Filth Media

When you’re browsing the menu at random establishment, the duck comes with an orange plum sauce, the fish with a lemon butter drizzle, the lamb shank with a tomato jus… and the poor steak has the optional extra sauce for £1.50. Since when does a steak not warrant this sauce by default? Often the steak is the most expensive item on the menu, so can the sauce not be included with this hefty price?

How has this come about… perhaps there was a period when non sauce eaters (wimps or fungiphobics) asked for the steak without any sauce, and then requested a discount for the minimised consumption. This is ridiculous, but if true, burn in hell anti saucites.

That there sauce is sitting in a huge pot in the back of the kitchen, or waiting in tupperware for a quick microwave nuke for your saucy loving. The cost of production of this sauce, well, can’t be much… perhaps you could make a good profit from selling sauce alone if you can move 20 ml for £1.50.

But the irony remains in the alternate sauces… so you’ve gotta pay for this gourmet concoction, but not the prepackaged goodies on the table… when you sit down for a BLT and chips, it’s likely you’ll open 1 mayo, 1 horseradish and 2 tomato sauce packets to get through with full unhealthy points. All for nothing. Where’s the top limit?

Next time you opt for the extra sauce on your steak – as if you wouldn’t – make sure you grab yourself a good handful of all them extra packaged sauces so you fee like you’ve got your money’s worth. Squeeze a napkin full of half a bottle of ketchup if it’s there. Fill your empty pint glass with vinegar.

The only issue should be making the really hard decision, when you’re at a good old (Aussie) pub anyway; do I have the pepper or mushroom sauce, or is this an establishment that will let me have both. Heaven!

What is it that is making the human race so fucked up? I mean, I kinda get the impression that a good deal of people that I meet and have met (present company excluded, of course) really enjoy trying to push buttons and piss one another off. In fact, in order to have a healthy social life, it almost seems imperative that you be the sort of person who enjoys paying out, and being payed out in return (and don’t get me wrong, it’s good for a laugh either way – at times) but I can’t help feel that this is a pretty fucked up way for us to interact! I know what yer thinking (or, I think I do) – that it’s all in good fun, and no one gets hurt, and deeply underlying it is really a sense of respect, and it teaches you to laugh at yourself. And those points are really hard to counter, I mean… interacting in this way does well to keep egos in check and stuff.

But, we don’t all think the same, and it kinda seems to me that if you aren’t the sort of person that can flow with that kind of thing quickly, then you’re going to sink in that sort of tide, occasionally at least. It comes down to insecurities, there’s no doubt, and the fact is that there are insecure people everywhere – myself being one of them. If you try and respect people’s insecurities, you end up reminding them of the fact that the insecurities are there, and most people don’t like that. It’s that “nice guys are dull” attitude. If, on the other hand, you help them to ignore their problems, by having a laugh at pointless shit (and reminding them that this isn’t the place to discuss such depressing stuff) it’s great on a social level, but is it (ultimately) going to help anyone? If, like me, you’ve got the sort of deep insecurities that requires something like a shift in global consciousness, then it seems to me like your rooted, and no one is going to help you because they’ve all got their shit to deal with, and no one has been prepared to lend them a hand, so you just end up feeling an outsider most of the time.

Having two sexes doesn’t help the cause much either. I’ve been a Jungian supporter for years, but most people seem to be Freudian in their take on things. Jung felt that there is so much more to human beings and our interactions than just sex. Freud figured our psychology was all based around sex – and so the two stopped being friends after about 20 years (think about it, 20 years is a hell of a long time, big debate that one). The way I see it, the problem with the Freudian take on things is that it’s all about being impressive to the opposite sex – ah, correction – looking impressive to the opposite sex. This is great for the sort of attitude you want to generate in a right-wing capitalist society, i.e. make it easy for yourself to look impressive for that special someone, so long as you’re prepared to sell yourself out. But I still think Jung was right, and as evidence in support of his difference with Freud, I point to the way that right-wing capitalism seems to operate.

People want to impress their partner (or prospective partner). Given that capitalism works on a ‘look after yourself’ attitude, it doesn’t really matter if you want your partner for your own selfish reasons – in fact this is better off in the long term as you’re going to have the kind of insecurities that may well need medical attention down the track (private cover, of course). Advertising plays on this like crazy and tells people that the way to impress their partner is to own widgets, and is supported by sit-coms and soap operas that give people subtle hints as to how they should react in certain situations. In order to purchase said widgets, you have to have money. In order to get money, you have to do something for someone else – generally speaking. Theoretically (I love that word), your boss is well aware of that, and is more than happy to get you to waste your life (and probably a whole heap of resources as well) doing something you otherwise really aren’t interested in doing.

So why does this work? Was Freud right, and it really does all come down to sex? If that’s the case, then it seems to me that we’re pretty much screwed up as a society. But what if (and this is the global consciousness raising stuff that acts like my own personal viagra – which I’m sure ya’ll are happy to know) we take out the insecurities? What if people started to face their problems honestly and openly rather than hiding behind a bit of a jab here and a few laughs there? Would we be prepared to put up with being exploited all in the name of widgets? I somehow doubt it. What would it do for our sexual relations? I would like to think that it would help us all to mature a bit in that regard – and stop us from doing something that seems just a bit false simply so that we can impress others, and we all might have to actually start being a bit more considerate of and compassionate toward those we profess to love in order to get that love in return! At the same time, this should stop us being impressed by simple little traps that may not necessarily lead to a happy hereafter, as we would surely become less in need of instant gratification to ease the wounds that our insecurities brought about. And (who knows!) I might then finally be able to find a woman that I’m actually happy with (Goddam it Freud!)

Peace Ya’ll!

(P.S. 10 points to anyone that can spot the major irony here, and 5 for picking the minor one)

There’s a new freebee mag in Brizzie called MX (God only knows why it has this name, but I suspect it’s to attract those that dug BMX’s as a kid and/or those that engorge over MX5’s now). I found a copy on the train the other evening, and actually found some of the articles fairly interesting. Apparently, German scientists have discovered that Birds have a sensory apparatus on their beaks that tell them where in the world they are because of the earth’s natural magnetic field – well I never.
Anyhow, while perusing this publication (I had left in a rush and left my book at home, something that I have since vowed to never do again) it came to my attention that there was a letters section that had been filled this week by one Mr. Terry Balson from Grange.
Now, I’ve kind of been wrangling with whether to give people a fair go or not of late, and have been leaning toward the warm and fuzzy notion that people aren’t so bad, and we’re all fairly trust worthy once it gets down to it, ’cause after all, life’s just a bit o’ fun and all can be cleared up with a nudge an’ a wink, ’cause we’re all just in it togeva.
Anyone who is aspousing this notion should grab a copy of this weeks MX magazine, and turn to page 12.
I sincerely think this guy was influenced by oil companies somehow; I dunno if they held a gun to his head, payed him off, or threatened to wipe out his Neighbours collection from the mid-eighties or what, but this guy sang like a nighting-gale with a rose-red bump on its head, and still made letter of the week.
It’s a good job I intercepted this bit of filthy media, and let me tell you it’s as filthy as it gets. It made me kinda wonder if the guy who wrote it actually exists, or if they just put something together to actively lower the intelligence of anyone who migh unwittingly get a copy (check it out, it’s really something).
It all kinda made sense, though, when I looked up MX magazine on the web this evening when I got home. It’s run by news limited for a start (i.e. the fox corporation), and (oddly enough) despite being a free magazine, you can’t actually get a free copy off the web. They’re pretty big on the advertising thing though, just check out the list of contacts, and I love the almost subliminal ‘PICK ME UP’ in the header. All this helped explained the new ads for a type of canned drink called MX advertised at central station too (you think it’s a new type of funky drink that will make you more attractive, until you realise it’s just a magazine. Two weeks later you forget about your embarasing run in with stupid ads, but remember that the name made you feel something real.) Check it out – http://www.mxnet.com.au/
Anyway, I had to respond to this stooge ‘letter of the week’ and figured I’d better let you all know, just incase I get wiped out this weekend in a freakilly localised tornado (or some such). The attatched letter is my response to Mr. Murdoch’s veil of shame, and I’m gonna transcribe this whole article for you me finks, just ’cause I’m drunk, bored, and passionate, so you should find that at the start of the next paragraph –

Climate Theory Still Unproven
According to Vicki Stocks (mX, Tues), climate change, as caused by human activity, is accepted by the scientific community. That’s incorrect.
Climate change has occurred continuously during the Earth’s history. This is due to the natural but complex movements in the universe (Earth around the sun, our solar system within our galaxy, our galaxy within the universe) coupled with the natural variations in the radiation output of the sun.
These factors have controlled changes in global climates and atmospheric carbon dioxide levels, with minimal interference from any life on Earth.
There’s still active debate about the role that human activity has in affecting climate change.
In science, an idea that may or may not be correct is called an hypothesis. If it is confirmed by further testing it becomes a theory and, if proven, becomes a law.
At the moment, climate change is an hypothesis.
The global climate is an extremely complicated entity, as indicated by the difficulty in predicting the weather – even a few days in advance.
Another fact is that coal (via trees), oil (via aquatic organisms) and gas (methane via anaerobic degradation of organic material) all originated directly or indirectly from atmospheric carbon dioxide. When they are used as fuels, the carbon dioxide released is just part of the recycling process.
Finally, I recall the Y2K computer bug debacle.
Nobody, as far as I remember, spoke out against the consensus position that at midnight on 31/12/99 there would be chaos as many computer systems crashed. Yet the year 2K entered without a whimper.
So, beware of politicians jumping on bandwagons.
-Terry Balson, Grange.

15/02/2007 mX Magazine

BE WARNED!!! THE HUMAN RACE HAS MOVED PASSED THE STONE AGE, THE BRONZE AGE, AND THE IRON AGE. THIS IS NOT THE COMMUNICATION AGE, FAR FROM IT, THIS IS THE MONEY AGE!!! YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED.

In response the letter of the day 15/03/2007

I don’t know where Terry Balson got his degree in science, but I would be very keen to find out, as I must tell everyone I know to avoid (like the plague) getting any form of education from his institution of choice. ‘In science, an idea that may or may not be correct is called an hypothesis. If it is confirmed by further testing it becomes a theory and, if proven, becomes a law.’ I don’t know when scientists started making laws, but I’m sure that legal firms all over the country would be keen to rectify this problem as immediately as is humanly possible, and I agree, so long as they don’t burn too many fossil fuels in the process.
‘[Climate change] is due to the natural but complex movements in the universe (earth around the sun, our solar system within our galaxy, our galaxy within the universe) coupled with the natural variations in the radiation output of the sun’.
Firstly, the earth may receive heat and electromagnetic influences from the sun (which I assume are the “variations” that Mr. Balson was alluding to), and it’s true, these factors do influence our climate to some degree, however, our solar system is a ridiculously insignificant little speck in a gargantuan mass of some hundred-billion stars, the closest of which (given our current state of technology) no human could reach in one lifetime – even if there was enough food and entertainment on board to keep him or her going for the duration. And that’s just our Galaxy, which (as Eric Idle once sang) ‘is only one of millions of billions in this amazing and expanding universe’.
As far as the control of carbon-dioxide levels on our tiny planet are concerned, we are living in a closed system. We don’t get carbon dioxide from anywhere else but right here on earth, and the fact is, when carbon is in the form of a fossil fuel, it is perfectly safe. If carbon remained in its liquid or solid form until the sun turned into a red giant and engulfed this planet some 5 billion years from now, that would be just dandy for our little blue-green paradise and its inhabitants. However, it is in its gaseous form that carbon causes problems, and as we human beings insist on the need to move from one place to another at a faster and faster rate, we are burning fossil fuels with hardly a concern beyond those which plague us at this very minute.
If that’s just human nature, then that’s fine. We want things done now, and we will do what we can to see them done now, and if that demands a sacrifice, then what we do is all the more noble for it. But if we are going to make a sacrifice (and to quote Hollywood, you can’t make an omelette without breaking a few eggs), can we at least try to understand exactly what the sacrifice we are making is first? And when I say understand, I don’t mean like Mr. Balson of Grange understands things (with an atlas of the universe and a teddy bear that tells him things when he goes to bed at night), I mean really understand, as in put in some effort so as to know what the realities are.
I for one am not prepared to risk what little beauty there is left on this amazing little gem of a planet, because, not only is it where I was born, but it’s where I grew up, it’s where I first fell in love, and it’s where I’m going to die, and I’d rather die knowing that my home is going to be alright when I’m gone, than think that it was all lost so that some pathological bastard could make a few measly dollars.

Madison Moriarty – Upper Brookfield

The European Commission has just announced an agreement whereby 
English will be the official language of the European Union rather than German, which was the other possibility. 
 
As part of the negotiations, the British Government conceded that 
English spelling had some room for improvement and has accepted a 5- 
year phase-in plan that would become known as “Euro-English”. 
 
In the first year, “s” will replace the soft “c”. Sertainly, this will 
make the sivil servants jump with joy. The hard “c” will be dropped in 
favour of “k”. This should klear up konfusion, and keyboards kan have 
one less letter There will be growing publik enthusiasm in the sekond 
year when the troublesome “ph” will be replaced with “f”. This will 
make words like fotograf 20% shorter. 
 
In the 3rd year, publik akseptanse of the new spelling kan be expekted 
to reach the stage where more komplikated changes are possible. 
 
Governments will enkourage the removal of double letters which have 
always ben a deterent to akurate speling. 
 
Also, al wil agre that the horibl mes of the silent “e” in the languag 
is disgrasful and it should go away. 
 
By the 4th yer people wil be reseptiv to steps such as 
replasing “th” with “z” and “w” with “v”. 
 
During ze fifz yer, ze unesesary “o” kan be dropd from vords 
kontaining “ou” and after ziz fifz yer, ve vil hav a reil sensi bl 
riten styl. 
 
Zer vil be no mor trubl or difikultis and evrivun vil find it ezi tu 
understand ech oza. Ze drem of a united urop vil finali kum tru. 
 
Und efter ze fifz yer, ve vil al be speking German like zey vunted in 
ze forst plas.

After having been given the finger by two motorists in two days who were both a) in the wrong and b) entirely anonymous, I think I probably have the right to be a tad tetchy (what with being a bit of a greeny and not really approving of the whole automobile industry thing and all). However, to have this inter-dispersed with genuinely insulting experiences that support the notion that mechanics are all they’re cracked up to be, I’ve had it with the blatant ridiculousness of our callously-cool crazed, bullshit-swamped, and totally-disinterested-with-being-nice-to-one-another façade of a cohesive society.

I am seriously considering giving up caring about anyone (or anything) at all. The only thing stopping me is the fact that I know that this is precisely what they want us to do. Who are they, you may well ask?

They are very difficult to pin down, and may very well not exist at all, but as Maynard James Keegan of Tool sings ‘That doesn’t mean I don’t desire to point the finger, blame the other.’ It’s possible that there are “hidden� ones that call the shots for our society, such as the Masons or Illuminati, and their agenda is to keep us all distracted as cattle, mooing and crowing at one another simply so that we all can be upset at one another rather than upset about the way things are going, and quietly shrug it all off as “just life�, or “just another anonymous arsehole�, while they play “real world� politics and push us around a computer screen like the insignificant little bits of data that we have allowed ourselves to be duped into becoming. (Something deep inside me hopes to God that one of those working for such a society intercepts this letter, comes to my house in the deep of night, and takes me away. It would help on two levels, no more bullshit, and – more significantly – no more bullshit.)

Unfortunately, though, I suspect such rumours are merely conjecture that the not-too-bright psychopaths that run this world are happy to have flying around so that it takes the onus off them if and when things stuff up (and yes, I do mean psychopaths, it is the appropriate term. Not that all of our world leaders are psychopaths, but I am referring to those that indeed fulfil the requirements of the condition known as psychopathy, and thanks to right wing ideology, they seem to be increasingly in the majority). Oh yes, come Armageddon (or its nearest estimate), they can retire to their custom built island and sip their gin happily from dew laden palm fronds, held and supported by several incredibly insular and equally incredibly sexually desirable figures (or whatever it is one does on such islands), satisfied in the knowledge that their influence on the world has been to create more like them – thus making them feel like a true pater-familias – all the while their alter ego’s rid the place of the rabble that are deluded in giving a shit about anyone but themselves by giving them the finger in inappropriate and undesirable circumstances, making them want to be taken away in the middle of the night by illusory secret society members.

So, why am I bothering to tell you all this? I’m hoping in vain that it makes some sense to you, (any one of you) and that you can translate it back to me so that I can make sense of it all and start to feel, if not good, then at least contented about this seemingly ridiculous stupidity, because I think I’m a decent fellow, and I can’t for the slightest instant understand why I’m putting up with this flagrant disregard for, well, umm, being decent to one another any longer!

I suspect nothing of the sort will occur, and you’ll quietly say to yourself, ‘why doesn’t Alex just get himself a girlfriend?’

I’ll hopefully get to cover that in my next rant. Thanks for your time.

ME.

It is greed that has brought on the death of this planet,
And it is money that has given greed it’s wings.

Thought I’d drop this into the filth mix a week before the most obscenely capitalised Hallmark occasion arrives on our doorsteps.

From 1982: Have you ever tried to sell a diamond?