Suppressing our emotions = bad

So: this whole Liam Neeson thing that caused a major media shitstorm. It got me thinking about us and our society here in the West; about how our culture has developed to encourage the suppression of our true thoughts and feelings. After all, if you admit to an irrational thought-train that pulled into the station in response to a painful personal scenario (like Neeson did) then you are immediately torn into by social media and the militant SJW factions that have been waiting for the next major celebrity to slip up. It is my opinion that we should be able to discuss our darker thoughts openly providing that we haven’t actually acted upon them of course.

Now, I don’t want to go on about this Liam Neeson thing too much because the story is really only a springboard for this topic but I will quickly re-cap it for the three people that missed it the other week as some context is usually helpful. The short of it is that somebody close to Neeson was raped by a black man “years ago” (no actual specific date/year given) and the movie star admitted to walking the streets for a week, hoping that a black man would randomly start some trouble with him so that he could kill them.

“God forbid you’ve ever had a member of your family hurt under criminal conditions. I’ll tell you a story. This is true.”

“She handled the situation of the rape in the most extraordinary way but my immediate reaction was… I asked, did she know who it was? No. What colour were they? She said it was a black person.”

“I went up and down areas with a cosh, hoping I’d be approached by somebody – I’m ashamed to say that – and I did it for maybe a week, hoping some [uses air quotes with fingers] ‘black bastard’ would come out of a pub and have a go at me about something, you know? So that I could kill him.”

“It was horrible, horrible, when I think back, that I did that. And I’ve never admitted that, and I’m saying it to a journalist. God forbid.”

“It’s awful. But I did learn a lesson from it.”

I’m not going to dissect this too much though because the interview has already been analaysed to death. Also, I’m not here to look at the racial side of Neeson’s comments. What I WILL say is that he was crazy to expect he could admit this stuff and not invite a turbo-charged media storm. It’s – sadly – the age we live in and one seemingly innocent admission could sink a career.

ln-1
[image: CNN.com]
And this is the point of this post. There are many with a neutral stance on this story who are saying that Liam Neeson should have just not said anything. As I mentioned just above, I can see why this line of thinking comes about but all it encourages is a suppression of our thoughts, feelings and emotions. What Neeson admits to is some pretty heavy shit and while I could never support what he did, I can still understand to an extent. Clearly the crime affected him deeply and sometimes, these things give birth to wholly irrational thoughts and mental states that seem insane when looking back on them with the benefit of time’s passage. At the time however, the irrational nature of these emotions is very difficult to see if it’s you in the eye of the storm.

Unfortunately, our society has grown highly competent at playing Judge/Jury/Executioner and so if you are considering letting some shit out that has been weighing your mind down then it will take some huge balls to do so. After all, rather than take a balanced approach and attempt to disagree but also understand, it’s much more fashionable to loudly condemn a person for their perceived sins. It’s even easier to do this if the confessor in question wants to open up about anything relating to race or sex. Finally, if you are a celebrity or somebody of high profile, then expect the brain-dead social media sheep to jump on the bandwagon and bleet their rage. Not necessarily because they give a shit but because it makes them look fashionable to be commenting on a high profile news story and be seen to be appalled by something, anything. It’s easy to condemn from that safe spot behind your screen isn’t it? I guarantee that at least 90% of people wouldn’t even bother getting involved if social media was non-existent and doing something about something meant getting off their arses to join physical protest marches.

Hypocrisy rears its diseased head at this point because we are constantly being told that it’s “good to talk” and to be open but it seems that this only stands if the nature of your problems or innermost thoughts is acceptable by the standards of the mindless Twitter mobs, the easily offended and “Won’t somebody think of the children?!?” brigade. Anything remotely controversial or worrying means that you ARE a racist or that you ARE a sexual predator/rapist. As I touched on at the very start of this post, there is a clear divide between having bad thoughts and actually doing something about them. I am in no way excusing those who have followed through on them because it means that somebody else has been hurt or had their life destroyed as a result and the offender needs taking out of society and either punishing or rehabilitating.

But how many of these crimes could have been prevented if society was more open about discussing our more unpleasant thoughts? I ask because it’s basic knowledge that suppressing emotions or hiding certain things only makes them grow stronger over time, perhaps to the point where they warp minds and the owners lose control. We’ve all heard the one about the shy, innocent girl actually being the filthiest of the lot due to suppressed sexuality or having to “watch out for the quiet ones”.

I’m not saying that there is complete, consistent truth in those random examples but one thing I DO know is that nobody is black or white. We are all both. Yin and Yang. Light and Dark. Good and Bad. To try and completely suppress the unsavoury and socially unacceptable segments of our psyche and become modern day saints in the process is a foolish and impossible task. That’s why I believe it is important to talk if it will help ‘release’ some of the bad thoughts but we must be comfortable in opening up without being sent to the figurative gallows. We must also learn to understand and accept that we all have a darkness within and that acknowledging its existence and being comfortable with it could well be one of the best ways of controlling it.

I often like to return to this fantastic quote by Johann Wolfgang von Goethe:

“Where the light is brightest, the shadows are deepest”

At the end of the day, I can’t take the self-righteous whiter-than-white do-gooders seriously when they scream about people being wrong or the devil incarnate for simply having human thoughts. Irrational and unpleasant, yes but human all the same. We evolve over thousands and millions of years so to expect society to shed its primal, territorial instincts so quickly (in relative terms) with no margin for slip-ups is ludicrous. The fact that we are as civilised and morally conscious as we are NOW is a small miracle in itself and shouldn’t be taken for granted.

WK-1
Even this White Knight chess piece casts a shadow…[image: Tiptopprops.com]

The self-righteous and uber-SJWs amongst us try to be as white and morally superior as possible but the stronger their light becomes, the longer the shadows grow. It’s why those crusading for “good” causes have been known to employ suspect tactics in order to get what they want. On a more basic level, these people are no different or better than the average man or woman and will be harbouring the same dark thoughts or desires behind closed doors, even if only in small, harmless quantities. You can’t have Good without Bad due to the nature of a small thing called Balance. The best we can strive for is to be as Good as possible and keep the dark in check while acknowledging that it is there.

So next time somebody “does a Neeson” and comes out with something outrageous, stop and take a moment before reacting. I’m not telling you to agree with their admission or to let it slide without challenge or scrutiny but at least try to understand and ask yourself if you have been in their situation yourself. Can you actually relate? Are you qualified to judge their state of mind without the relevant experience? Most importantly, did the person in question actually act on their irrational thoughts?

What I’m saying is, don’t preach tolerance and freedom of speech if you aren’t prepared to tolerate other people’s thoughts or allow them to be honest.

Brexiteers don’t understand Gibraltar

The latest Brexit-related stink bomb has been dropped and this time it concerns the overseas British territory of Gibraltar which has been described as a “colony” in a piece of EU legislation concering the travel rights of UK citizens post-Brexit. Gibraltar is a complex and long-running item of heated dispute between the UK and Spain, the latter believing that sovereignty rightfully belongs to them (Gibraltar was ceded to Britain in 1713). Back here, the British government hasn’t taken kindly to the “colony” designation or Spain’s refusal to agree to the footnote in the legislation being removed/changed.

I’m not here to debate the issue of Gibraltar though because it’s a big debate that I’m not fully clued-up on and I’m honestly not informed enough to be hurling ignorant opinions about. Plus, as a British man, I’m probably likely to be biased on the matter.

What I AM here to showcase is this terrible hack-job of a digital poster that one of the various Brexit-backing online organisations has produced to be shared on social media for the purpose of sticking it to Brussels for their brazen use of the term “colony”.

Brex-1

I’m not even going to comment on the huge message dominating the image because there’s nothing actually wrong with it. What I DO find utterly daft however is that “Leave Means Leave” logo up in the top-right…

…because it’s a little bit massively ludicrously ironic given that 96% of Gibraltarian’s voted to remain in the European Union at the referendum!

Brex-2

Evidently, the research team for the Leave Means Leave campaign didn’t do a very thorough job on this one. Should I be surprised though? Absolutely not.

You see, these guys didn’t do even the most basic bit of research because they were too busy jumping for joy at being handed another piece of anti-EU ammo to fire back at the evil empire that are now attacking the sacred frontier of Gibraltar. These people don’t give a fuck about the people of Gibraltar or what they want. All they were concerned about was using this latest tit-for-tat news item as a fresh piece of anti-EU propaganda to whip up more Brexit support over social media.

Fucking embarassing.

Bullshit News: Red Bull poster banned

I haven’t posted anything here for around a week (I think) but I’ve been having internet issues that have, quite honestly, left me not feeling up to broadcasting my witty insightful ragged viewpoints if there’s no guarantee that I can get online to publish them. Society’s ability to bamboozle those of us with a common sense approach isn’t hindered by such first-world issues however and so all kinds of “WTF?!?” stories have been flying about and escaping my criticism in the meantime. This one is just a quickie to keep my foot in the blogging door while I work on some “better” stuff.

So, what would you think if you saw the following poster from energy drink giant Red Bull while passing through the London Underground?

rb-1

Clearly it’s just a playful joke but it seems that some people have had a sense of humour malfunction and actually taken time out of their day to complain to the UK’s Advertising Standards Authority. Then again, here I am taking time out of my day to talk about people taking time out of their day to complain about something. The irony isn’t lost on me, I can assure you.

Anyway, the ASA banned the advertisement on the grounds that it implied “unauthorised health claims”. To quote the report from BBC News’ website directly:

One person who saw the poster complained to the ASA that the advert implied the caffeinated energy drink had a positive effect on health, improving focus and concentration.

And here we have the magic word! “Implied”. I’m going to (mostly) gloss over the fact that somebody saw a poster on the tube and went to the trouble of contacting the ASA to lodge a complaint. Haven’t people got better things to do? Perhaps I’m the only one who doesn’t really pay any attention to adverts like this beyond the pictures. After all, it’s always some sort of marketing speak or “clever” wording to get at the cash in your wallet and so I don’t tend to give 95% of ads any of my time.

The thing is though, energy drinks DO improve focus and concentration so there’s no lie there. Reading the ingredients and looking at the facts on how the likes of caffeine, taurine and the various other minerals impact on your body/mind shows that these drinks will give you a boost. This boost is only temporary though and drinking the likes of Red Bull in excessive amounts will either reduce the effectiveness of the drinks over a period of time or simply make you ill. None of this has ever been denied and it should be common knowledge.

Nowhere on energy drink cans does it ever state that the contents provide a positive effect for a consumer’s health. As I said, it should be common knowledge that a can loaded up with sugar, caffeine and fuck knows what else cannot be ‘good’ for you in any way and should be consumed in moderation (or better yet, not at all). If you feel that a poster advertisement is all it takes to lead the general populance astray however then I’m (not) sorry but you are an idiot.

Energy drinks – like alcholol, cigarettes, porn, drugs etc. – provide a quick and easy rush that you KNOW is bad for you. I don’t believe that any of these things should be banned or cracked down on because those who use them responsibly and in moderation will pay the price for everybody else’s lack of self control and education. I firmly believe in doing whatever the hell you want (excluding the likes of murder, rape, abuse etc.) but also being aware of and being prepared to face the consequences should you fuck up.

Furthermore, I don’t believe that consumers are as dim-witted and easily brainwashed as as the SJW and their “save people from themselves” mantra would have us believe. What’s actually happening is that millions of people have zero self-discipline or other underlying issues that they avoid by seeking the quick fixes offered by the likes of energy drinks. Rather than turning to a can of Red Bull, you should be questioning why you are tired or unmotivated in the first place and working to solve that problem. Perhaps you don’t get enough sleep or maybe your diet is the cause. The reason may even be that you aren’t happy in your job and need a change.

Not according to the ASA though:

But the ASA ruled against Red Bull, saying that consumers would understand that the poster did imply those health claims, which were not authorised on the EU Register.

Well I’m a consumer and I wouldn’t even entertain the notion of believing that Red Bull is good for my health, especially not by glancing at a fucking poster in a tube station. I hate to use the well-worn terminology here but it really is just Nanny-State hand-holding once again.

That and the word “Implied”. This word along with the likes of “Insinuate”, “Interpreted” and phrases such as “could be seen to…” are the real problem here. Any news item that uses this sort of vocabulary is either trying to turn vague rumblings into a ‘Story’ or is presenting the opinions of random nobodies on Twitter as facts which is a complete journalistic disgrace in my opinion and only worth printing in cheap, trashy rags calling themselves NEWSpapers. You’d get more factual information from the Page 3 girl’s tits than the garbage “news” printed on the other pages. To see such once-respectable sources such as the BBC promoting this crap above REAL news is sad to see.

The final tragic irony? Those who complained to the ASA probably feel vindicated now that the ad has been banned but the only winner here is Red Bull and the free publicity that they gained.

Bullshit News: Gillette advert sparks fury

Last week, social media had it’s latest eruption of outrage (number #7,686,892,213,293,973 to be precise) when Gillette released a new advertisement that focused heavily on the #MeToo movement and so-called toxic masculinity. I use the term “so-called” because I find it good practice to at least question another person or organisation’s definitions rather than blindly accepting them.

The ad [linky, linky] sees a twist on Gillette’s classic “The best a man can get” slogan and asks the question “Is this the best a man can get?”. It goes on to show things like a man grabbing a woman’s arse, a couple of boys play-fighting (with the parents shrugging it off as “boys will be boys”) and some teenagers watching girls in skimpy clothing on TV. Some preachy shit about holding one another accountable and being better blokes in general as well as examples of how we can all achieve this follows. The advert has generated a lot of negativity from the male community with many vowing to not buy Gillette’s products ever again for “insulting” them.

g1
Honestly, I would be MORE concerned with looking like this guy rather than wondering whether or not I am a sexual fiend.

So, as a card-carrying man, do I feel offended by Gillette’s “attack” on my masculinity? No, I don’t, for several reasons. Before I get to those reasons though, I do want to say that companies trying to tell us what it means to be a man or what to do in general can fuck right off. The same goes for the militant feminists who have grasped #MeToo by the horns in a death-grip and abused a worthy cause as a vehicle to shame men for anything that doesn’t fit their agenda and strict requirements. Don’t tell me what to do. I’m well aware that slapping a random woman’s backside is inappropriate as is forcing your partner to live in the kitchen 1950’s style but don’t try to make me feel guilty for following my biological coding and checking out a pretty girl in the street or for reading a “lads” mag.

As one wise philosopher once observed, “I am a man therefore I like breasts and bottoms”.

Gillette however, have nothing to do with my views on this subject. The first reason that their inflammatory advert hasn’t got me steaming at the ears with outrage is because I am secure in my masculinity. I will look at women I find attractive. I will aspire to be a man by my own definitions and metrics, not how a corporation or individual thinks I should live. I will continue to hang a sexy wall calendar up every January and enjoy the twelve pictures guilt-free. I will focus on my own life and progress rather than giving a shit about the judgements of others. I will continue to question myself and my actions and re-evaluate my direction but I will do it myself sans the influence of those who seek to change me.

Sometimes it may seem that certain corners of our society are trying to shame us for simply being blokes but it must be remembered that a vast chunk of what we (wrongly) assume to be facts and “correct” has been presented to us by the media and packaged in a way that suits them. Gillette sticking their oar in and telling us how to live is only possible with the power of TV and the internet. This crap that I dare to call a “blog” is media. So much of what we take to heart and get angry about is fed to us on a plate to encourage views, clicks and ad revenue. In real life, I can honestly – hand on heart – say that I NEVER, ever have to listen to somebody preach to me. In fact, the women in my workplace are more likely to slap you on the arse and are totally fine with harmless, playful flirting. Even they say that all of this super-feminism is a load of rubbish and you know what? We stand as equals, get paid equally and don’t think any less of one another because of sex.

We rib them for always complaining about being cold or gassing about pointless gossip and they rib us back for being shit at multitasking or obsessed with sports. Importantly, we ALL have a laugh about it and know that no malice or derogatory subtext was involved. The key thing is to know your boundaries and what is/isn’t sensible. Only a moron would attempt to speak lewdly to a woman that they don’t know at all for example and if they get called out on it then they deserve the consequences.

The point is, you shouldn’t correllate what TV and the internet shows you with reality. The outrage-fuelled headlines warp our brains and subtly redefines our perception of right and wrong. In the same way that I have no time for hardcore, angry feminists, I have no time for the daft notions that some blokes have. The idea that all women are out to enslave and castrate us for example or that we should waste our time getting angry about a Gillette advert. Wise up and stop playing into their hands. By tweeting your fury, all you have achieved is more exposure for the advert (which was currently sitting in excess of twenty-four million views at the time of me writing this…) and their brand.

g2
In the ad, this dude stops his mate from harassing a woman in the street. Men taking offence at this seem to forget that there is a difference between admiring somebody of the opposite sex and actually going out of your way to shout at them.

This brings me nicely to my second point. The marketing people at Gillette aren’t stupid. An advertisement like this would have been re-worked countless times and would have to have been signed off by company bigwigs. In short, they KNEW that this would generate controversy and mass exposure for the Gillette brand while also earning them a ton of praise from the SJW camp. It has been an all-round winning situation for them and any man that believes Gillette will go down like the Titanic or suffer commercially at all for daring to tell their consumer base how to act needs to think again. There is no such thing as bad publicity as they say. I can’t be offended by an advert like this because in doing so I would be being played like a fiddle.

I will end this post by pointing out that there is a distinct whiff of hypocrisy about Saint Gillette and their “message” however. A particularly strong odour in fact. After all, this is the company that came out with a range of women’s razors and coloured them Barbie-pink so clearly they know all about feminism and #MeToo.

Oh and another example of their work…

g3

Bottom row, fifth from the left is my favourite. Go on and shoot me.

 

Brexit is Bullshit III: Ignorance and Misguided Dreams

Fuck me, I’m sick and bored of Brexit by now. Every day brings more and more doom-mongering here on British TV as well as utterly embarassing attempts at point-scoring between political parties as they elect to point the shit-encrusted finger of blame rather than banding together to work out a deal that will be good for the populance. Yet here I am making a third post about the whole fucking thing. Problem is, there is just so many angles to cover and Brexit in general is just such an easy target.

This time in part three of the eternal saga of miserable doom known as Brexit (or Breggzit according to certain newsreaders), I want to talk about some of the crazy things I hear coming from the mouths of Brexiteers. Most of it I consider to be extremely ignorant, misguided and plain incorrect but before I put my critical hat on, let me remind you all that I’m NOT disagreeing with people’s desire to leave the European Union and “make Britain great again”. It’s just that I don’t think people’s fantasies can actually be a reality once the facts and figures are taken into consideration.

Also, as a working-class man in his mid-late twenties, I’m not exactly thrilled that the older generation of pro-Brexit voters are determined to leave and risk potential economic ruin (or at least upheaval) at the expense of the younger generation. To be blunt, these people are driven by a perceived invasion of foreign immigrants and if they get their dream of a no-deal, middle finger to the EU and the country is fucked as a result then they won’t have to deal with it. They are prepared to obliterate the living standards of the younger populance (if it all goes sour) as long as they get their way. And to be even blunter? A great deal of the oldest of voters will not be long for this world once the shit hits the fan and they won’t have to live through the consequences.

So: some shit that I have heard/read and what I think of it…

“We were fine without the EU before. We will be fine once we’re out of it”

A romantic, chest-swelling statement designed to remind non-believers that all was well in those sunny, idyllic pre-EU days before the evil empire absorbed our island and made us all miserable. The sun surely shone all day, everybody was nutting into wads of twenty pound notes (just because they could) and there were no rules to bring us down. Problem is, this ignorant way of thinking doesn’t acknowledge the fact that the world as a whole has moved on since those pre-EU days. Globalisation is a thing and we are all more interlinked than ever before as a planet. This isn’t going to change. In fact, globalisation and international trade is only going to continue to grow and become more important.

Doing anything that sends us in the other direction or hinders our ability to be part of a fast-moving trade environment makes zero practical sense. Globalisation wasn’t such a major force before the UK was a member of the EU so maybe we were fine then but times have evolved and if you don’t evolve with them then you die. Going backwards and electing to be more isolationist doesn’t seem like such a good idea, especially since the UK is such a consumer-driven country that relies so heavily on the import of food and goods.

And you can’t simply rip yourselves out of such a complex system and expect to carry on as before. But then again, those shouting the loudest are probably those who have the least to lose should it go tits-up.

Brex-2

“They need us more than we need them”

Such an ignorant statement that it deserves little analysis. It’s a view that stems from the belief that our products, goods and exports are so important to the EU that the union would implode in a fiery ball of failure should we leave without the form of trade deal that we want. At the end of the day, we are a consumer nation that imports so much of what we buy and eat. If we were more self-sufficient and confident about thriving alone in self-imposed exile then yes, I could see some potential merit in the above statement but this isn’t the case.

Believing that twenty seven other countries need us more than we need our links with them also makes no mathematical sense at all. I’m sure I could be incorrect somehow but I can’t word it in another way where the formula stacks up in Britain’s favour. It is the absolute pinnacle of ignorance and misplaced pride.

Any negative consequences will bring the rich and London elite down a peg or two and level the playing field between the north and south

An idea possibly born from the class divide which is definitely a thing here in the UK (but not exclusive to our collection of islands). There are many in the Midlands and the north that harbour a resentment towards London, the self-important attitude of “The City” and the wealthy people that live and work in and around the capital. People are working their arses off to keep a roof over their heads – with the spectre of redundancy and employers going into administration ever present – while people living in London rent teeny-tiny apartments for £2000 a month and their mayor dares to suggest that London could have an exception and remain in the EU (while the ‘Leave’ voters who ruined it for everybody can suffer the consequences alone, eat turds and die I suppose)

Unfortunately, it’s a fact that the working class and poor will suffer the most should Brexit go wrong and produce dire economic consequences. The rich and the greedy will simply have their ability to make MORE money diminished and will possibly have to just lower their living standards a little. Meanwhile, they will still have a better living standard than those at the bottom of the ladder as well as the cash reserves, influence and power to keep their seats at the top table of society.

If prices increase and jobs are lost then it isn’t those people that will be brought down as a result.

That’s about all I have to say for now. I could go on and on (so much dumb stuff is vocalised on a daily basis when people decide that they have the measure of Brexit) but quite honestly, I’ve bored myself here. I just wanted to publish a snapshot of some of the absurd “insights” that I hear on the radio or in actual conversation amongst other sources.

Brexit is Bullshit II: The Saga Never Ends

I’ve previously posted about the embarassment that is Brexit but I feel like I have more to say on the subject. There will probably be a Brexit is Bullshit III [insert movie-apeing subtitle here] looking at a different element of the process but I felt I had to knock out a Part 2 now based on current events in Westminster.

Y’see, on Tuesday, Prime Minister Theresa May will attempt to win a vote in parliament for her Brexit ‘deal’ that she has put together. The problem is that it looks set to be defeated overwhelmingly by a mixture of Remainers and other MP’s who simply don’t agree that this deal will be good for the UK. The media is reporting that the deal may feature several amendments suggested by Labour (the main opposition party) in order to garner more votes. What this says to me is that this deal (if it DOES survive the vote) will be one of the most pointless, watered-down excuses for a deal since deals began.

brex2-1

The deal was already seen as a betrayal by those who voted to leave the EU due to how many concessions had already been made to Europe. It wasn’t hard enough; wasn’t “up yours!” enough to the EU and their negotiators. Making more amendments is frankly a laugh and we could – in my view – end up with a deal that goes through the motions of us leaving the EU in formality but with as little as possible actually changing. Let’s not forget that this vote was supposed to have already happened but was postponed once.

It really does feel like an episode of Game of Thrones at the moment albeit without any credible leaders or sexy ladies getting their kit off. At the time of me typing this up, Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn has said that “this political chaos cannot go on” and signalled that should May’s Brexit deal be defeated, his party will call for a general election. Isn’t that a bit ironic? Saying that you want the worst British political chaos in recent times to be brought to an end while threatening to throw more fuel on a raging fire by adding a country-consuming election vote into the mix?

Meanwhile, the DUP (Democratic Unionist’s Party) from Northern Ireland – which propped up May’s Conservatives at the last snap election – are set to vote against the deal themselves due to the issue of the Irish border and a refusal to agree with the “Backstop” idea (a plan which will see the border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland remain as it is now i.e. no hard checks). On TOP of that (as if there needed to be any more complications…) there is currently no government in Northern Ireland since the Power Sharing agreement between the DUP and Sinn Fein collapsed two years ago.

You can see now why we are fed up with Brexit in the UK. The whole thing is a monumental train-wreck that will never satisfy voters on either side of the issue. Of course, it could be about to get much, much worse…

If the deal is defeated in parliament (a current, very likely outcome) then we could be leaving the EU without any deal of any sort. Hardcore Brexiteers are championing this idea and looking forward to giving the finger to the EU and making Britain “great again” (more on this in Brexit is Bullshit III – coming to a shitty, rundown shambles of a cinema near YOU soon…) but away from the scaremongering, there are numerous ways in which we – as a country – could suffer after severing the cord between us and Europe. You only have to look at how financial markets are so easily influenced by rumour, loose predictions and “feeling” to wonder how things may pan out once paths are chosen and economic deals not made.

brex2-2
A reminder of a hideously blind, uninformed campaign [image: The Independent]
But who is really set to suffer from the fallout of a no-deal Brexit? Will it be those in Westminster fighting for control and playing political chess? Will it be the suited MP’s and high profile public figures with enough money to weather the storm? No, it will be people like me – working class people who keep the gears of our economy turning while those we are supposed to trust (LOL) to run the country dump it into the toilet and keep pulling on the flusher, seemingly determined to force the UK into its own sewerage system and make as big a stink as possible.

This should be the time for MPs to realise that this pantomine has run its course, set aside their differences and work together to put some sort of agreement on the table for the good of the voting populance. You know, the very same millions of people who they want to vote for their parties at the next election? But of course, this isn’t how it’s going to go. Instead we will have a PM (who didn’t believe in Brexit) forging on with her widely panned deal, an opposition leader using the situation to gain political power and MP’s from the whole political spectrum forgetting about the man in the street and squabbling amongst themselves, trying to score points instead of securing a stable future for the UK.

As I said in the previous installment of Brexit is Bullshit, I am no fan of the EU and being under the influence of a super-state that can overrule my own country but at the same time, I simply couldn’t vote to leave (as I would have liked to) because I knew that this current farce would be the outcome. I saw no concrete plans, credible statistics or a timetable for how we would deal with the process if we were to vote “Leave”. All I saw were propaganda-decorated buses preying on public emotions, blue-sky dreaming and people shouting “Take back control!”

Obviously, nobody could have predicted just how embarassing and drawn-out the Brexit saga would actually become. If you read this, are living outside of the UK and can’t help but laugh then I sincerely don’t blame you. As for me, I just feel like a powerless passenger on a runaway train. It all comes down to just how bad the derailment is.

Christmas song promotes rape

It’s been a few days since I posted anything here on this fledgling blog but life has happened and work has been extra tiring. The diarrhoea-like river of excrement that is the news continues to flow in the meantime however and the number of “stories” (let’s not give them too much credibility) that I’d like to analyse has began to back up like a blocked toilet clogged with an ever-increasing volume of the nasty brown stuff.

Unsavoury metaphors aside, one of the more dumb stories that cropped up on my radar was that of an American radio station electing to pull the Christmas song “Baby it’s Cold Outside” from their playlist due to an apparent unsuitability in today’s hyper-sensitive #metoo landscape. Other Christmas songs that were written/performed in the past have now been put under the microscope and over-analysed by those who are determined to play dot-to-dot and create those tenuous links and daft interpretations from songs that are products of their time.

I do want to quickly point out that this is another of those stories that the media love to publish in order to wind up a certain demographic and get them to keep clicking away or buying newspapers. I know this and I suppose that giving this shit even more exposure by talking about it is a bit hypocritical but I feel like looking at the facts and quotes from these headlines and applying some proper logic to them.

bico-1

Let’s start with the Christmas song that has stirred up the keyboard warriors and Twitter superstars the most shall we? For decades, there was nothing and suddenly “Baby, it’s Cold Outside” is one of the great evils of the music world; a song that apparently tells the story of a man pressuring a woman into sex. As quoted from the BBC’s website:

In particular, the line “Say what’s in this drink?/No cabs to be had out there” has led people to make a link with date rape.

So this is also (apparently) a song about date rape and drugged alcoholic drinks. The problem with this above quote is that phrase “led people to make a link”. We can make links between anything and everything if we wanted to. This is a simple case of people taking a product of the past out of its time and complaining that it doesn’t conform to modern expectations which – honestly – can be done with anything at all from history. What next? Does “Driving Home for Christmas” suggest an irresponsible decision to drive in dangerous, wintry conditions? Does any Christmas song to do with Santa condone lying to your children? Loose comparisons I know but seriously.

How about this: listen to a classic Christmas song and just take it for what it is. When did every single thing need to be looked at it minute detail and constantly reviewed every few years to see if it remains “acceptable”? Any such analysis that includes phrases such as “seems to suggest…” or “could be interpreted as…” is automatically bullshit of the highest order in my book. Far-fetched conclusions being conjured up in the minds of those who simply MUST find something to be offended about. Unless of course I’m talking out of my ass and hearing a song like Baby, it’s Cold Outside IS slowly warping my brain and installing a subconscious instruction to lure females in from the cold so that I can rape them. See how stupid it sounds? I believe that there are three reasons why a story like this even becomes a (undeserving) ‘thing’ in the first place:

  1. The fear of offending people. Weak, easily bowed people decide that it is safer to remove material deemed potentially offensive before anybody can make some crazy links and bring negative press down on the organisation.
  2. Virtue signalling. Loudly and proudly condemning something that COULD be deemed offensive in the minds of a small minority in order to become the white knight and latest champion of the #metoo or similar movements.
  3. The social media echo chamber. A few people think that they are hot shit for ‘discovering’ something they believe could possibly be offensive or disempowering. Others re-tweet and show their support (from the safe anonymity of their keyboard/smartphone screen) subsconsciously feeling that they are being fashionable by doing so.

I am always open to be proven wrong or have my view changed by solid facts. Not interpretations, not theories and not suggestions. Just concrete facts, figures and evidence. That said, I feel extremely confident when I say that I do not, for a second, believe that when Frank Loesser wrote the song in 1944, there was the intention to promote rape. There is nothing to say that the male in the song intends to force himself on the female if she continues to refuse his advances. There is nothing wrong with suggestion or displaying amorous feelings to somebody of the opposite sex in a private situation if the other party seems like they could be up for it. That’s how we actually get somewhere in our love/sex lives. Of course, should Person B firmly refuse then Person A must repect their decision.

Pouring red wine

If this song is guilty of anything then maybe – at a push – it is a guy ignoring a girl’s soft rejections and continuing to try his luck, edging closer and closer to that grey area where natural, lusty advances become coercion and potentially rape. But I don’t hear that. I hear a playful, slightly sexy song that is probably just being a bit naughty. You aren’t supposed to rip it apart and publish an enormous thesis on how it condones this and that. Perhaps the critics ought to take a look a little closer to home because modern lyrics have been glorifying far worse in a much bolder manner for some time now. If anything is going to be a threat to an easily impressionable younger generation then it might be the stuff that they – y’know – actually listen to?

I was shocked to read (when doing a quick bit of research) that this song has been the subject of much debate and criticism for more than a decade. Conveniently in the month(s) of December of course because it’s such an issue that nobody cares once it’s no longer Christmas and the song doesn’t have to be aired anyway. My point being that there have been many, many other analysis’ and discussions about Baby, it’s Cold Outside and the perceived implications of its lyrics written with greater finesse than mine. These are just my rough and raw thoughts on the subject. I listen to the song and don’t hear what some people are condemning. Maybe that makes me a lesser person for not trying to hear beyond the surface but guess what? I don’t really give a fuck.

Another song that was criticised (amongst several) was Band Aid’s “Do They Know it’s Christmas?” for apparently enforcing an image that Africa is a needy continent reliant on the handouts of more developed Western states in order to survive. Bob Geldof’s answer to the critics was “It’s a pop song, not a doctoral thesis”. Well said, Bob. We are constantly made to feel guilty by charity ad campaigns and asked to donate money to causes in third-world countries where people are legitimately dying from poor sanitation and the wars of others but it seems that doing the decent thing and helping is also allegedly demeaning. Putting aside the fact that terrible sanitation, terrorism and constant uncivilised warring ARE factual blights on many innocent Africans, this bizarre logic of being incorrect whatever we do/think can fuck right off. Another prime example of desperately looking for offence where there isn’t any and keyboard warriors eager to seek out a vaporous injustice.

In summary: stop fucking reading too much into songs and presuming that your personal interpretations are the correct interpretations of everybody because they aren’t.