This has to be the most insane thing I've found on the net so far....

This has been floating around on the net since the 8th of this month. The preferences attached to my stumble button should make it impossible to miss a story as insane as this, but there we go... I missed it anyway!

http://sarcasticgamer.com/wp/index.php/2008/02/steroids-in-professional-gaming.html

Now this only leads me to wonder... who on Earth is desperate enough to win Guitar Hero (even if it is a professional tournament, presumably with a cash prize) that they would take steroids?

Steroids? To win computer games?

Now, don't get me wrong, I don't think that there is a single gamer on EARTH that hasn't felt at least a modicum of anger towards their TV/ PC screen while playing a particularly difficult game, or particularly hard portion of a game (for me, these are almost always Boss fights for ANY Metroid game since Super Metroid; that particular game frustrated me so much I went to the Metroid database and got easy hints how to kill each boss: the game was a disappointing breeze after that. Just goes to show that you should do as much as you can on your own, otherwise, where's the fun?), but I've never felt the compunction to buy a performance enhancing drug to better increase my ability to play something that is a leisure activity. Now, I know it was a professional gaming tournament, but I have friends that play in professional gaming tournaments. They are the happiest people in the world, because quite literally they get to just play games for a living (It's a pretty good living too. Top prize in most gaming tournaments is around £10,000 in the UK, and the amounts decrease by £2000 a time for each place lower than 1st; so come 3rd, and you've won about £6000. They compete in about seven or eight tournaments a year, the rest of the time they spend "training." Bastards.) and have never EVER felt the need to enhance any of their abilities with drugs.

I used to compete in Martial Arts tournaments. I competed in two disciplines; Shorinji Kempo, and Muay Thai. I loved the buzz of competition. I loved the fact that I was pitting my skill and learning and stamina against someone else's skill learning and stamina. I hated losing, don't get me wrong, I fucking hated losing. It made me angry, but I accepted it. I seriously believe that that's what taking performance enhancing drugs is all about. They can't accept the reality of loss, and never want to accept it. They want to gain an edge on people that they must feel don't deserve the win as much as they do (that's how they must think. otherwise, why work so hard to take away a win from someone else through any means apart from the fair ones?). These people cannot accept that they have limits.

It is a reality of life that no matter what it is that you do, no matter what your strength is, what your God given talent is, someone out there in the big wide world of over six billion people is better than you at that particular gift. The trick is realising that it doesn't make your talent worthless, and if anything, it sets a benchmark and a goal for you to strive for.


If there's no competition, what's the point?

Men and women aren't that different really.

Patriarchy...it rears its ugly head in all places.

No, I am not a radical feminist. I believe in being a decent human being, because that's what we're all supposed to be. I don't believe in participating in a system of power (the patriarchy) that crushes people because of their gender, and then crushes people of the opposing gender because they're saying "hang on a minute, that's a bit out of order."

I've just been reading a blog called PunkAssblog, and one thread about guys pretending to be on side with feminists and supporting the cause when in fact they're just trolling made my blood boil. There were two trolls on that thread, one of them decided to state matter of factly that the "Patriarchy doesn't exist."

Ex - fucking - scuse me?


Just take a look at today. Valentines day. A lovely idea. A lovely sentiment. What's the reality though?

One day in the year when men have to be really romantic. Only one day when they have to make any effort with their respective partner. The rest of the time they can be lazy and unaffectionate, and it's OK, because I bought flowers, chocolate and a card for her.

Perfectly sensible women fall into this trap too. "Valentines day's so sweet! He was really nice this year."

Um. He should be nice to you. Every day of the year. That should be a given. That sentence is on par with "He's good to me," for making me angry. He's good to you? HE'S GOOD TO YOU?! What are you, a battered wife?! Of course he's good to you, he fucking should be, it should be a fucking given!

I'm not trying to be an Uber scrooge, and before you start, I'm not single and therfore embittered. I just know that for myself and Sarah, Valentines is fucking pointless because I make an effort to be a sweet and loving guy to her all the time. And it's no effort. I like doing that because I like seeing her happy.

Valentines day is one of the best examples of Patriarchy in action; Don't worry fella's, we'll fix it so that you don't have to put any effort in for the rest of the year with your girlfriend or wife, we'll fix it so that as long as you're really romantic on this one day of the year, you can get up to whatever crazy shit you want. Hell, buy her big ass ring on Valentines and you can probably cheat on her! We'll also make a butt load of money hawking tacky crap that you'll never use again! It's better than Christmas. It's a license to print money!"

Don't be so blind.

Cloverfield and freedom of speech...

Well, Kalmar have been and done it. Well, at least two thirds of us have done it anyway. Yup, that's right. We went to see Cloverfield. With no truly pressing concerns about the band, we took some much needed Rn'R. We've even decided on a logo. Here it is!











Now, you would have had to have been living under a rock for the last couple of months not to know at least something about Cloverfield, not least to say its rather brilliant marketing campaign. Relying on techniques not used for quite some time, they created an incredible sense of mystery and hype around the film, and the posters were a powerful lesson in iconism; The things that Cloverfield will be remembered for the posters depicting either a headless statue of liberty, or the head of the statue of liberty lying in the street. Instead of blowing its load in the trailers and showing us all of the best bits ahead of actually seeing the film, it let us wonder, speculate and generate massive word of mouth about it by saying almost nothing.
When it comes down to it, Cloverfield is actually a monster film; You know, monster attacks city and we track the movements of a group of protagonists and we witness their very human struggle for survival. Where it differs is the almost Gonzo nature of the storytelling, by relying on the Blair Witch model of dramatic tension by having it all captured on a camcorder. It's a well told story, with likeable characters who you actually care about, especially when anything happens to them. The Monster is perfect, if not aesthetically (my only criticism is that the monster is quite obviously a CGI creation); It's not something that can be reasoned with, it's an unstoppable berserker, it has no reason to be there apart from destroy things and when it's needed, is a perfect Deus Ex Machina.
As soon as I saw the trailers and heard the buzz, I also knew that this film was going to be the most fashionable thing at the box office to hate, a) because it was doing something different, b) because it was incredibly successful, and c) lots of people thought it was quite good. If there's one thing the internet has taught me, it's that people hate success, hate fresh and forward thinking, and if it's popular, it has to suck. In Cloverfield's case, I'm glad that that many people are actually wrong about it.

In other news, the controversy in 2005 surrounding the printing of cartoons that depicted the prophet Muhammed by Danish newspapers has been stirred up again by their decision to reprint them today. This follows the arrest of three men who had been plotting to kill the artists, and seems to be a direct response. Sweden, Holland and Spain have also printed the cartoons. When the cartoons were originally published, the Cardiff University newspaper Gair Rhydd also published them. Following widespread protest from muslim students, the offending issue was removed from circulation and furthermore, security was posted from opening to closing of the main Union building, where their offices are based, in case of violent reprisal. How ironic that Gair Rhydd as far as my understanding of Welsh goes actually means free word. I'm writing about this particular issue because it angers me as much now as it did then that people could possibly fear for their lives exercising rights protected in law to free speech. I find it contemptible that people feel that religion should be above ridicule, especially when considering that you only have to look at the selfsame religious conservatives calling for mutual respect and their actions to see that they have no respect for any opinion that differs from their own. Religion is not above being satirised, and it should be, and as frequently as possible, especially if it's a religion that tries to take a womans choice away from her as to what she can do with her body regarding abortion like fundy christians do... especially if it's a religion that advocates the blowing up of innocent people for a holy war (and I don't care WHAT your holy book says... kill innocent people, and if it exists, you're going to hell. Simple as that) like fundy muslims do... especially if you try to teach creationism as SCIENCE when it is quite clearly religious hokum like fundy christians do, but most of all, ESPECIALLY if you try to censor what everyone else says and thinks about your faith like both sets of fundies do.
I'm afraid the UK has freedom of speech laws and acts. The right to and write or draw whatever we feel like is protected by UK law, and by European law. That means, by law, you have no right to censor what I say draw or write. You may not like it, you may find it insulting to your faith, but I have every right to say it, and by trying to stop me you are trying to break the law.
Put it this way, if I have to hear or hear about an ultra religious islamic cleric telling young minds to go and blow up innocents in the name of Allah, or hear or hear about Christians telling gay men and women that they are going to hell because of something that is quite frankly none of their business and far less damaging than the sexual abuse they heap upon their altar boys, then you WILL listen to me laugh like a drain at your fervent belief in a belief system that is nonsensical and contradictory.

Mutual respect? Stop threatening to kill people for speaking their minds, then we'll talk about mutual respect.

Guys, Dolls, and the "When Harry Met Sally" syndrome.

Bit of a slow day today on the blogging front I'm afraid. I went to work, came home from work, and played computer games. There's going to be loads of band related activity at the end of the week; we have a jam on Friday, and band drinks on Sunday where we will wander around to different venues, show our faces and let people know about Kalmar.
Which is not to say that I'm not busy, or that the rest of the band is slacking in any way; we're choosing our new logo (which you will see tomorrow) and we're all writing reams of lyrics. In our non band related lives, we're all busy with our respective jobs and extracurricular activities (such as girlfriends).
We'll be getting a photo up of Coran soon so you can all see what he looks like, and so he won't keep blushing crimson every time he looks up the blog, and we're hoping to start posting up our Youtube videos of our various shenanigans in and out of the practice room; That'll be happening real soon, hopefully within the next week.

One of the topics I have been finding a lot in my travels through the blogosphere in the last four months is the spicy subject of the "nice guy." Here is a quite bitter male perspective:


http://evilwoobie.com/2008/02/10/ladies-i-can-be-the-guy-you-settle-for/#comment-2135


We've all been the "nice guy" at some point; You know, the hapless sap that becomes a a womans best friend, but in actuality, the nice guy is holding a torch bright enough to light the night sky for her. These relationships aren't terribly healthy; On the one hand, some guys who may actually be genuinely nice will start getting resentful of the situation they're in, and start thinking that "hey, y'know, I do all this nice stuff for her... I'm entitled to get laid!" This instantly turns them from nice guy to arsehole, because it does not matter what the situation is, you should never think you are ENTITLED to sexual intimacy (that it unless you are returning a favour; Go down on me and I'll go down on you, for example). On the other, genuinely insecure women will start noticing that they have a glorified lapdog and start treating this person who's supposed to be their best friend exactly like that. I've known a few women who realized with hindsight that that was exactly the sort of "friendship" they were in and admit that their behavior was less than honourable. And believe me, it leaves a bitter taste in your mouth when you realise that you are just as capable of being that artlessly self centered; Using a guy as your emotional armour and being unwilling to take a bullet back is never cool.

There has been a huge feminist backlash on this topic, and the level of vitriol spouted about nice guys (or about so called nice guys) is somewhat staggering, and it seems that a whole other dimension to the nice guy has sprouted from nowhere; The nice guy as sexual predator, only a step up from a date rapist. He does all of these nice things quite simply because his ultimate goal is to guilt her into a bout of shagging that will be guilt free for him, and leave the woman a shattered mess of a person. It certainly makes a change from the Dawson's Creek model of a nice guy...

I suppose it was only a matter of time before this was going to happen. Any sustained attack against the sisterhood has to be answered, and it did have to be answered. The "Nice guy" and "can boys be friends with girls without the sex part getting in the way" doesn't paint women in the greatest of lights. It unfairly paints the picture that given the choice women would love to have an insecure guy who's maybe not great looking but adores her and will answer her every beck and call around to stroke her ego and tells her she's pretty so she can go and fuck the prom king/male model. It's not a nice picture and it definitely isn't true. So of course the sisterhood fought back, and well done. Women should stick up for women and for the most part do, and for men, that support network that women can have for each other, even for other women they don't know or have never met before is an awe inspiring thing; were we only so lucky (a small minority of radical feminists sometimes argue that the patriarchy is a support network all of it's own; Patriarchy is a support network for men in the same way that a violent husband is a good man because he didn't beat his wife tonight. Patriarchy harms men as much as it does women; The ways in which it does are myriad and incredibly subtle. If you don't believe me, read Manhood by Stephen Biddulph).

I'm fairly sure a lot of innocent bystanders, both men and women have been caught in the crossfire. There are of course the horrible creepy men who do the "nice guy" act purely as a means of getting their end away, and there's certainly enough anecdotal evidence of that in the blogosphere, just as I'm sure that there are the archetypal evil women using men as a guilt free crutch for their ego, their very own lapdog... cheaper than a lapdog, because he'll go home and probably won't piss on the carpet. But I'll wager the whole "nice guy holding a torch of unrequited love" thing is far less sinister than either of those two alternatives; He probably can't find a way to tell her how he feels, and maybe she doesn't know how to deal with it so never brings it up, or simply doesn't know. Of course, it can be quite difficult to view it that subjectively when you're the guy it's happening to, so bitching about it feels like a fantastic release, but it's one sided and just plain wrong. And when you're the woman being accused of being a bitch for leading people on, it can be quite difficult to just say "hey, he doesn't mean it, he's just upset. Probably shouldn't kick him when he's down.

The problem is that both of those negative stereotypes are sticking. The nice guy camp is clinging to their archetype of the evil self centered woman (which seems a little nonsensical because they profess love for women who are supposed to be possessed of radiant beauty, wit, charm, poise grace and dignity, and that's certainly not the woman described in the stereotype), and the angry woman fighting back camp is clinging to their stereotype of creepy nasty little man who isn't that physically attractive and uses the nice guy mantle to slime his way into womens pants for guilty sex that he feels entitled to (this also makes no sense because no sane woman would be friends with someone so unlikeable, much less best friends). It helps neither cause because the two positions are only tenable on the surface. Under closer scrutiny both arguments can in my opinion be proved as fallacies.

Me, I'm sitting on the fence for this one. I find it a bit six of one, half a dozen of the other, and all rotten. I was a former "nice guy waiting," myself. It took me moving two hundred miles away and two years of total radio silence with this girl to sort out my head. Now, we're friends again, proper friends, not weirdly ambiguous opposite sex buddies, but friends. She was tooling around on the internet and came across a nice guy thread and was shocked enough to call me and tell me that despite how weird our "friendship" was, she always knew I was honourable and not a creepy nasty little guy with nefarious plans to penetrate her because I'd done a few nice things for her.

Her words? "You're not a nice guy, you're a good man."

My only other advice is that Total honesty is key to any close friendship or relationship. Total disclosure may not be the world most comfortable but it does save a lot of time and effort, your soul won't blacken with lies, and in the long run, it strengthens your friendships.

And... if you're a nice guy waiting around for her, try saying something. If you two are good enough friends, it'll sort itself out.

If you're not a nice guy but a doormat for a bitch, leave her behind. No good will come of it. It's an abusive relationship, and she'll never change.

If you're straight up not a nice guy but seeking a quick fuck using guilt and the mantle of a nice guy into coercing a girl into something she doesn't want to do, then seriously buddy, you need to sort your life out, and stop it. You're giving guys who may just be too shy a bad name.

And if you're a woman looking to bash a man for the sake of it... remember how it feels the last time someone kicked you when you were down. I reckon in most cases, that's what you're doing.

Long goodbyes

I have always hated goodbyes. I turn into a soppy little man anytime I have to say goodbye to anyone I have grown fond of.
This is happening now, as I speak. The hairy miscreant in the photo is at this moment playing Wii next to me. He wasn't even my friend to begin with; He was just some dude that my house mates had known for years who would come around periodically and get wasted with us. He was a cool guy, but no one I ever thought I'd really end up missing. But because he has now been a Sheffield native for such a long time, his visits were few and far between and always involved a legendary level of drunkenness. I started opening up to him which is usually really hard for me to do, but he's so cool and chilled out that it didn't phase him at all to hear all of the stuff that tends to come pouring out of me when I'm wasted (I'm a very confessional drunk).

Now he's going to be away in China for a year doing God knows what.... I know I should be more aware of what he's doing out there. I think it's a teaching post of some description.... all that matters to me is that he's going.

I shouldn't get like this. I've seen so many people come and go, but I can't help it. It seems that every town I go to, I make really great and close friends, and they end up leaving at some point, leaving me to chase ghosts.

Bye Liam. We'll miss you.

Practice makes perfect!

Today was a very long day. Extremely long, in fact. From three o' clock onwards, it was full systems go as far as the band was concerned. We had the band meeting, and all other little bits and pieces aside like who's going to be doing the Myspace and the blog (Mike for the Myspace, Me for the Blog) and who's getting our official website names (Coran), the the big next step has been decided. We now need to gig! So be expecting posts before, on and after that fateful day which should be decided in the next week.

Then after that, there was an extremely long practice where we tentatively made a few forays into new material; One new song we have is a love song dedicated to Hailey Williams. We have unimaginatively called it "Paramour." You'll notice that that is the correct spelling. My Girlfriend who knew about the existence of the song was a little jealous of it, and now probably regrets the decision to come to the jam with us today. :-) Part of me always wanted to date a rock star of some description, and before myself and Sarah got together, those rock stars of some description had included Christina Scabbia of Lacuna Coil, Angela Gossow of Arch Enemy, and of course, Hailey from Paramore. However, Sarah's told me that dating rock stars is not really all that fun, and once on the road apparently even the nicest and quietest people turn into arseholes, but here (http://punkinwriting.blogspot.com/2008_01_01_archive.html) is a definitive list of why. It's written from a womans point of view, but you only really have to replace "he" with "she." People will probably point out that this is also written from the point of view of a strong, confident woman, and I say so? I give everyone I meet the benefit of of the doubt about being strong, confident and self assured regardless of gender until they give me reason to assume otherwise.

Aside from that, today was just extremely tiring. By the time I got home, it was about Ten, so it's been about six or seven hours worth of hard, totally band related slog, so I've been unwinding since then with internet related shenanigans and Wii related injury. All in all, a good day!

That's about it from me, but I'm going to start a little Sunday tradition. Every time I find something hilarious on the net, whether it's a picture, article or video, I'll post it up on the blog for all to see. This week, it's only going to be a link, because it's a web comic, and probably the best one that tackles video games. I know that there are hundreds of these fucking things out there, but this one is honestly awesome. It's well drawn, updated very regularly, and scripted very well. Most web comics are a pile of shite, so if it ends up being linked here, the chance are, it's not.

http://fanboys-online.com/