Hi folks. Haven't blogged for a long time because I didn't know what to say.
But having listened to Simon Kelner's fabulous lecture last week about newspapers needing to find a new niche in the market, I've given this blog business a rethink.
I always agonised over how to mash up a news story in a 'blog-savvy' way - then realised there was no point.
I am never going to beat the BBC or Sky news in terms of breaking news - neither are most newspapers. So I've decided to create my own brand of blogging, consisting of discursive opinion, comment and debate. If you like it, great. If it's not 'hard news' enough, allow me to direct you to the BBC homepage. That's not what this is about.
Kelner reckons (and he's editor-in-chief of The Independent, so I'd listen to what he has to say), that newspapers are increasingly going to become 'viewspapers' - based more on analysis of news, rather than the news itself. This way it gets round the problem of the internet always pipping us to it when it comes to scoops.
So I thought I'd blog about something that interests me, and gives me room for exploring. You guessed it - it's a rip-off of Carrie Bradshaw's musings about sex, love and relationships. It's not particularly aimed at specifically men or women - it's aimed at those who are interested in relationship politics in a changing world. And other stuff I have to say, obviously.
Love, relationships and control? My point is this, and I'd be interested to hear what people think. Basically, it's widely believed that even in a very even-handed, democratic relationship, there is one party who has the upper hand, even if this is slightly.
Who asked who out? Who said the 'L' word first? Who is more needy? These are the markers that decide who is more into who. It sounds trivial, but it's true.
The games played in the early days are a perfect example. Both parties are trying to establish who is in charge. Timed interludes between texts, not returning calls, not having sex on a first date - it's nothing to do with morality, it's to do with feeling in control.
The trouble is, you can't have your cake and eat it. Having control means you have power with nothing to show for it. Not returning a text means you won't get one back. Not having sex with someone (not necesarily because it's a first date, perhaps that was a bad example) but because you want to feel in control and the one with all the cards is fine, but you don't get to experience the intimacy, pleasure and fun of having sex with someone you are attracted to/in love with.
Yet - if you ask a guy out first, make the first move in the bedroom, ask him to marry you, and all those other things that turn the traditional male/female roles on their head, it is exciting, but you have potentially lost 'the control', or the power that comes from knowing someone is pursuing you relentlessly.
But why should this be? Why can't women make the first move without suddenly feeling vulnerable and 'out of control'?
Society has drummed it into us that men are hunter gatherers, while women are passive and sit in towers waiting to be rescued. They put this down to biology, using the examples of male and female reproductive data. Sperm are active, pursuing the egg and swimming furiously towards it, while the egg is passive and sits there waiting to be fertilised. Believe it or not, this has been the blueprint for defining gender relations for a long time.
I think a lot of women have got themselves into a pickle because of these firmly defined roles. They hang onto the 'control' in a relationship for dear life. "I'm not texting him. He can call me. And I'm making him wait for sex." But surely these small victories are fruitless because you are then depriving yourself as well?
However, give in to instinctual feelings or urges and very quickly the man has tired of you because there's no 'challenge', or because somebody openly pursuing him threatens his masculinity and makes him feel emasculated.
So what the hell, as liberated 21st century girls, are we supposed to do? Sit in the tower twiddling our thumbs while we wait to be rescued? Or text him saying 'Pls cum n rescu me' only to get no response because you were too 'available'?
Sod that lot. I'm having a cuppa soup.
Monday, 30 March 2009
Saturday, 22 November 2008
Weekend jazz gems
Check out: http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=VKL-8FJlFS0 and http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=7kefYrJQ9tc
I adore jazz and wish they still played music like this in clubs today. I know there are some jazz clubs in Manchester but it's still a bit of a fringe scene. It needs a revival.
I adore jazz and wish they still played music like this in clubs today. I know there are some jazz clubs in Manchester but it's still a bit of a fringe scene. It needs a revival.
Tuesday, 18 November 2008
The secret to everlasting happiness
Please listen to this song. http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=Qh9ZZgDqzAg
It made me smile, no mean feat considering how fed up I am today. Had a complete energy slump after working on my feature last week. Better get used to it, that's how it goes.
The lyrics are unashamedly misogynistic but it's such a bouncy little number that in spite of myself I was laughing when I heard it.
I particularly like the dialogue between the band halfway through the song:
"Hey man! I saw your wife today!"
"Yeah?"
"Yeah, she's ugly!"
"She sure can cook though!" Brilliant.
I'd be very interested to see what you gentlemen think. If you wanna be happy for the rest of your life, should you never make a pretty woman your wife?
Does wife have to be synonymous with doormat/frump/cook/reproductive vessel? Is a woman seen as a bit risky or threatening when she can cook, kick ass in the boardroom, raise a family, do the lady on the streets and a freak in the bed thing, and still look fabulous? Or is upsetting of the mother/whore dichotomy still a bit too unsettling for some men?
Why are women sometimes seen as one thing or another? ie in the song, an ugly woman is pitted as a safe bet, cooking meals on time and "giving peace of mind". However, a pretty woman can "make a man look small, and very often is his downfall."
In other words, you can't be an attractive woman and have morals - if you're attractive you're a hussy. Only the downtrodden wife in the kitchen is left - but that's ok because no other man will look at her. She could be a right floozy for all we know! But because she's been labelled as ugly the singer has out this possibility firmly out of his mind.
Both women have been objectified and put in boxes. One is labelled 'sexual object'. One is labelled 'wife/mother'. When did the two become so mutually exclusive?
Some comments please?
Gender politics never cease to bemuse me. But I love them, and I'm glad I share this planet with the intriguing species that is men.
It made me smile, no mean feat considering how fed up I am today. Had a complete energy slump after working on my feature last week. Better get used to it, that's how it goes.
The lyrics are unashamedly misogynistic but it's such a bouncy little number that in spite of myself I was laughing when I heard it.
I particularly like the dialogue between the band halfway through the song:
"Hey man! I saw your wife today!"
"Yeah?"
"Yeah, she's ugly!"
"She sure can cook though!" Brilliant.
I'd be very interested to see what you gentlemen think. If you wanna be happy for the rest of your life, should you never make a pretty woman your wife?
Does wife have to be synonymous with doormat/frump/cook/reproductive vessel? Is a woman seen as a bit risky or threatening when she can cook, kick ass in the boardroom, raise a family, do the lady on the streets and a freak in the bed thing, and still look fabulous? Or is upsetting of the mother/whore dichotomy still a bit too unsettling for some men?
Why are women sometimes seen as one thing or another? ie in the song, an ugly woman is pitted as a safe bet, cooking meals on time and "giving peace of mind". However, a pretty woman can "make a man look small, and very often is his downfall."
In other words, you can't be an attractive woman and have morals - if you're attractive you're a hussy. Only the downtrodden wife in the kitchen is left - but that's ok because no other man will look at her. She could be a right floozy for all we know! But because she's been labelled as ugly the singer has out this possibility firmly out of his mind.
Both women have been objectified and put in boxes. One is labelled 'sexual object'. One is labelled 'wife/mother'. When did the two become so mutually exclusive?
Some comments please?
Gender politics never cease to bemuse me. But I love them, and I'm glad I share this planet with the intriguing species that is men.
Wednesday, 5 November 2008
Andrew Keen: the anti-Christ of Silicone Valley
Evenin' all.
Just listened to a fabulous discussion on Radio 4. Please please check it out, I think you'll find it genuinely interesting in view of everything that was said yesterday in our splendiferous presentations. http://andrewkeen.typepad.com/
It's a bloke called Andrew Keen, who has been called the anti-Christ of Silicone Valley.
I wish I'd heard the programme 48 hours earlier, as it would have made a really interesting counter argument to our digital journalism presentation, which basically argued in favour of the web 2.0 revolution.
However, I am now genuinely confused as to what I think and would value some brainwashing in either direction. Honestly do have a foot in both camps. I hate sitting on the fence, it's for wimps and I'm getting splinters!!
Andrew was saying that what we have in front of us now is cultural chaos and moral decay. He said the culture of blogging, citizen journalism and general plethora of online communities is replacing the wisdom of traditional experts with the innocence of online amateurs.
Apparently, it's "democracy gone mad."
Keen sees the burgeoning communties as a cacophony of worthless opinion. Everyone is talking simultaneously, with no-one listening to anyone else. However, is it just a case of those voices were always there, but there was no medium for them? Perhaps Keen doesn't like that someone can immediately, publicly retort to articles now, eloquently or not. Not sure what his background is. Is he a journo, does anyone know?
He is dismissive of what he calls a "pervasive culture of digital narcissism", with everyone scrambling to survive, spouting any amount of nonsense to do so.
It raised in my mind an interesting tide of change that Clare mentioned in the presentation sessions yesterday - one that says content may no longer necessarily be king, and it's all about generating rapport, discussion and honesty. This disregard for content is what really needles Keen, and he fears severe cultural consequences.
Anyway...not much point me saying any more when you can read the thing yourselves. I'm taking to this stuff with the ferocity of a convert.
Tara
Just listened to a fabulous discussion on Radio 4. Please please check it out, I think you'll find it genuinely interesting in view of everything that was said yesterday in our splendiferous presentations. http://andrewkeen.typepad.com/
It's a bloke called Andrew Keen, who has been called the anti-Christ of Silicone Valley.
I wish I'd heard the programme 48 hours earlier, as it would have made a really interesting counter argument to our digital journalism presentation, which basically argued in favour of the web 2.0 revolution.
However, I am now genuinely confused as to what I think and would value some brainwashing in either direction. Honestly do have a foot in both camps. I hate sitting on the fence, it's for wimps and I'm getting splinters!!
Andrew was saying that what we have in front of us now is cultural chaos and moral decay. He said the culture of blogging, citizen journalism and general plethora of online communities is replacing the wisdom of traditional experts with the innocence of online amateurs.
Apparently, it's "democracy gone mad."
Keen sees the burgeoning communties as a cacophony of worthless opinion. Everyone is talking simultaneously, with no-one listening to anyone else. However, is it just a case of those voices were always there, but there was no medium for them? Perhaps Keen doesn't like that someone can immediately, publicly retort to articles now, eloquently or not. Not sure what his background is. Is he a journo, does anyone know?
He is dismissive of what he calls a "pervasive culture of digital narcissism", with everyone scrambling to survive, spouting any amount of nonsense to do so.
It raised in my mind an interesting tide of change that Clare mentioned in the presentation sessions yesterday - one that says content may no longer necessarily be king, and it's all about generating rapport, discussion and honesty. This disregard for content is what really needles Keen, and he fears severe cultural consequences.
Anyway...not much point me saying any more when you can read the thing yourselves. I'm taking to this stuff with the ferocity of a convert.
Tara
Thursday, 30 October 2008
'Que?' (Big up The Sun for today's splash)
Can't believe how inarticulate and ineffectual Mark Thompson is.
Just seen him being interviewed (by one of his employees, must have been a strange experience for her), and he waffled so much I actually had no idea what he was saying.
I think this will devastate Ross's career but Brand will rise from the ashes somehow. He seems crafty like that. He knows he has a huge young fan base who don't give a donkey's doo dah whether he made a lewd phone call or not. In fact, it may well have a kind of naughty appeal.
I don't like him but I admit he has charisma. It will interesting to see what happens next in Manuelgate.
Night campers
Just seen him being interviewed (by one of his employees, must have been a strange experience for her), and he waffled so much I actually had no idea what he was saying.
I think this will devastate Ross's career but Brand will rise from the ashes somehow. He seems crafty like that. He knows he has a huge young fan base who don't give a donkey's doo dah whether he made a lewd phone call or not. In fact, it may well have a kind of naughty appeal.
I don't like him but I admit he has charisma. It will interesting to see what happens next in Manuelgate.
Night campers
Sunday, 26 October 2008
What is going on???
On Friday I ventured into Wilmslow with my girlfriends when lo and behold, I spotted three fellow journalists flaunting pockets full of cirus fruits.
Yes, this sounds weird. But that's what happened. One had a couple of oranges, one had a lemon and one had a lime. I prised said lime out of his hands and spent the rest of the night posing with it ala "I'm doing the tango, but there is a lime instead of a rose between my teeth'. It was great fun.
Apart from that, it's been a bit of a non-event this weekend. I have spent hours doing my politics homework, not quite sure why. It just dragged out.
Feeling slightly restless. Life at the moment is a corridor with a series of interesting doors on either side leading to even more interesting corridors. I feel like I'm walking past all these doors, not sure which one to go through. I'm learning more and more that there isn't a 'wrong' door to go through...it's just that certain doors will lead to certain corridors, and certain outcomes. We have a certain amount of control but then, to throw something else into the mix, what's cosmic ordering all about? AAAAAgh...
Aidan. I know you're the only person who reads this blog. So please try and answer some of my questions. I need to get more people involved but not sure how! grrrr this blog stuff is hurting my head. Night everyone x
Yes, this sounds weird. But that's what happened. One had a couple of oranges, one had a lemon and one had a lime. I prised said lime out of his hands and spent the rest of the night posing with it ala "I'm doing the tango, but there is a lime instead of a rose between my teeth'. It was great fun.
Apart from that, it's been a bit of a non-event this weekend. I have spent hours doing my politics homework, not quite sure why. It just dragged out.
Feeling slightly restless. Life at the moment is a corridor with a series of interesting doors on either side leading to even more interesting corridors. I feel like I'm walking past all these doors, not sure which one to go through. I'm learning more and more that there isn't a 'wrong' door to go through...it's just that certain doors will lead to certain corridors, and certain outcomes. We have a certain amount of control but then, to throw something else into the mix, what's cosmic ordering all about? AAAAAgh...
Aidan. I know you're the only person who reads this blog. So please try and answer some of my questions. I need to get more people involved but not sure how! grrrr this blog stuff is hurting my head. Night everyone x
Friday, 17 October 2008
It's a sorry situation tonight folks...
It's Friday night, and I've had a fab time listening to Pat Brand's melodious voice on the Teeline audio tracks.
I am such a sad Moomin. Whatever happened to the Moomins by the way? They were mint!
Yes people. I have STAYED IN tonight. I too was shocked.
But my reasoning is: I am teaching tomorrow which is no fun when you're wrecked.
That's my job. Pretty sweet. Ive danced since I was three and when I was 15 started training for my teaching qualifications, all of which I passed a couple of years ago.
So every Saturday I teach kids ranging in age from two and a half to 11 years old (best birth control ever...I come away thinking I am never going to be able to cope with stuff like that full time).
I love it. Dancing is such a pivotal part of my life, teaching doesn't even feel like a job. Plus I get to work with some of my closest friends. We have so much fun. But try explaining a broken down shuffle to a little tot who doesnt even look like she's been out of nappies that long. Cute but trying.
I always have a sleep after teaching because it's mental. It's a cross between being a kids TV presenter (you have to be happy and upbeat all the time), and how I imagine an LSD trip to be.
For example: with the baby class we pretend to paint rainbows after the rain clouds have gone. This is all to twiddly classical piano music. Sometimes me and the other teachers catch ourselves and just go oh my god. This is how we spend our Saturdays. This is mint!
The little girls are adorable, decked out in their finest fairy outfits. The job is so uplifting, because the pure joyful innocence when they're pretending to be fairy princesses and stuff (I cast aside my qualms about gender stereotyping) is just beautiful to watch.
They completely lose themselves in the stories we tell them and the parents love seeing how caught up they get in it. In fact, sometimes, if we do scary stuff like Jack Frost icicle fingers some of the babies freak out and cry! Oops.
Can't wait actually. teaching always cheers me up. And the words 'credit' and 'crunch' are never mentioned. Bliss.
And tomorrow night, I'm out on the tiles with my girls for a much needed night of decadent debauchery. Again, for this purpose, the 'r' word does not exist. But Sambuca and Tequila do! Sweeeeet!
er, bye
I am such a sad Moomin. Whatever happened to the Moomins by the way? They were mint!
Yes people. I have STAYED IN tonight. I too was shocked.
But my reasoning is: I am teaching tomorrow which is no fun when you're wrecked.
That's my job. Pretty sweet. Ive danced since I was three and when I was 15 started training for my teaching qualifications, all of which I passed a couple of years ago.
So every Saturday I teach kids ranging in age from two and a half to 11 years old (best birth control ever...I come away thinking I am never going to be able to cope with stuff like that full time).
I love it. Dancing is such a pivotal part of my life, teaching doesn't even feel like a job. Plus I get to work with some of my closest friends. We have so much fun. But try explaining a broken down shuffle to a little tot who doesnt even look like she's been out of nappies that long. Cute but trying.
I always have a sleep after teaching because it's mental. It's a cross between being a kids TV presenter (you have to be happy and upbeat all the time), and how I imagine an LSD trip to be.
For example: with the baby class we pretend to paint rainbows after the rain clouds have gone. This is all to twiddly classical piano music. Sometimes me and the other teachers catch ourselves and just go oh my god. This is how we spend our Saturdays. This is mint!
The little girls are adorable, decked out in their finest fairy outfits. The job is so uplifting, because the pure joyful innocence when they're pretending to be fairy princesses and stuff (I cast aside my qualms about gender stereotyping) is just beautiful to watch.
They completely lose themselves in the stories we tell them and the parents love seeing how caught up they get in it. In fact, sometimes, if we do scary stuff like Jack Frost icicle fingers some of the babies freak out and cry! Oops.
Can't wait actually. teaching always cheers me up. And the words 'credit' and 'crunch' are never mentioned. Bliss.
And tomorrow night, I'm out on the tiles with my girls for a much needed night of decadent debauchery. Again, for this purpose, the 'r' word does not exist. But Sambuca and Tequila do! Sweeeeet!
er, bye
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
