well, you're all wrong I'm afraid. His response:

Dear k_tunbridge,

Well your assuming you're a man of experience are you??? I will tell you that fender will and does close anything listed that uses their name incorrectly or anyone selling a new fender item that isn't a deal. IVE BEEN IN THE GUITAR BUSINESS FOR OVER 30 YEARS,,,,but hey, get off your backside junior and call David O'Laughlin at Fender (Hes the CEO& owner of Fender Australia) and have a chat with him..Im sure he'd like to talk with you. Or if your a bit shy I can call him for you if you like??
Ive been in more legal battles with fender than id like to think about..but if you think your untouchable then you go for it you legend.

- ************

I don't know how it happened but I had touched a nerve... hardcore. I mean, the gall I must have to even question a belligerent semi-literate man on the internet! How DARE I? Needless to say, I wrote a contrite apology:

Dear ***********,

I don't know why you care and I don't like your attitude. I know companies like Fender have people scouring eBay for fakes etc, but I've made it clear that it's a Peavey both in the item listing and the description. I've been completely honest, but if Fender doesn't like me using their name and have the auction closed, then so be it, bad luck for me.
I just don't know why YOU'RE on my back. Seems like it's none of your business?

- k_tunbridge

Again, you're probably thinking, "Ah! Keir has put the matter to rest with THAT riposte, that much is certain." But no, dear reader(s), apparently he didn't like my attitude! What!?:

Dear k_tunbridge,

As I licensed dealer ITS EVERYTHING TO DO WITH ME. and several years of dealing with shifty weasels on ebay gives me another reason to complain...ESPECIALLY WHEN IM LOOKING FO LEGIT PRODUCT to fill a customer's needs...but more importantly I was WARNIGN YOU NUMBSKULL to watch what your doing. You cant put a fender logo ON ANYTHING not made by Fender...even though your admitting its a fake but YOUR STINK ass attitude is exactly what will get your backside cooked mr know it all yobbo..and I hope like it it happens to you sooner than later.you need a lesson on manners and brains.

- ************

Already I am a "shifty weasel", a "NUMBSKULL" with a "STINK ass attitude" and a "mr know it all yobbo" who needs "manners and brains lessons". I think you'll agree that his level of anger at this stage is not in proportion to the seriousness of the situation.

Dear ***********,

I'm not pretending it's a Fender amp. As I said, I've clearly stated what it is. The Fender badge is for cosmetic purposes. It was Peavey that made the amp look like a Fender Junior, not me (even down to the backwards facing chickenhead knobs). Are you going to write nasty and bitter emails to Mr Peavey as well?
Also, you weren't warning me, you were threatening me.
And as for manners, your messages have been extremely sarcastic and nasty in tone while mine have been civil at worst.
Lastly, I have an impeccable eBay record. You don't. Who's the shifty weasel?

- k_tunbridge

Once more, I know what you're thinking, "Good old Keir! That is a terse but very reasonable response to a clearly insane internet hooligan. I'd hazard that this character scampers off home directly, with his tail between his legs". Not so, I'm afraid. After viewing his eBay profile page I discovered that *********** was a "militaria" powerseller (that is, he sells old Army hats and medals and so forth) with a less than perfect record of 97.6%. Apparently he isn't a licensed Fender dealer at all. Oh look out, here he comes again:

Dear k_tunbridge,

Hey mud for brains….. YOU’VE been in ebayland for minutes,,,,, IVE BEEN THERE ALMOST 8 YEARS,,,,,,,see how your feedback goes dealing with crap like you for years on end…….

Im going to have a blast now though in the legal system,.,,,, just to teach you a lesson.

- ************

I think it is safe to assume that a "blast through the legal system" for this guy involves going to the Wikipedia page for defamation and realising he is completely OH NO ANOTHER MESSAGE

Dear k_tunbridge,

Since you have too much to say I will be taking it tomorrow with fender...lets see what they think. DON'T WRITE BACK TO ME AGAIN....OR I WILL TAKE IT FURTHER LEGALLY..bring it on now junior.

- *************

There aren't many vague internet threats more vaguely chilling than "I will take it further legally". Seriously though, I'm annoyed at this stage because I know that if he does report me to Fender (and I know he will), there is a good chance that they will have the auction removed. I just hope that Fender doesn't respond in time. Why did I choose a 10 day auction? My response:

Dear ************,

Wow, that is extremely spiteful. As far as I'm concerned, I've been 100% honest, not just 97.6% honest like some sellers are. So go ahead, call Leo Fender Jr and tell him I've been insulting his father's good name. I'm sure the FBI will be knocking down my door and dragging me off to Gitmo in no time at all.
Tata!

- k_tunbridge

You're most likely thinking, "Splendid! That's our Keir, always willing to pull a few snarky words out of his word-can to hurl at unsuspecting fools on the internet, *********** will surely be so devastated and ashamed that he will have no recourse but to delete himself from the internet and return to his lonely hate-filled flat instanter, never to be heard from again".

Again, you are WRONG:

Dear k_tunbridge,

SEE YOU IN COURT DICKHEAD.. ENJOY YOUR PARTY NOW..

- ************

Terrifiying. The "r" word is of course horribly overused on the internet so I apologise, but I have to say that in this context, "SEE YOU IN COURT DICKHEAD.. ENJOY YOUR PARTY NOW.." is one of the most retarded sentences my brain has ever had to interpret. First off, I'm not having a party. Why does he assume I'm having a party? Also, court? What for? Can a person be sued for willful sarcasm? If so, I am in TROUBLE.

Dear ************,

Haha, OK buddy, see you there.

- k_tunbridge

Anyway, as I expected Fender did remove the auction, because "someone" reported it to them. From eBay:

The rights owner reported the following information:

Your auction was reported to me because it infringes upon the intellectual property rights of Fender Musical Instruments Corporation. You are not authorized or licensed to manufacture, advertise or sell products that contain trademarks owned by FMIC, which includes the word marks FENDER and Pro Junior. For additional information, please see Fender’s About Me Page on eBay. Thank you for your anticipated cooperation.

The listing fee was refunded and I was free to relist it, which I did, with references to Fender removed and an added precis that ***********, unfortunately for me, took HUGE offence to. It seemed he was still watching me:

Dear k_tunbridge,

THIS CRAP: relisted: sorry to bidders on the last auction, but a spiteful ebay user who goes by ************ dobbed me in to a certain iconic american guitar company and had the auction cancelled for trademark infringement.

(this was a completely accurate summary of the situation).

WILL ONLY GET YOUR BACKSIDE INTO COURT FASTER THAN YOU ARE HEADED IDIOT. TIME TO WAKE UP OR GET YOUR FINANCES READY.

Oh….. and I will keep closing your pathetic lying and nasty listings every time you do it.

- ************

I still wasn't 100% sure what he was planning on suing my for, but let me tell you, I was, as they say in the suburbs, SHIT-SCARED. Hold the phones, another message! I hadn't even replied to the last one yet! Apparently he hadn't conveyed to me enough of his anger:

Dear k_tunbridge,

Your a sad little prick arent you>?? and a small gutless prick at that....you say hiding in ebayland mate.... your face is safer. Any more defamittory remarsk and I will see your ass in court..you maggot!

- ************

God, he's so MEAN. Anyway, apparently mentioning another user's username in an auction description isn't allowed. It turned out ********** had complained again, and had the auction removed AGAIN. This is also the third "see you in court" threat, which as you can imagine left me reeling. I felt at this stage that I really needed to find out what a "defamittory remarsk" was so that I didn't get 25 to life in the big house. Anyway, here's eBay explaining themselves:

We recently removed the following listing:

280366102552 - Tweed Peavey Classic 20 - valve / tube amp / amplifier

However, your listing was in violation of eBay's No Item policy.

Listings not offering an item or service for sale are not permitted on eBay. Listings that do not offer an item clutter the site making it harder for buyers to find and sellers to sell items. Furthermore, these listings undermine trust in the eBay marketplace.

Listings with the apparent, primary purpose of expressing the seller's personal views are not permitted.

What bollocks, all I'm trying to do is sell an amp, eBay, you jerk.

I sent *********** another message:

Dear ************,

How is the legal challenge going? I don't think you really understand defamation law to be honest, but good luck anyway.
All the best, sorry for mentioning your (user)name in that last auction, that was unnecessary.
Also, please stop sending threatening and abusive messages, that has to be against some eBay policy or another.

- k_tunbridge

Anyway, I listed the amp again, and it sold for $565 including postage to Ballarat, so ultimately the guy's efforts were for nought. I still hadn't received any correspondence from his legal team regarding our mutual court date and I realised with a start that he doesn't have my contact details! Calamity!

Dear ************

I hope you'll be pleased when I tell you that my Fender Peavey Blues Classic Junior sold for $525, which is about twice what I paid for it two months ago. I think there was a lot of interest in it due to the prolonged exposure it received by being cancelled twice. Basically it was a thirty day auction for the price of ten! Good value! Top marks for us!
Even though you helped me so much, I can't help feeling that it was a shame the way you acted towards me. That kind of embarrassing behaviour lets us all down.
I accept your apology before you offer it and forgive you.
By the way, I haven't heard from your lawyers re. the defamation case, it occurred to me that you probably haven't got my contact details? Would you like them? My lawyer Dave is itching get going on this, it's only his second case and he needs the experience. He's not very good, but dammit, he tries hard, and isn't that the important thing? Tell me that it is important. Tell me that you agree with me.

- k_tunbridge

He didn't reply.

My trip to Sizzler: Notes and advice

2009-05-22T16:54:00.019+08:00

I'm a bit of a food snob. Like any food snob, I secretly enjoy food and drink that is hell of crass - such as deep fried mashed potato balls and self-serve Pepsi. So that's why recently, instead of enjoying a nice homemade risotto or somesuch, I found myself at Sizzler "enjoying" what they call a "salad bar".

For those who have never been, Sizzler is a "restaurant", only unlike most restaurants you have to decide what you want and pay for it five seconds after you get through the door. If you're not aware of this procedure you can find yourself in a stressful situation, so be careful. Happily, there are large pictures of the dishes on the walls (in case you're not aware of what steak with garlic prawns looks like). Also, if you don't know the difference between "rare" and "well done", there is a rareness chart with pictures, so don't worry about that.

Clientele
Sizzler attracts an interesting crowd. On this day they included:

A woman with knees that could only be described as "obese". She was eating steak with garlic prawns.

A trio of boisterously friendly North Africans speaking Arabic loudly and eating steak with garlic prawns.

A newborn Chinese baby and its three mothers. (Is there anything cuter than a Chinese baby? Answer: Shelly Craft). All four of them were eating steak with garlic prawns.

A table of six or so elderly women trying not to look at their companion's open tracheostomy. I'm serious, literally open. It looked like Goatse.cx.* Why couldn't she cover it up somehow? It was fucking nightmarish. Lord knows how her blue-haired friends managed to choke down their seafood extender with that thing gaping at them. She talked with one of those voice modulator things (in between mouthfuls of steak with garlic prawns).

A wistful fortyish man eating steak and garlic prawns alone, in between disconsolate sighs.

One of those glasses wearing nerds that one day got sick of being pushed around and started going to the gym so that he could get chicks and is now extremely proud of his rockin' guns. The chick he was with could kindly be described as "corpulent". They were both eating steak with garlic prawns.

Various other extremely fat people (eating steak with garlic prawns).

Food
My brother and I sprung for the salad bar addition to our main meals. This means you are allowed to go up and get as much seafood extender and fried mashed potato balls as you want without paying any extra. Ruminations on the food:

For something that is called a "salad bar", there are a hell of a lot of items that just completely aren't salad, such as bacon bits, chocolate mousse and nachos.

There is in fact salad at the salad bar, but there seems to me to be an unwritten rule that holds that one must smother anything healthy with blue cheese dressing.

I had the steak, which I must say was pretty solid. Not excellent, but not complete arse either. A good solid steak. Nice and fat, and rare just like on the picture. The pepper gravy however was another story. And not a nice one. The chips were cold.

Cheese toast
You get complimentary cheese toast.

Conclusion
The Innaloo Sizzler is the kind of restaurant where there may or may not be scabby meth-heads holding up the till as you eat, but don't let this discourage you from trying it out. They do decent steak, there are plenty of suburban specimens to look down your nose at, and the soft self serve chocolate icecream machine looks humourously like a big square robot doing a poo. Sizzler is also probably one of the most cost effective ways of getting fat really fast for a movie role. Speaking of movies, this particular location is attached to the biggest cinema complex in Australia, which only adds to its suburban "charm".

Final Word: Probably the best guilty pleasure going around.

Weighted score adjusted for daylight saving and crassness: 9/13

* If you don't know what that is, whatever you do don't go and look it up right this second.

The World's Favourite Horoscope

2009-05-11T22:25:00.007+08:00

Aries Mar 21 - Apr 19

They say that love is blind. This will become more meaningful for you this week when you get run over and killed by Kurt Cobain’s ex-wife in downtown L.A. She will later record a blood moonshine level of 12%.

Taurus Apr 20 - May 20

Interpol agents will detain you as you attempt to enter Argentina on Tuesday. Don’t kill them, they won’t know that you are the Jackal as no one has ever photographed your face. It will turn out that they mistook you for William H. Macy and simply wanted an autograph.

Gemini May 21 - Jun 21

You will discover the definition of the phrase “elephant in the room” this week. You currently have no idea what it means because you have autism.

Cancer Jun 22 - Jul 22

You will invent a new internet acronym this week: FPAJSIMH. (Fuck, Paula Abdul just spewed in my hoodie)

Leo Jul 23 - Aug 22

Someone once said that sarcasm is the lowest form of wit, but they had never met you.

Virgo Aug 23 - Sep 22

This week you will once again curse the fact that you are one of the tallest actors in America when you hit your head quite hard on a doorframe at Danny DeVito’s house. Danny will laugh, and though you won’t let him know, this will infuriate you. When your wife of 21 years Susan Sarandon offers sympathy, you will snap at her and feel guilty for the rest of the evening.

Libra Sep 23 - Oct 23

You will discover a shocking truth about women on Saturday when your girlfriend asks you to buy tampons while you’re at the IGA.

Scorpio Oct 24 - Nov 21

If Basil Zempilas approaches you this week and asks to borrow your phone, run the hell away. I shouldn’t have to explain why.

Sagittarius Nov 22 - Dec 21

On Friday Morrissey will smell barbecuing meat halfway through his set at a music festival and walk off stage in protest. As a result of this, you will beat him to death.

Capricorn Dec 22 - Jan 19

This week your horoscope will come true in every detail.

Aquarius Jan 20 - Feb 18

They say that love is blind. This will become more meaningful for you this week when you get stabbed in both eyes by a drunken, enraged cupid.

Pisces Feb 19 - Mar 20

You will experience something of a renaissance on Wednesday after you are viciously murdered on Tuesday by notorious gang leader Clarence Boddicker in an abandoned steel mill in Old Detroit.

Review: The Boat That Rocked

2009-04-27T18:03:00.001+08:00

At its best, English comedy is the finest in the world*. The Boat That Rocked is an very English comedy, and not in a good way.

Plot: (spoilers, obviously):

Young man is sent to his godfather’s boat because he was expelled from school for smoking. Boat turns out to be a pirate radio station. Young man falls in love with godfather’s hot niece. Someone mentions condoms. The main cool DJ guy (Philip Seymour) is riled by the return of the guy who was the main cool DJ guy before him (Rhys Ifans). There is tension between the two, but they sort it out. Young man finds out his father is the weird hippy DJ. Uptight politician makes pirate stations illegal. Boat sinks. Also, there is a lesbian.

Blackadder was a long time ago

Director, writer and tedious middle class twat Richard Curtis had no business making this movie. It is clear from his approach to depicting the rock & roll lifestyle that he has absolutely no experience of any kind of debauchery, and learned what he knows from the one party he was invited to 30 years ago where he stood in a corner, drank three shandies and went home at 9:30. His idea of making a movie “edgy” is to throw in a single spliff reference and to imply that there might be some sex going on somewhere in the world. In a movie about a 60s pirate rock station, you don’t imply sex and drugs, you fucking show it.

WASP attack

There seems to be a market for these types of extremely lame movies. Recent inexplicably popular comedy Death at a Funeral springs to mind, which, like The Boat That Rocked, has an idea of what is “hilariously outrageous” that is so middle class and white, it’s embarrassing to our whole race. Here’s a list of extremely naughty things from Death at A Funeral:

Recently deceased patriarch’s affair with a male dwarf gets exposed
Guy accidently takes acid and proceeds to act like someone pretending to be on acid
Diarrhea

...and The Boat That Rocked:

A lesbian
A fat guy who gets chicks
“Spliff”

Incidentally, the funniest thing about Death at a Funeral is that it was directed by Yoda from Star Wars.

Masturbation frustration

Anyway, back to the review. Not only is The Boat That Rocked extremely insipid and repressed, it’s nauseatingly sentimental and infuriatingly self-congratulatory. The scene in which the whole crew decides one by one to defy the government’s order to shut down as the exceedingly overwrought orchestral score swelled dramatically made me want eat my own face. I mean, you have to see it to really believe that it’s not ironic, but you just can’t do a scene like that anymore. This is 2009 for the love of shit. And the scene in which Philip Seymour Hoffman heroically keeps broadcasting to his certain death as the boat sinks was even worse, but at least, I reasoned at the time, it added some actual drama to a movie that had thus far been a colossal nut-cupping wankparty. Nope, he pops up almost immediately and everyone cheers and cups each others’ nuts.

This movie made me extremely angry. With its fantastic cast and premise it had no right to be as shitty as it is. I haven’t even mentioned that it’s over 2 hours long, which maybe doesn’t sound too bad, but believe me it drags. And everything about it is just so smug.

In conclusion, if you liked this movie then you are not allowed to listen to rock ever again. I’m serious, I’ll be checking.

3/10

*This scientific fact has been confirmed by scientists

Coldplay are ridiculous

2009-04-21T15:01:00.001+08:00

It should be obvious to anyone with even the most basic grasp of rock music history that Coldplay are ridiculous. They are also, of course, startlingly mediocre. They are more boring than shops that sell beads; more pedestrian than a Mormon crossing the street.

As with any band, the identity of Coldplay is closely linked to its lead singer, Chris Martin, who is the most improbable “frontman” since Morrissey. At least Morrissey had the decency to have awesome hair (mainly to compensate for his voice, which has often been described by experts as “preposterous”). It’s pointless to even mention the other members of Coldplay because they are so boring that they barely even exist.

The prevailing theory regarding Coldplay's mediocrity among contemporary rock thinkers (myself included) is that they are a construct carefully designed by scientists at EMI, who developed a computer program that was able to distil the music of every band in history and produce the world’s first “truly average music”. Everything thing was included, from Frank Zappa to Creed to G.G. Allin. Some fringe commentators even go so far as to suggest that the band members themselves are constructed, either through genetic technology or super-secret advanced robotics.

Anyway, as compelling these speculations are, no conclusive evidence has emerged as yet so I’m going to proceed as if they are an actual “band” and provide you with some useful Coldplay facts so that you may impress upon neighbours and friends just how silly Coldplay are

Chris Martin makes his own clothes.

When not touring or recording, the members of Coldplay take aroma baths together and talk about their feelings.

Other activities Coldplay enjoy include weeping and feminism.

Coldplay are currently petitioning the UK government to expand illegal drug laws to include such substances as alcohol and chinese tea.

Coldplay give 15% of their income to Wistful Acres, the “weekend centre for nancy-boys” that they all attended in their youth.

Chris Martin has a vagina in the small of his back.

Chris Martin and Gwyneth Paltrow are reportedly going to name their second child “Macbook Pro”.

The reason Chris Martin always sounds like he has a cold is because he does. He has no immune system because he is a huge pussy.

All the members of Coldplay except for Chris Martin were replaced by members of the band Travis for an entire tour after an intra-band outbreak of Asberger's Syndrome and no one even noticed.

Chris Martin is so unremarkable that he has never once been picked out of a police lineup, despite having murdered a number of prostitutes in his teens.

Anagrams of "Chris Martin" include "Sir Chinmart" "Tit Screamer" and "Chief Shitpram".

Chris Martin was once glared at by Lemmy from Motörhead backstage at a festival. The trauma was so severe that Martin was forced to spend 5 weeks at Wistful Acres to recuperate. He has no memory of the event.

Elderly rock purists sometimes claim that “rock is dead”. Enlightened music nerds like you or I are usually able to ignore their Jack fueled ramblings and incessant requests for cigarettes. But if Coldplay truly do become the biggest band in the world, rock and roll is going to die. I am absolutely serious about this. As ludicrous as Bono is, at least he can fucking sing.

So there you have it. Obviously none of the above traits should ever be found in a rock band. I’ve never bothered myself about Coldplay too much before now because I don’t usually worry about things that are lame, but lately it seems that they are popular enough to actually have a shot at the “world’s biggest band” title. Obviously, something needs to be done. Please, tell your friends and help raise awareness about this issue.