Monday, 31 July 2017
Day 212: Shit
Sunday, 30 July 2017
Day 211: You wouldn't think a robot could sound condescending
Saturday, 29 July 2017
Day 210: Did I say it was nice weather for working outside?
*I heard my oldest** niece say this the other day and thought, "Wow, there's a blast from the past". Did anybody else use this turn of phrase when they were young?
**Oldest non-adult niece
Friday, 28 July 2017
Day 209: Back to working in the great outdoors
Thursday, 27 July 2017
Day 208: I'm not the only one
Wednesday, 26 July 2017
Tuesday, 25 July 2017
Monday, 24 July 2017
Sunday, 23 July 2017
Day 204: auntyalex.wordpress.com
Saturday, 22 July 2017
Day 203: Lock-Out
Friday, 21 July 2017
Day 202: Aussies Out
Thursday, 20 July 2017
Wednesday, 19 July 2017
Day 200: Shots Fired
Tuesday, 18 July 2017
Monday, 17 July 2017
Day 198: Called it!
Sunday, 16 July 2017
Day 197: Playing with Inkscape's "Gradient Mesh" tool
Saturday, 15 July 2017
Friday, 14 July 2017
Thursday, 13 July 2017
Wednesday, 12 July 2017
Day 193: Just put your lips together and blow
Tuesday, 11 July 2017
Day 192: Where to draw the line on trannies
You might remember that a couple of years ago I wrote a post about the movement to abolish gender-segregated toilets and changing rooms in Scandinavia and California. You might also remember my take on it was that I could see where they were coming from, but I'm too set in my ways to want to change. Well, things have evolved a little bit since then. The battle against the gender binary has now reached into places where I can no longer put my opposition down to my own age and intransigence, and I just have to say, "no, this is fucked in the head".
The first issue involves sex re-assignment for children, and for the life of me, I can't work out why this is even on the table. Look, you can dress your kids up however you want, and you can push them to play sport or dolls or whatever takes your fancy; but pumping them full of hormones to try to change their sex is fuckin' child-abuse. End of story.
The second issue is—thankfully—far less serious. Apparently, it is becoming common for male-to-female transexuals to be allowed to compete in women's sport, and there is even a push to let in people who merely "identify" as women, but haven't been through any sort of transition. At this point, most of the controversy involves combat sports, like wrestling, kick-boxing, & MMA, but there's also trans-gender people competing in women's weight-lifting and cricket—and, surprise, surprise—they're doing really REALLY fuckin' well … and the women they're beating aren't too happy about it … and understandably so.
Look, let's be brutally fuckin' honest about this; letting men—and even people who used to be men—compete in women's sport, is like letting able-bodied people compete in para-sports*. When it comes to sport, being a woman is a distinct disability. If it wasn't, we could just abolish women's sport and have everybody compete together. But we can't. And that's the reason why.
* Can I also point out that there is now a trans-ablist movement, for people who "identify" as disabled (but aren't); as well as a trans-racial movement. If you want to know more about that second one, look up a woman called Rachael Dolezol (spelling?), a white woman who has apparently spent most of her adult life pretending she's African American.
What the fuck is wrong with people.
Monday, 10 July 2017
Day 191: Great Match
Sunday, 9 July 2017
Saturday, 8 July 2017
Friday, 7 July 2017
Day 188: Techno-woo
Thursday, 6 July 2017
Day 187: Where to draw the line on child pornography
A few weeks (months?) ago, I talked about a thing I'd heard on companies trying to manufacture lifelike sex robots. Today, I heard a short interview with a woman who was from some group that are trying to outlaw sex-dolls/robots that look like children. Apparently, there are already companies that manufacture them in Japan. The woman said that they (the group she represented) had already got a man gaolled in the United States for importing one (under child pornography laws) and they were in the process of trying to get a man gaolled in Canada.
I remember about ten years ago, there was a case in Australia (NSW, I believe) where a man on parole was put back into gaol for having pornographic Simpsons cartoons on his computer. Last year, while I was driving between towns out in the middle of nowhere, I heard a report on the news about an Australian man who was facing charges for selling an ultrasound of his unborn child to an undercover detective (the child wasn't being molested, but it was technically "naked"). I intended to look the story up when I got back to civilisation, but I forgot about it until now.
Y'know, I hate being put in a position where I have to defend people like this, but at the end of the day, so long as they're not trading images of actual real children actually really being harmed, I don't particularly like the law going after these people. Essentially, what they're doing is taking a law that's supposed to protect people from abuse and turning it into a glorified obscenity charge. Is it as bad as cops who go after 15-year-olds who take photos of themselves in the buff? No, but it's not a million miles away either.
And speaking of abuse that's not a million miles away; do you think that trading images of adult abuse should also be illegal? Like, it's illegal to have pictures of a 17-year-old being sexually molested, because that's child pornography; but as far as I know, it's not illegal to have pictures of an 18-year-old being sexually molested. Also, it's not illegal to have pictures of either of them being molested in a non-sexual manner. Should it be?
Wednesday, 5 July 2017
Day 186: Where there's smoke
Tuesday, 4 July 2017
Day 185: A bit of fun
Monday, 3 July 2017
Day 184: Time for some more Logicked.
Sunday, 2 July 2017
Saturday, 1 July 2017
Day 182: Sex, Lies, and the Fatal Female Instinct That Rocks the Single Basic Attraction.
It's interesting that the subject of free-to-air television has recently cropped up here. Today, I had to spend some time rooting around with a laptop, because the owner couldn't get it to stream video off the Ch7 website. Whilst the shows I saw on offer looked pretty abysmal in general, I'd like to pay special attention to the "movies" page. If the screenshot below is too small, you should be able to click on it for a larger version.
Points Of Interest
- I can't believe Seven are still joined at the hip with Yahoo. It even looks like you need a Yahoo account to use certain features on the Seven website. Jesus Christ Seven, if there's one company you shouldn't be relying on for the responsible management of customer accounts …
- There's only two ads on this page and they're both for LottoLand.
- Like a lot of modern websites, they've opted for a colour scheme of light-grey text on a lighter-grey background. In the screenshot above, I've actually darkened the text considerably, in order to make it legible
- Take a look at the film selection! Now, keep in mind I haven't watched any of these pictures (hell, I've never even heard of any of them), but look at the thumbnails/title/descriptions. It seems to be comprised entirely of straight-to-video/tv erotic thrillers. It looks like a service-station's "weekly rentals" rack from 1991. And no, this wasn't "one page" of movies, this was the entire friggin' catalogue. Bloody hell; do people actually watch this rubbish, or is this why television stations are struggling?


