It’s bullshit when they name laws after crime victims, you know?

16 Jan

If there’s one thing guaranteed to shit me and send the TV hurtling out the window, it’s when some crime is committed somewhere and you think, “Gee, poor bastard…” but that’s not the end of it! If the crime was somehow different enough to warrant a new law being made, sometimes that law is named after the person in question. Excuse me, I need to vomit before I continue writing.

Let’s say there’s a guy called, “Harold” and he gets run over by a truck driver exceeding the speed limit on a certain highway. I will bet you, London to a brick, that if a new law gets created to stop truck drivers speeding on that highway, it will get called something totally and utterly gay like, “Harold’s Law”, and you’ll see fuckwits banging on about “Harold’s Law” for years afterwards.

What these douchebags forget, of course, is that “Harold” wasn’t the first person hit by a truck, or to die on a highway, and so on, so to name this law after “Harold” is nothing more than ego running wild. Of course, no one except your old mate Zaphod has the balls to actually say this because everyone’s too worried about offending the fuckwits in question. But it is so, so stupid!

Speaking of stupid, who wants to bet it was the fucking Americans who invented this? If anyone knows for sure, leave a comment below. I’m curious now.

Here’s a word to everyone I know. If you are a victim of crime, and it results in a new law being made, I’m not going to request it gets named after you. It’s cheesy, it’s bullshit and I have more respect for most of you than to attach your name to something as fucking stupid as a piece of legal legislation. So there!


Wikipedia editors can suck my cock, you know?

12 Jan

You must know Wikipedia — it’s the online encyclopedia that people used to be so excited about because “everyone” can contribute to it. And I say, “everyone” because while — technically — anyone can still open an entry and make edits, the chance of those edits remaining are getting increasingly slim. I mean, have you actually tried to add something to Wikipedia in the last year or two? It’s getting borderline impossible, even if you have top information to share.

And why is this? Simple. Wikipedia has become a haven for all those dickless wonders you can find all over the Internet in online communities, email groups, forums, USENET groups and basically anywhere that people can post an opinion about something — preferably with the fuckwit in question having the ability to edit and/or delete the opinions of those they disagree with as it seems to give them a sense of power they are missing in their “real” lives.

Yep, like moths to the flame, the fuckwits have descended on Wikipedia to edit, criticise, nitpick — and often talk about things they’ve actually got no fucking clue about. But hey, when did that stop cunts like this?

I’ve come across this several times in the last couple of years, to the extent that I’ve actually given up trying to add information to Wikipedia — even on subjects I have an intimate knowledge of — as it’s only going to get deleted by some fucking moron who has appointed himself “guardian” of some random, esoteric entry and this self-appointment seems to include the self-belief that no one else in the entire world can possibly add facts to the subject except themselves.

Does Wikipedia care? Does it fuck. It seems quite happy that it has this army of fuckwits keeping the site up-to-date. What it doesn’t perhaps realise, however, is what’s being LOST to sheer fuckwittery and editing by these morons.

Here’s a good example. When I was growing up, I knew a local band. That band never went on to be famous, but large enough to have a “cult” following and release some CDs on a minor label. One day I noticed this band has a Wikipedia entry and, when I read it, noticed some glaring errors. And how did I know they were errors? Easy. Unlike people who might have read a book on this band, or heard about them through fanzine articles and the like, I had actually lived it. I knew the band. I’d been to their houses. Bought rounds with them at the local university bar. All of that. So I went into the entry and corrected a few things. They weren’t even big changes, simply corrections, creating a much more reliable Wikipedia entry, to my way of understanding the site’s goals.

Within a day, however, some dickless fuckwit had swooped in and changed all the details back to what they were. Huh? I went into the notes for the page, and made a complaint that what I was saying was actually spot-on and what credentials did this joker have for changing it? All bravado, out Internet fuckwit replied that he was a fan, and he was “in charge” of the page (NB: no one is “in charge” of Wikipedia pages so this guy was a pure power-tripper), and what I had said was wrong to his understanding of the band’s background story.

I looked up this guys profile and not only was he about 30 years older than me (and thus the band members under debate), he also lived in another country to boot. So here we had some pension-aged foreigner telling me about a band of my contemporaries, from my home town, who I was mates with? What a fucking goose. Seriously, what a dumb cunt! And he reckoned he was right!

At that moment I thought about fighting on, because I was totally correct in what I’d said, and I suddenly had visions of appealing to someone higher up in Wikipedia and getting this idiot stripped of his ability to make people’s lives a misery by editing their well-meant (not to mention, factual), comments, but then I decided not to waste time and energy on it. As I mentioned earlier, this has happened to me more than once and, if this is what Wikipedia’s to become, it’s welcome to it. The result is that it will always be a semi-decent source of information, but while ever these self-appointed fuckwits patrol its pages, it will never be truly great. They’re morons who can’t see the wood for the trees.

Creationism is pretty fucking stupid, you know?

27 Dec

Creationism is the totally fucking crazy religious belief that humanity, life, the Earth, and the universe are the creation of a supernatural being. Many of the people around you, right now, are probably creationists to some degree. Heck, for all I know, you are as well. And if you are, seek help. I’m totally fucking serious. People generally won’t talk like this to people like you because, “they don’t wish to offend”, but I don’t give a bugger. Seek help. You are delusional and believing in the biggest load of twaddle ever invented.

Anyway before I get any further sidetracked on trying to save you from looking ridiculous, I was watching a documentary a few days back where a creationist science teacher proudly told viewers that he believed the Earth was around 6,000 years old — and that’s what he was going to teach his students.

For fuck’s sake, where do you even begin with someone as closed-minded and stupid as that? How on earth can someone call themselves a “science teacher” and believe that? OK, so science teachers — and teachers across the board — generally aren’t the sharpest fucking tools in the shed (pretty much because teaching degrees are so piss easy to get into at university), but to totally ignore the entire field of Paleontology, for starters, is utterly fucked.

Paleontologists will tell you, nay, show you, how the Earth became capable of supporting life, about 3,800 million years ago. So that’s not even the age of the Earth… that’s just when little organisms started appearing on it. Even so, there’s still a big difference between 3,800 MILLION and 6,000, eh? Yet this science teacher, the smug git, thought he was so right, it was disgusting.

There is a real problem right now, out there in society, where organised religions — and I’m not choosy which one you pick, they’re all as fucking bad as each other — are fighting against science, and the evidence all around us that the earth evolved over a very long period of time — it wasn’t just zapped into existence in a few days, some 6,000 years ago by a supernatural being. I mean… Christ… there are people out there would laugh if someone said Superman or Spiderman was real, yet they’ll happily believe in this supernatural bollocks?

Like I said earlier, if you’re one of these people, seek help. Now.

Some band names are shit, you know?

27 Dec

Just recently I’ve seen a bit of music press news about some band called Biffy Clyro. I think some dipshit from one of those reality music programs (you know the ones — where people who are too untalented to actually get into the music industry the traditional way, are hyped up by a TV series and the producers reap fat profits off the first few songs they record while the public is still confused into liking them), has covered one of their songs, or something.

Anyway, it got me thinking… aren’t there some SHIT band names out there? Biffy Clyro. What the fuck is a Biffy Clyro? Is it meant to sound cool? Tough? Funny? I literally have no idea because it’s such a stupid fucking name. And, you know, bands like this Biffy Clyro could make the greatest music in the world, hand delivered to their listeners by naked women, and I still wouldn’t listen to it because of their stupid fucking name. What bands are you into? Oh I love Biffy Clyro… Yeah, right. Fuck that for a joke. There are lots of bands like that, actually, who I refuse to listen to because they have stupid names.

People might think that’s weird, but I think it’s pretty fucking sensible from where I’m sitting. Who wants to be into a band called Biffy Clyro? Not me.

Not everyone likes Tron, you know?

27 Dec

Tron is a movie I never liked as a kid. I thought it was shit. Pure shit. Back in the early 1980s, I liked sci-fi like Star Wars and even uncool stuff like Doctor Who and, heck, even Star Trek, so I was certainly an equal opportunity film and TV viewer now that I think about it. But Tron? Give me a fucking break. In fact, I don’t even remember any of my mates even liking Tron, either.

For years I never even thought about Tron (well, do you waste time thinking about shit stuff from your childhood?), but then, recently, I started hearing that there was a new Tron on the way. And the strangest thing was happening. When people would say the word, “Tron” they’d look at you like it was some mystical, holy word. Kind of like how people used to say “Star Wars” when Episode I was about to come out (ie: before we realised the prequels would be shit).

Yet, the great difference here is that the original Star Wars trilogy was totally fucking legendary, and Tron was… well, this stupid fucking movie from the early 1980s that I don’t remember anyone actually liking at the time, yet here were all these wankers, saying to me, “There’s going to be a new TRON movie!” as if I could have no other reaction than to throw my clothes off and dance down the street naked with the sheer joy of a new Tron film coming out.

I think I popped a lot of people’s bubbles when I told them what I thought of the original film; inquired if they’d ever actually seen it or whether they were one of these movie wankers who read a lot about films and then go around telling people what’s “classic” even though they haven’t even seen the films in question, themselves; and would then finish with a flourish, telling them that I’d rather set fire to my own testicles then even contemplate seeing a remake or prequel or “movie based on” Tron. They often seemed to get rather upset at this and would wander away. “Good riddance, dickhead,” I’d think as they left.

Anyway, why this diatribe? Why this bile? Simple. I read this NME review and, thank fucking Christ, there’s someone else out there who actually understands what I mean when I talk about the original Tron movie being total and utter shit.

Tron wasn’t a great sci-film in 1982, let alone laid out amongst the many genre triumphs of the era. It achieved a modest return at the box-office. It was widely viewed as a cynical attempt by Hollywood to cash in on the skyrocketing popularity of videogames at the time – and, while there’s a case for Frenchman Jean Giraud’s set design achieving iconic status the other side of New Rave, not to mention a lengthy Daft Punk career – beneath the visual bluster of director Steven Lisberger’s film laid a movie skeletal, inane and cold.

Thank you James McMahon, thank you.