Soon, the centre of the universe should be back at cenobyte.ca. The big change will be no more cenobyte.ca/words; just the root directory. I’ll let you know when that happens.
Um.
Carry on.
16 March 2010 at 11:26 am (Everything Else Drawer)
Soon, the centre of the universe should be back at cenobyte.ca. The big change will be no more cenobyte.ca/words; just the root directory. I’ll let you know when that happens.
Um.
Carry on.
10 March 2010 at 1:29 pm (piss in your eye)
Tags: Canadian Politics, Government
I just read this article about how the Saskatchewan provincial government plans to end the subsidy it provides to chiropractors. Of all the stupid decisions that the Saskatchewan goverment has made lately, this is the stupidest. I realise they have to cover their arses for the utterly irresponsible budget they passed last year that depended so heavily on one resource that even the people working in that industry thought it was irresponsible. I realise that “times are tough” and the guvviment has to, as a governing body, tighten our proverbial belt.
But listen.
Just like supporting and training midwives in the province will save millions of dollars in health care, making chiropractic care affordable prevents all kinds of patients from requiring more intensive care. Chiropractic care relieves pain, restores mobility, and improves posture.
If you’re lucky, your health plan will cover chiropractic. If you’re not lucky, you’ll now be either paying out of pocket for chiropractic care, or you’ll be waiting longer to see specialists and surgeons.
So. Bad move, SaskParty. Bad, bad move. I was tempted, you know, to think about voting for you. But where are our midwives? THREE YEARS before a licensed midwife will be practising in Regina? And now you take away chiropractic care? Bad move in an election year. Dummies.
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/saskatchewan/story/2010/03/10/sk-chiropractors-1003.html
8 March 2010 at 1:05 pm (piss in your eye)
Tags: nekkit
You know what really gets me? What really gets me is when you’re at the pool or the gym or something and you go to change because you are IN THE CHANGE ROOM and people stare at you and make little uncomfortable coughing noises because you’re naked. Or half-naked.
What, do you expect me to take my clothes into the toilet stall and put them on in there?
We all have the same equipment, people, and if you can’t handle that, then I think you have some serious problems. SERIOUS PROBLEMS. I’m not sure if you know this, but in order to change your clothes, you must at some point be naked. And there is nothing wrong with nakidity.
5 March 2010 at 7:04 am (education, Grammar, piss in your eye)
Tags: Grammar
A while back, I said something which I don’t entirely remember exactly what it was about not wanting to have the discussion about why writing the way people speak is not acceptable if the people doing the speaking are utter morons. Oh right. This is how I said it : save the ‘but that’s how people talk’ discussion for later, because you know my opinion on doing things a) simply because everyone else is doing them, and b) incorrectly.
Someone commented to me recently that it drives her mad when people use “of” instead of “have”. I assumed (perhaps incorrectly, but I don’t think so) she meant in verb phrases/tenses like “should have” and “would have” and the like. I recognise that, in spoken language, because most people are lazy, they do not annunciate well. They use what, linguistically, is called “clipping”. It’s very much like the sort of clipping done during a vasectomy, but with phonemes rather than vas deferens. It’s when you shorten the pronunciation of a segment of a word, or when you truncate a word to …well… part of its parts.
So. To be clear, this is what we’re talking about:
“Should have” becomes the contraction “should’ve”. This is pronounced (and for all you cunning linguists out there, I have opted not to use proper phonemic notation, because not everyone is a cunning linguist): shud-uv. To the lazy listener, or to someone who has forgotten grade four English, this is heard as “should of”. Now, in *speech*, it often doesn’t make much of a difference if you say “should’ve” or “should of”, unless you put a huge break in between the should and the of, a break big enough to have a little sit-down picnic in. In recent times, “should’ve” has become further clipped to shud-a, which, if I were spelling it out rather than trying to write it phonetically, would probably be spelled: “shuddah”, and some poor, hapless student of English as a second language would think it was somehow related to the word “shudder”.
As I said, it shouldn’t make *too* much of a difference in spoken language if you say “should’ve” or “should of”; it’s when you write “should of” that you become a total dolt. In spoken language, I (because I am an elitist fanatic) usually don’t use the contraction. I usually say “should have” or “could have” or “would have” (and not, for the record: shuda cuda wuda). When I’m writing, I often hear the words in my head. And, for the record, I do pronounce “should’ve” differently than I pronounce “should of”…primarily because I do not say “should of”, because it is wrong. WRONG. Wrong.
Now, my good friend Smarty Pants often trots out the following : “but that’s how people TALK.” And that’s true. They’re still wrong, those people, but that is how they talk. They *shouldn’t* talk like this, but they do. If I could hit them with sticks every time they used lax language, I would. But then you all would have to pay more for medicare, and I’d probably get lynched, and then who’d write this bournal? No one, that’s who.
I heard an advertisement on the radio once…I listen to the radio a LOT. I listen to radio more than I watch television. I love radio. So I was listening to the radio once, and the announcer said something ridiculously idiotic like : “shoulda went to blah-de-blah”. I could, can, and may continue to forgive the use of ‘shoulda’. But what I could not, would not, and will not forgive, is the use of “should have went”, which is such a blatant abuse of tense that the pegs are all bent.
Oh look. Look what you’ve done. You have me all side tracked on tense, when that’s not what I set out to talk about. Geez, you.
So, anyway, back to “should of”. It happens because what we hear isn’t always what is said. You can extrapolate this (as some of the folks playing in the LARP know from talking to me) on a much grander scale, and talk about semantics. But this happens on a much smaller scale as well. What I’m getting at is that while it is incorrect to say “would of” or “should of”, it’s understandable why it happens – that’s the way people *hear* it. The missing link in all of this is the proper education of what it *ought* to be, and that is what many people don’t know, and worse, don’t care that they don’t know.
Let me tell you something – the most successful people in the world don’t talk like no-shirt-under-overalls-wearing jug band-playing porch-side hunters. (Yes. I’m making a comment here about poverty. Folks living in poverty aren’t stupid; they just don’t get as good (or even any of) an education as folks with means) And I don’t mean ‘most successful’ in terms of who has the most money, either. I mean most successful in the brief period of time between wailing and waning. Learn to speak properly, and people will listen to you.
Correction: people will listen to what you have to say, rather than just snickering because you talk big, but don’t understand that emanate and emulate are not the same word. Neither are exacerbate and exasperate.
4 March 2010 at 8:43 am (Rants)
Gag writer defends campy closing ceremony
3 March 2010 at 8:25 am (Everything Else Drawer)
Tags: tabula rasa
We haven’t much to tell you these days.
I could talk about the streaker at city hall in the Queen’s City, but that’s already been done. I could tell you about how Canadian Members of Parliament are finally going back to work (lousy shirkers). I could talk about how miffed I am that ‘feminist’ is used as an insult. But, I’ve gone through all of these things before.
So, I’ll pose a question to you: what would *you* like me to blog about today?
1 March 2010 at 1:40 pm (Family, His Nibs)
I love you all. You know that, because I tell you all the time.
Buddy Holly, you were my first boyfriend. Coincidentally, you were also my first dead boyfriend. You know what? I’m not going to harp on little imperfections like not having a pulse.
What can I say to you, Johnny Depp? Oh! A little lower, please.
Gary Oldman, I never wanted to have to do this, but…it’s just not working out. I will always think fondly of you, and we’ll always have Sid and Nancy. I just…I’ve moved on. And really, what did you expect? You haven’t returned my calls in years. And, since you’ll probably ask anyway (yes, I do know you that well), I AM seeing someone else. Hugh Laurie. He and I share a birthday (on the BEST DAY OF THE YEAR), and, well…he’s FUNNY, Gary. He plays piano. Have you even ever SEEN his work with Stephen Fry? Yeah. Well. Not to mention in Blackadder. I think it’s hilarious, for the record, that someone who played predominantly awkward twits in Britain is cast as a brilliant dickhead in the States. Anyway, Gary Oldman…that’s why you haven’t heard from me lately. It’s because I’m with Hugh Laurie now. If y’all feel the need to engage in an EPIC CAGE-MATCH BATTLE over me, let me know. I’ll wear something more comfortable.
I know you and I have known about each other for a long time, Keith Moon, but it’s really been in the last couple of years that we’ve been getting serious about each other. And, just let me say, you make me *very happy*.
Wolverine, you’re beautiful. No one could ever replace you. And that thing you can do in Yoga because of your skeleton made of SOLID ADAMANTIUM…well, this public forum isn’t the place, but suffice it to say…wow.
You and I have spent many, many sleepless nights together, Neil Gaiman, and I think it’s obvious to everyone that as my International Literary Boyfriend, you have quite a big responsibility in our relationship. I’m not difficult to please, as you know; just remember, I’m not going to kick you out of bed for eating crackers, so please bring the tasty onion-flavoured ones next time you’re by.
Robert Kroetsch and Donald Sutherland, as my Canadian Literary and Canadian Performing Arts Boyfriends, I expect the two of you to get along. Donald, just sit nicely while Robert reads; Robert, Donald would do a Wonderful treatment of voicing your work. Also, I think both of you do the chess?
Now, the main reason I’ve mentioned all of you is because i have something to tell you. It shouldn’t surprise you, and it certainly doesn’t change anything between us.
His Nibs is pretty much unsurpassingly awesome. I love hanging out with him (you’ll know that, Keith and Johnny, because you’ve spent time with us together. **Think what you will, dear reader.**), and he pretty much rocks. Even when he’s being a jerk, I love him. You know when you have friends and they get in to a new relationship, and they’re all annoying and smoodgy and snuggly and disgustingly cheerful all over the place? Yeah. Well. I kind of turn in to a brainless teenage girl around His Nibs most of the time. Until he pisses me off.
Anyway, yeah. Doesn’t change anything. I just wanted to make sure you understand that while I love each and every one of you, His Nibs is my HUSBAND.
We can still make out, though.
27 February 2010 at 12:58 pm (His Nibs)
For instance, when oiling your hardwood floors, it is *much* better (and faster, actually) to just get down on your hands and knees and do it yourself by hand, rather than trying to use fancy “time and energy saving” products and machines. And mineral oil is still best. If you could change a woman’s hair from grey to brilliant shining blonde with natural streaks just by rubbing some mineral oil in there, the cosmetics industry would go bust.
Speaking of which, I have another Public Service Announcement.
Women, most of you who wear cosmetics DO NOT NEED THEM. Don’t waste your money. If there was ever a bigger absolute swindle for non-essential products, I can’t think of one. Well, maybe the sale of razors to the gentlemen. (NB – It is not only women who wear makeup, and too much makeup at that. Let’s be fair.)
Let’s face it; many of you learned how to wear makeup from television and magazines, where the only way you can tell a woman has a nose is because the nostrils themselves are visible. Barely. I know some of you watched daytime television programmes that focussed on how to match your…um…cheeks crap to your eye crap, and how to blend all of it with some ridiculously expensive brush or lotion or interpretive dance.
Eyes, my friends, should not look like the hat in Matisse’s Woman With a Hat. If you *must* wear makeup (which, I reiterate, most of you do not need), it should look as though you are not wearing any. Check out Christy Turlington here, wearing NOTHING AT ALL. Her makeup (and I guarantee you, she’s probably wearing more than you do) looks nekkit too. Now, you probably don’t want to have to spend thousands of dollars to pay some flappy person to apply your makeup every day. I know I have better things I’d like to spend thousands of dollars on (do you hear me, Johnny Depp!!??).
Want to know something else? Wearing makeup wrecks your skin. The more you wear it, the more you “need it” (which, again, is Bee Ess). I proved this to myself; I put some top-end, really-bloody-expensive cosmetics on one hand, and I put nothing on the other hand (technically, on the back of my hand). Yes, I moisturised both beforehand (heh). In less than an hour, my makeup hand was full of wrinkles and looked like the hand of someone twice my age. Bleah.
And, AND! Here’s the most important bit: It’s really sad that you’re afraid to look your age. Eighteen-year-old girls look like eighteen-year-old girls because…wait for it… THEY ARE EIGHTEEN. Forty-year-old women look like forty-year-old women because they’re FORTY! They’re beautiful FORTY YEAR OLD WOMEN. Women who, at twenty, or thirty, or sixty (I’m looking at you, Cher. Oh! And you, Madonna!) try to look like they’re 18 are lying to themselves, they’re lying to you, and they’re kind of making a mockery out of what it means to be a human. Not just a woman, but a human.
Look at the reason *why* you wear cosmetics. Are you trying to look older? Younger? Are you a performer? A circus freak? Think of all the money you could save if you just…stopped. You’re already beautiful (that word, remember, means ‘full of beauty’). Go ahead, when you’re stepping out and you want to do that smoky thing with your eyeliner, that’s cool. But a daily regimen? You’re doing it wrong.
For two weeks in grade 9, and then again for three days in grade 10, I attempted to wear makeup. It did not end well. In fact, I think the pink frosted lip gloss from grade 9 was still in the dresser drawer last time I was at my mum’s house (I threw it out). My mother always told me: “you’re lucky; you don’t NEED makeup.”
And that confused me, because neither did she.
Neither does my aunt, who is one of the coolest, smartest, most beautiful women I know. But she will not…WILL NOT leave the house (not even to get the paper) without it. Never has.
Another woman I know won’t even leave the bedroom without ‘putting on her face’. Do you know how frightening that EXPRESSION is, never mind the practice? Think about it for a while. Putting on your face.
It gives me THE SHIVERS. The idea that somewhere, in some girls’ dormitory somewhere, there is a special closet with row upon row of faces hanging on little hooks, and the girls all sleeping motionlessly, their beds lining a long, narrow room, the only light coming from tiny, dingy windows high up int he walls. And where there faces ought to be are pulsating, bloody landscapes, eyes darting this way and that, deep in REM sleep, but lidless, mouth muscles pulled back over teeth. The only sound a rhythmic breathing as the girls all exhale in unison, and a subtle drip, drip, dripping as blood drops on the floor beneath every girl’s head.
That’s why you shouldn’t wear makeup.
24 February 2010 at 11:05 am (piss in your eye, Style)
Tags: Advice, Mr. Dressup
Ladies, let’s sit and have a little chat, shall we?
Some of you need an intervention. Some of you needed an intervention when you were still under the age of ten. I’m sure some of you won’t pay attention to this intervention, but really, trust me: it’s for your own good, and for the good of the whole world.
Bodies come in many shapes and sizes. As long as you are *healthy*, it doesn’t really matter what shape and/or size your body is. Some of us are flat-chested, some of us are well-endowed; some of us have great, sensuous round hips, and some of us are far more streamlined. Some of us have bingo flaps on the backs of our arms which can be deployed in a strong headwind to increase lift. The point is, if you don’t look like “that” or like “this”, it’s no big deal. But there is something that *is* a big deal.
This thing is shape-appropriate attire.
I have said before that spandex is a privilege and not a right. This could be amended to ‘spandex in public is a privilege and not a right’. I do not wear spandex, unless it is as reinforcing material in my bathing suit or brassiere. I *did* wear spandex, when I was sixteen. I wore spandex bicycling shorts because I used to do an awful lot of bicycling. I don’t believe that I could fit those shorts on my bingo flaps now, if I still had the shorts, which I do not. BECAUSE I HAVE NOT BEEN SIXTEEN FOR TWENTY YEARS.
Tube tops.
Baby, tube tops are awfully cute on little girls. Some older girls and young women can get away with tube tops as well. When we develop our luscious curves we enter in a time in which extreme caution must be exercised. Tube tops are dangerous, dangerous things. Here are some guidelines for you:
1) If you do not pass the pencil test*, you probably should not wear anything without straps. Unless all you’re doing is lying down, or reclining on a chaise whilst your cabana boy feeds you peeled grapes.
2) If the tube you are preparing to don is too small for your thigh, it is too small for your torso.
3) Tube tops look bloody stupid when worn over a tee-shirt. This applies to women and girls of all ages.
4) Flocked tube tops do not make you look slimmer. They. Just. Don’t.
5) A tube top is *not* the same as a strapless gown. DO YOU HEAR ME, TEENAGERS!?? THAT IS A **SHIRT**, NOT A DRESS.
6) Never, ever wear a tube top to church. ESPECIALLY if you’re the priest.
7) Tube tops are meant to be handled gently, with grace and a delicate touch. It is a Bad Idea to wear a tube top to participate in football, soccer, baseball, basketball, rugby, marathons, jump-rope, hopskotch, or curling. They are appropriate for swimming, beach volleyball, darts, and ice dance.
8) If you are over the age of 35, you might want to ask yourself, before donning a tube sock top: what am I trying to accomplish, here? Am I wearing the tube top, or is the tube top wearing me?
9) If you are over the age of 70, wear whatever the hell you please.
The next lesson will be: Fake Nails, or What Were You Thinking?
–
*The pencil test: this is how the school nurse/guidance councilor/phys ed teacher decides it’s time for a brassiere – slip a pencil beneath your breast. Let go of the pencil. If it drops out relatively quickly, you don’t need a lot of support. For reference, the pencil I slipped under my breast in grade six is still there. I have named it Millicent.