AlisonW - caveat lector

A thought or two about porn.

2009-11-13T23:27:11+00:00

This is going to be one of those blog posts where you first ponder whether you should actually make such a post on your 'real name' blog, or whether you should place it on one of the pseudonymous ones given that everything is searchable on the internet and future employers or, indeed, lovers might read it and conclude they are, um, 'disquieted' by the content. But, after a long soak in a nice bubble bath just now, I've decided to go ahead with writing it here anyway!

So then … Porn.

Yes, you head me, Porn. Pornography. Erotica. 'Material of an adult nature'. Whatever you call it it is probably one of those things that 'you know it when you see it'. The first time I recall seeing it was accidentally finding my mother's copy of The Perfumed Garden (الروض العاطر في نزهة الخاطر) when I was in my teens. Since then I've been proud to be the Technical Director for the last few years of the Night of the Senses and the Erotic Awards, both organised by the wonderful Tuppy Owens (whose birthday it happened to be yesterday, so many happies dear!) and which raise money for the charity organisation Outsiders . Alongside meeting many great sex workers, pole dancers, and erotic artistes of all kinds there I've had partners and friends who have been 'in the business' too. Everyone I've met has done the work because they enjoyed it; they hadn't been forced into it or had to do it to pay for drugs (more often for college fees actually!) and although I'm now way to old to get involved myself (and the body went south for the winter years ago and never returned) I've never seen any big problem with the concept of the erotic world, just as I came out as bisexual at school one day age 12 and have been ever since. As a young adult in the 1970s I still stand by the saying "if it feels good, do it".

So, back to why the reason for this post. About five or six years ago I saw a photo set of a very cute redhead who was clearly enjoying herself — and was extremely fanciable! Yes, they were 'porn' and showed all the flesh she had — we each have skin so why it acceptable for us all to look in mirrors or at our partners naked and during sex but not to see the same on film or in stills I really don't quite understand — but it was the subject's smile, not to say grin, that really struck me. I'd found the set amongst a load of other stuff I was scanning so didn't know anything more about it than the file names of the images, which included the name "Sarah". The backgrounds in the pictures made me think the set was possibly Polish or other east European, but that was all.

Then, earlier this evening, I followed a link from someone's tweet on twitter. That page had an offsite link elsewhere and I then found I was on a porn site. I wasn't intending to look for such things at that point but, now that I was there … and so I clicked on the free videos link to see if there was anything of interest to this jaded palette of mine. I say 'jaded' as I usually find textual erotica much more interesting than purely visual stuff, which often makes me go "ooh look! what lovely shoes!" than anything about the bodies concerned.

And as it played through, amongst the men and women I saw a brief glimpse of a face I recognised from so long ago. Yes, you heard me — a face! Searching the rest of the site for more I couldn't find her amongst all the thumbnails, so I checked back on my archive server to find out the file names from so long ago and then searched the html of the site I'd now found, and there she was. I had a full (professional) name. A little more searching and I discovered a wikipedia entry about her!

Turns out she is actually from the US mid-west and has turned her talent in to a multi-faceted successful business , catering for many of the 'tastes' out there. Wonderful, therefore, to see that someone was being so successful and enterprising. Except I then found a YouTube video.

Now if you recall the film Singin' in the Rain you will remember that Lina Lamont (wonderfully played by Jean Hagen) had a very squeaky voice not at all suitable for an audience in the talkies†, and now I wondered would hearing her voice would spoil it for me. It didn't, and I think the video deserves a wider airing so include it below (you are ok; it is quite safe for work, as they say).

Ladies and Gentlemen, Ms Sarah Blake.

† Although the film revolves around the idea that Kathy has to dub over for Lina's voice, even in the talking scenes, it was actually Jean Hagen's normal voice. Reynolds herself was dubbed in "Would You?" and "You are My Lucky Star" by Betty Noyes and when Kathy is supposedly dubbing Lina's voice in the live performance!

Addendum: I mentioned this post to Ms Blake via twitter. Response? "Wow, thank you for the huge compliment!" ::grins::

State-sanctioned murder

2009-11-09T23:09:21+00:00

Earlier this evening I watched a powerful drama on Channel 4. The Execution of Gary Glitter was — in its final outcome — expected from the very name of the programme. A superbly made film, with an absolute tour-de-force from Hilton McRae in the lead role, it was disquieting and terrifying in the possibility that state-sanctioned murder could ever come back to this country.

The ' death penalty' (ie Judicially-sanctioned murder) does not work - just look at the countries which still have it and note how often those crimes which get 'death' as the punishment still happen regularly. It has no deterrent effect whatsoever and instead, just as this film showed, we end up with a population in a state of 'excitement' of mob rule and their belief that they should have their way. A (fictional) Home Secretary saying that a decision was based on the desire of the people to have a killing is not an acceptable way for the elected government to act. Death, for practical purposes of the person found guilty, is no different from a whole-life sentence served behind bars, yet just as we abhor death by terrorists so we must find state-sanctioned murder no better.

In many ways we are all children of the modern era, in that most of us - thankfully - rarely see death in front of our eyes. We watch hundreds of fake deaths daily on television and in films, yet news programmes ensure they do not show the act of violent death when reporting from war zones or relaying film from al-Qaeda showing another captive being beheaded — little different to the effect of a hanging. Cowboys and Indians as children again make us learn that death is an impermanent state of being and little happens to change that early view. Even in the case of this dramatisation the executive producer, Samir Shah, has said "The director Rob Coldstream felt we had to show enough to convey the grim reality of the execution but it would have been gratuitous to show more."

That some comments on the Channel 4 website have said things such as "that drama put a smile to my face. bring back the death sentance (sic) and hang huntley and glitter. they won't be smiling then", and "The only dissaponting (sic) thing about this programme is that it wasnt for real" makes me feel very sad and disappointed, not to say very worried.

For the state to accept mob rule and fail civilisation in killing offenders for the fun of the few should never be acceptable. That polling suggests 54% of the UK adult population want the 'death penalty' returned shows both that there is a lack of education about what it really means, and — arguably — that the result of any polling is questionable, based on the way a question is asked ( Sir Humphrey in Yes, Minister comes to mind) and how inaccurate electoral polling often is.

Whilst some may believe in the (Judeo-Christian) bible's "an eye for an eye" approach, I believe we have moved on. Even Gandhi noted "An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind" and we no longer permit many activities sanctioned in the bible and to kill someone because they did something we find totally, utterly, and completely reprehensible makes us as bad as them.
________________________________________
clip from Yes, Minister
"Are you worried about the number of young people without jobs? … Are you worried about the rise in crime amongst teenagers? … Do you think there is a lack of discipline in our comprehensive schools? … Do you think young people would welcome some authority and leadership in their lives? … Do you think they'd respond to a challenge? … Would you be in favour of re-introducing national service?"

"Are you worried about the danger of war? … Are you worried about the growth of armaments? … Do you think there is a danger in giving young people guns and teaching them how to kill? … Do you think it is wrong to force people to take up arms against their will? … Would you oppose the re-introduction of national service?"

Alcohol, E, nicotine, cannabis .. and horse-riding

2009-11-03T12:59:31+00:00

"It seems that Mr Wilson has clearly never met any real scientists. However, he does appear to possess a great deal of straw from which he is able to fashion crude simulacra of them." Article comment

Well, the story of the politicians versus the scientists is not abating, indeed various groups — like the Daily Fail — are whipping up their followers into a frenzy against reality, it seems. So let's look at the facts. In the same year that a few people died relating to cannabis mis-use, more than four times as many died connected to horse-riding. And many thousands died from smoking- and alcohol-related illnesses. So point one to the scientists.

But the government makes oodles of cash from taxes and duties on alcohol and tobacco. Indeed, without that income to the exchequer general taxation would have to rise quite a bit to replace them. There is also the argument that because so many people die from alcohol- and tobacco- related illnesses and accidents then — even though there may be some costs associated with their medical care — overall they 'save' government money by dying early: less money to be paid out of the pension pot. Which all means that governments aren't as keen as they probably should be to reduce, or even stop, their continued use.

Yet the 'less harmful' (but still illegal) drugs make no money for them. 'E' isn't taxed, cannabis pays for no new roads, and being against them is good publicity for the government; it makes them look 'hard' on crime. Even though the effects of these 'lesser' drugs generally make people less violent (a fight started by too much alcohol, you say?) and less likely to drive their car into a tree or a line of people at a bus stop.

Professor David Nutt was completely accurate in stating that alcohol and tobacco are more dangerous to an individual's health than cannabis, and that horse-riding is more of a risk to your health than ecstasy. In his — unpaid — post as Chair of the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs he told the Home Office this. When asked to provide evidence to the contrary he found none, and stated that fact. And then he did his 'day job' in talking about his findings.

Assisting a government in providing expert advice — and unpaid at that — is a task we need those with the relevant knowledge to undertake. And government should listen to that advice seriously and not pre-judge or demand a particular outcome.

And being an advisor is not a request to be muzzled.

ps. Daily Mail article includes blatant case of Godwin's law. Caveat lector indeed!

Subtitles

2009-11-03T12:23:17+00:00

No, not the ones which are ever-so-useful to many people on the television or at the opera, but the one on this blog. Initially I set it here to Mostly Harmless, a term used by some friends many years ago to describe me (long before the late Douglas Adams had used it) to someone who had asked them what I was like. Now I've used something much more reasonable for a blog: caveat lector.

Heed this advice, dear reader!

The Post Office Problem

2009-10-25T12:01:58+00:00

Last week there were — allegedly — two days of strikes at the Royal Mail. I say 'allegedly' as I didn't notice any effect, but others report some, so let's presume there were. On Friday the Communications Workers Union announced there would be three more days of industrial action in the coming week.

All this, of course, has meant the media publicising the 'alternative mail services' that supposedly exist, from TNT to a bloke on a bicycle in Portsmouth. Thing is with very few exceptions none of these 'alternative' organisations actually deliver the mail they collect. They cream off the majority of the fee paid for each item, but leave the current Royal Mail postie to actually put it though a letterbox. None of them have a public service obligation to provide a delivery to every property in the country; only the Royal Mail has that requirement set upon it. And how do we expect them to cover the costs of that service if the government lets others take the majority of what is — still — a low per-item fee for that service.

In my view, what is needed is that the cost structure of the cost of a stamp needs to be strongly biased to covering the cost of delivery and not collection (and bulk moving of the mail around the country). There are, clearly, options for great savings on the collection and distribution side of things, yet delivering will always rely on individuals going out in all weathers on foot.

The only alternative would be the loss of the every-delivery-to-the-home service and every person having to visit a postal delivery office to collect their mail, in a similar way to the loss of the milkman delivering everywhere daily. And I'm sure that isn't what we want.

Swedes divided over biofuel from bunnies

2009-10-18T17:58:52+00:00

"That's amongst some people, particularly among some animal rights activists who think this is not a good way to treat rabbits."

Remember what Anya said?

Are the EVE-Online servers moving to Iceland?

2009-10-11T16:46:47+00:00

Yesterday I noted an interesting article on the BBC website about a firm setting up a 'green' server farm operation in Iceland to make use of the carbon-zero geothermal electricity alongside the lower ambient temperature to reduce the usually substantial overhead of cooling computer servers.

The article went on to note that Iceland is about to substantially increase its presence on the internet backbones with the Farice , Cantat-3, and new Danice high-capacity fibre links now on stream, and that the company concerned — Verne Global — hoped to gain a substantial number of customers by the cost reductions available to clients who move their servers there. They also made great play of how stable the underlying bedrock is in that area, close by Keflavik airport†. Indeed, their website has lots of interesting information on it.

Then I noticed a name I recognised; Vilhjálmur Thorsteinsson is Chairman of the Board of Verne Holdings. He is also Chairman of the Board of CCP Games, who created and operate EVE-Online. Given that the EVE universe is a "single shard" — every player world-wide uses the same physical group of servers and plays in the same 'space' — then, unlike other online games which have servers located in different continents, all of the EVE-Online servers are in one physical locations. Just outside London, UK, in Slough.

The Verne website makes great play of their centre being only 18ms from London (as the internet flies) and 36 milliseconds from New York. So, given the CCP Chairman is now creating this 'cooler' server centre one can't help but wonder whether the CCP servers will now be moving to Iceland to save money, as well as the planet.

† Keflavik — a former US Air Force base — also happens to be one of the rare airfields which is long enough and wide enough for the Space shuttle to land at in an emergency.

Start with intellectual polygamy

2009-10-02T17:41:17+00:00

I've always considered myself a 'Generalist' in the right meaning of the word — indeed I used to have a business card which stated that as my job title — so this article by Edward Carr, called The last days of the Polymath is most intriguing.

And highly recommended.