Testing tweets

testing testing. Forgive me. All in a good cause :)

— henrymcg (@henrymcg) November 30, 2012

Jobspeak. Or "Every day I dream the same dream"

Just reading the online portfolios of what I suppose I should call the competition, ie: other Web-developers.

Ye Gods but they talk some nonsense. If I ever publish anything talking about my "proven track record" in "providing robust solutions" etcetc I think it would be a good idea for somebody to call the cops.

And all this stuff about being a "people person", "a good team player", who is also good at working on their own, just to cover all bases. I am sensitive, but don't take things personally, thoughtful and constructive, but not bossy. I tell good jokes and will be good for office morale, whilst most of the time exuding such . By God, I seem to miraculously fit that professional-shaped hole in your organisation, without quite falling into the cringing-dogsbody category.

There are all these people about, purporting to fit the description above. How can I compete with these tail-wagging, performing poodles?

I'd forgotten how bad this all was. The unimaginative posturing of these morons! Myself I just like to turn up and say "gissa job". Surely that would be simpler?

I shouldn't laugh. If I'm not very careful I'll be doing the same myself one day

The Apple cult. Why it is the way it is

The Daily Telegraph have, momentarily, abandoned their Apple-enthusiasm and published an article on the ridiculousness of Apple-fandom. One feels a curious sensation of deja vu about this: the huge surge in popularity of a name or brand which can do no wrong, followed in time by a flagging of interest, and then eventually the doubters and complainers become more numerous - the obvious flaws become more apparent.

I've been one of the doubters for about 5 years, entirely coincidentally that is since just before the iPhone came out. I had my first taste of Apple zealotry from some people I was working for - truly nice people, but who behaved like unpaid volunteer advertisers for a product, as though they were promoting a way of life. Now I'm well aware that associating your product with a way of life is a standard advertising/PR strategy. And I think this goes a long way to explain the particular strain of snobbery surrounding Apple.

Let me explain. Part of the image we've been given to associate with Apple is this elitist image, there are two facets to this that I'll talk about: firstly, that they attempt to appeal to those who 'think outside the box', and secondly the idea that Apple products are for creative types.

On the first point, I remember finding out about cold-reading, part of a group of methods that confidence tricksters, fortune-tellers, mediums and sometimes salesmen, use. Basically the trick is - when you meet someone you've never met before - to say things about them that apply to many people, but sound very personal. One particular sentence that is often used is to say "you like to be accepted by the crowd, but at the same time you feel you are a little bit different, and think differently from the herd"

This is brilliant because it applies to every single one of us. I think it about myself, you think it about your self, We all do ('I don't' says a voice). It's incredibly common to self-justify in this way and people who are trying to persuade you to do or think something have known this a loooooong time. So saying that your product is for people who "think outside the box" is a very old trick in advertising.

Secondly, it's asking for trouble to try to appeal to creative types, or people's hidden creative side. I live in the UK and I've seen pathetically tiny amounts of the class snobbery that people associate with us. But that's not to say I've never seen snobbery here. Snobbery is alive and well in the UK, in fact it's rampant. In Music. And I strongly suspect in Art and Literature circles, and probably in theatre and film too. It is hard to credit the posturing, toadying and clique-culture that exists in these social circles. Seeing oneself as 'creative' seems to be inextricably linked with a strong tendency to ego-gratifying self-image. Not universally, but it happens a lot. People who wouldn't be like this normally are sucked into this mode of behaviour just so that they can exist and hopefully prosper in musical circles.

So there you have my thesis, perhaps not a new one: advertising techniques and cultures which emphasise that you are creative or "thinking outside the box" are in great danger of encouraging snobbery. I think that's what's happened with some Apple aficionados. There is a certain irony in hundreds of people who think they are different and special, but as in the link I gave above, Monty Python captured that pretty well for us already.

Celebrating an ex-PM's death? Really?

So the big story in the UK media today, it seems, is not Andy Murray winning the US Open (congratulations to him, btw) but the printing of T-shirts - for sale at the TUC conference - celebrating Lady Margaret Thatcher's anticipated demise. The messages on the T shirts include "Hey ho the witch is dead".

The story was most read on the BBC website for a while, and attracted over a 1000 comments in a few hours on the Telegraph website. But there's little more to say. It does, I suppose, look like more nastiness from the Left - the self-professed nice people in politics.

But what are we to make of the level of hatred and the standards of behaviour? Do we want to live in a country where it is acceptable to celebrate the death of another? It was bad enough when the tabloids crowed over Myra Hindley's passing - it is a hundred times worse in this case, to say this about someone who devoted her life to serving her country. Yes someone who made some mistakes - unlike the rest of us no doubt...

It is a sign of civilization to maintain the best standards of behaviour you can during political debate - the most divisive, passionate area of discussion there is. Those of us debating can get angry precisely because we become so involved in the issues. But the point is that we're arguing so we can attain a more civilized society (aren't we?) So if we can't behave like compassionate human beings then I would like to know what the point is of listening to fine words spoken by politicians, or indeed debating anything.

I imagine TUC leaders may get quite pompous over the course of the conference (will they condemn these Tshirts? Have the Labour party done so?) But I don't know what these fools, or any other bunch of fools, can do with a country full of people who think it's acceptable to celebrate the long, undignified death of another human being.

The BBC biased? Never!

For a good while now, there has been a debate in the UK about whether the BBC has a left-wing bias or not. Less of a debate, more a statement of fact followed by vehement denials. But still we have to roll out the arguments.

The BBC are supposed to be unstintingly impartial - that is their rasion d'etre. Yet on their news and cultural output they relentlessly either stifle, ridicule, or completely ignore anything other than a narrow 'progressive' viewpoint (of the Guardian/Independent newspapers) - which has very limited support in the country as a whole, but is given free (or license fee-funded) propaganda by the state broadcaster

The above view is an angry one - but it is supported by the facts. Every time I switch on radio 4, or watch a BBC news programme of any kind, the slant is obvious. There is no balance within the programmes themselves, as there should be, nor is there any hint of the news programmes being balanced by more libertarian programmes. If you think there is, please show me.

Last night, as an example, I switched on "Saturday review", on radio 4. This was hosted by the scrupulously impartial, on-the-fence Bidisha, whose previous quotes include:

“Any man who thinks it’s OK to live in a household where the woman does the overwhelming majority of all the housework, childcare and family admin is a woman-hater”,

and

 “I wouldn’t be above some impromptu castration”

Please note that my collection of notes below took no work whatsoever. I listened to the programme once only, scribbling a couple of notes as I went along probably missing much. 

• look at the chosen topics: Naomi Alderman's novel undermining Christianity, a left-wing protest album (at a time when the Democrats are in power in America). Bidisha talks of the TV drama showing an "Empire with victorian values, undergong forced changes and reversals of power"
• the guest Cahal Dallat states that the programme "has a good Tory in it, which I think is something worth watching" - this 'good Tory'  talks of a minimum wage  3 times the one "that socialists have brought in"*
• the idea of the "old world breaking up" is mentioned about 5 times in 5 minutes
• when talking about a sci-fi-based play by Aykbourn, Bidisha enthused "That android is everything a man should be"
• there were odd remarks about Jesus’ “socialist principles”
• Bidisha rather wanted the Ry Cooder album to be history-changing,
• one guest said it was “really good to see a grumpy lefty getting out there and doing protest music"

Those are just a few examples, but the general agreement was relentless. Where was the non-progressive viewpoint to balance all this? I'll answer that for you: nowhere, and it won't appear soon on the BBC.

Sometimes your Guardian reader will respond that these views are now standard UK opinion, whereas a cursory (or more in-depth) look at newspaper sales shows that exactly the opposite is the case. If you mention this, they will, without missing a beat, change tack, and claim that the alternative 'liberal' view (read "Marxist inspired Guardian view") should be given some air-time. Which is ok - but not ALL the air-time. But by now their attention will appear to have wandered.

They don't care what the rationale is, they just want the progressive viewpoint pushed by public funding whatever the reason given needs to be. It is therefore unbalanced political propaganda and no-one should pretend it is anything other than that.

* for a very eloquent man, Cahal Dallat overused the words "socialists" and "tory" a little - which may or may not reflect his framework thinking about the world

The Laurie Penny lectures. Good oh!

So on Monday the Independent decided to run a piece entitled "How should we talk to men about sexism?". A fascinating question, to be sure. The piece was a dialogue between Laurie Penny and Martin Robbins (both call themselves feminists) trying to answer the above question. There are some inadvertent points of interest in the article.

Firstly the cringeworthyness of some male feminists. Mr Robbins kicks off with:

"It’s tough being a male feminist, albeit far less tough than being a female one"

Note that Robbins seems to have learned (or been 'trained') to put in the disclaimer saying "albeit far less tough than being a female one " (so please don't be nasty to me, nice feminists). Possibly he feels he must make mention of his privilege as a male every other sentence? You tell me. 

When Robbins says 

"Where are the spaces where men can stand up and say – actually, this is fucked up? I wish feminism was seen as a discipline in which we discussed men’s issues as much as women’s"

Ally Fogg (who's been there) replies:

"I have to say there's a rather depressing answer to this question guys, which is that anyone who attempts to do so is likely to bring down the furious wrath of the feminist movement upon his or her head. Attempt to do it in a feminist space and the best you can hope for is that you'll get a chorus of mockery.."

Secondly behold the heartwarming intellectual humility on display:

"Feminists often repeat the mantra that [the 'patriarchy' affects men] without properly devoting time to explaining why"


Feminists don't need to argue that the patriarchy affects men, they merely need to explain why. Apparently the debate is all done and dusted. Another snippet:


"Martin: You almost need a sort of training arena where you can say stupid things to feminists and not get shot down in public. When I was struggling to understand patriarchy, I found feminist blogs unhelpful. I was asking questions I now realise were a bit stupid, but out of naivety rather than anything else.

Laurie: I’ve thought about this a lot and unfortunately, I do think female feminists are going to have to be a bit more forgiving and generous in our corrections from time to time..."

Ignore the nauseating brown-nosing from Robbins, just try to imagine Penny graciously being 'forgiving in her corrections'. Bit of a Mistress/slave dynamic in play there. 

This attitude didn't emerge from a vacuum, it's the way many feminists have learnt to behave towards I think it says everything you need to know about feminist's attitude towards men who try to join their ranks.

Sith entity affecting england football performance

Scientists have discovered the source of dark-side sombreness responsible for England’s poor football performances. Readings have indicated extremely high levels of Sith activity precisely located around England’s commentary team in Kiev.

“We’re not naming any names” said Professor Dinkworm of the Institute of Studies, “but there’s one individual who we suspect of radiating negative energy on an epic scale. It’s clearly taken it’s toll on the players”

Scientists believe that this entity calls itself Darth Lawro, and has been clouding the entire teams  thoughts with horrors from the Dark Side.

“This creature must have a colossal midichlorian count,” said Dinkworm, “he’s able to literally depress not just the team, but an entire nation through a trick of the force, using the medium of television”

Viewers phoned in with higher than usual numbers of complaints of headaches, caused by repetition of mantras such as “No shape, no cohesion, no ambition, no hope”.

Readings spiked around the time the commentator concerned said “if his brains were petrol he’d never get out of the garage”

Prof Dinkworm, and his team believe that the waves of dark-side gloom instil the certainty of inevitable defeat that psychically transmits to the players and all England supporters worldwide. “It’s a major discovery”, he said, “If we can overthrow Darth Lawro, we estimate that England will win the next 5 world cups in a row from sheer relief”

“Assuming we keep sacking the manager, of course”