Log blog

•May 14, 2017 • Leave a Comment

So yesterday I was availing myself of the facilities at a public convenience and, not for the first time at this location, I found myself next to a pair of cottagers utilising an adjacent cubicle. I serenaded their romance with the crepitation of a fruity raspberry that resonated through the acoustic chamber created by the porcelain of the throne I was occupying. The accompany aroma generated by the reappearance of the previous night’s curry, while not the kind of perfume conventionally associated with the boudoir, I’m sure enhanced the atmosphere for them, each to their own I suppose. I couldn’t help but ponder though, that since the public facilities we were occupying were at that time experience quite a heavy demand, that the lovers next door might have to wait rather longer than anticipated before their exit–ah the romance.


The Daily Mail

•May 10, 2017 • Leave a Comment

It would be an exaggeration to say that the staff at the Daily Mail newspaper is completely gay, it’s around 80% by my estimation — or maybe closer to 85 or 90%. Oh hang on though, there’s…  so it’s around 98% or possibly just under 100% but it’s definitely not completely gay — or it might be.

Now you have this insight into the editorial staff, don’t some of  those bizarre headlines start to make sense when you view them in the light of irony? Anyway with this in mind let’s examine the Mail’s response to a controversy concerning the recently departed Australian cartoonist Bill Leak. Australia, that nation which erstwhile was known for plain speaking and the absence of affectation, has suffered more than most under the yoke of Political Kracknest. In fact it’s fair to say that in recent decades, the place has been run by a bunch of bell ends. I’ll tell you what, Bill was far braver than most with his constant pointing out of the state of the emperor’s undress and for his trouble he would get all sorts of shit thrown at him by assorted cunts and nazis. So one day he drew a not particularly good cartoon, drawing a comparison between some of his opponents and the actual historical Nazis, as opposed to the people living today who behave and think like them.

There’s almost nothing interesting about he kind of default response that this drawing elicited from Australia’s beatified, just the usual pointless outrage and shit but have a quick look at Alice Clarke’s tweet about the cartoon, which goes: ‘Remember when Nazis rounded up gays and put them in death camps?…’. This does happen to be interesting because it demonstrates Alice Clarke’s, I’m sure sincere belief, that during the thirties and forties the NSDAP government in Germany systematically persecuted homosexuals and eventually put them to death in extermination camps and that’s interesting because it didn’t happen, in fact nothing like it happened—at all. But But… what about the pink triangle you say, surely that’s the mark used to define homosexuals in the concentration camps? Yeah well the pink triangle was used to identify sexual offenders and yep, homosexuality was a sexual offence, just like it was in the regime the Nazis succeeded, just like it was in the regime that succeeded the Nazis, just like it was in the United Kingdom…

So… did you ever hear of an event called Kristallnach? Yeah well it was a minor bit of bother that kicked off in 1938, orchestrated in response to the death of a high ranking Nazi and one of Adolf’s personal friends, Ernst Vom Rath. His Wikipedia page is hilarious, it could be used to exemplify equivocation, the contrivance with which it skirts Ernst’s sexuality is breath-taking. The notion that the Nazis persecuted homosexuals in the like manner they did Jews is entirely fictional. Yeah people were singled out as homosexuals but the charge was used as means of discrediting opponents as in the Fritsch Affair. Let’s finish by referencing those poor lost souls in the concentration camp with the pink triangle, people like Oskar Dirlewanger imprisoned for sexual offences but given a second chance by a compassionate regime?


Something wrong here.

•May 9, 2017 • Leave a Comment

So I popped into the library to borrow this book by the northern Irish author Colin Batman—sorry Bateman. I wanted to purchase the first in this series Ice Quake but my local Watestones is run by two gays, so the only teen fiction they buy in, is stuff that has a frock on the cover. Talking of covers, I’d like to point out just how pathetic this particular example is. Unfortunately it seems they made the mistake of getting a graphic designer to do it, so it’s typographically based cover, though this one does have a rather prominent but incredibly dull  illustration.

Can you believe it, this is supposed to be aimed at the teen male action/adventure market, I mean, what a bloody yawn. The concept’s okay, two figures caught in the glare of search lights but the execution is just abysmal. I don’t blame the illustrator though because I suspect this is a case of an unsuitable brief, I’m guessing that they told him/her to include the helicopter.

Another duck

•May 5, 2017 • Leave a Comment

Colourful ducks, aren’t they?

A snap I took of a duck a week or so ago, it’s been subjected to some image enhancement, which I think works quite nicely.



•May 2, 2017 • Leave a Comment

I keep seeing words like unforgiving, challenging and demanding in relation to watercolours. Which is odd because I’ve quite a bit of experience in the medium and those are not the kind of things I would associate with it.

Burka ban

•May 2, 2017 • Leave a Comment

I find questions like, should wearing the burka be subject to a general ban, interesting. Interesting not because they pose a dilemma or raise a significant issues requiring sagacious examination. I find them interesting because I wonder how the fuck do you get to be dumb enough to ever pose them? This isn’t France or Germany where Jacque and Adolf get to tell you which fingers you’re allowed to hold your willy with when you have a pee, this is fucking England mate and in England, you get to wear what the fuck you want.

So maybe there’s a case for proscribing ’em in sensitive locations, airports, banks and, as is the case with motorcycle crash helmets but other than that the state has no business telling folk what they can wear.

Guy stuff

•April 27, 2017 • 2 Comments

Feminisation is what they call it, which isn’t quite true but it’s close enough a term to be useful. It’s been going on for a few decades now, since the mid 90’s really and it’s what’s turned most of our fictional literature and drama really really boring. You know, you pick up a book, one that’s got a reasonably enticing cover, only to find its all about fucking relationships. Holy turd fucking shit, where is the fucking action man? We call it feminisation because of the concomitant associations, for instance when feminists took over my local library, they burned all the H Rider Haggard and Mickey Spillane and replaced ’em with that fucking Jane Austin gobshite; fucking bitches, I look forward to the day they’re all ravished by fucking monkeys!

As I mentioned it’s been going on for a while now, during which time it’s progressed in scope and it’s got to the point where now, literature and drama are now almost totally femcentric. This circumstance has given rise to the term, guy stuff, because, guy stuff that is stuff that appeals to guys, is now a beleaguered and dwindling oddity amid an ocean of touchy feely, puke inducing ponce fodder. But what is guy stuff, that’s a question that needs addressing because I’ve seen Starsky and Hutch put forward as an example, er excuse me, gay stuff maybe but guy stuff? No fucking way man, guy stuff is about chicks and cars, booze and reckless behaviour; there’s no room for cuddly sweaters and mutual respect. Cosy up to your workmates like either Starsky or Hutch and if won’t be long before you hear, ‘backs to the wall lads’ and find the lavs at work conveniently vacated whenever you need a pee. Guys don’t slap their mates on the back and tell each other how great they are, they only  speak to each other at all, to take the piss, pitch insults and cast aspersions on each other’s sexuality.