Call me Mr. International. If you read my blog through my Facebook status updates you will know that I really like to know that people are reading my posts. I write them to be a little self indulgent and opinionated but I also enjoy writing them to hear what people think. I like to be balanced and as unbiased as I can be, although sometimes if I'm a little bit 'enthusiastic' about something my opinions can be a little more important than being balanced.
Recently I have seen that my blog readership has increased, more and more people are 'Like'-ing my post and indeed commenting via Facebook which as I said I always appreciate. I would like to be doing a lot more with them - I mean, most of the blogs that I have seen and browse through are really short and more like miniature thoughts. I like that I'm a bit different although I am sure there are literally millions of people all around the world who are exactly like me. Well not exactly like me, that would just be weird and a little bit sad.
Anyway back to being Mr. International. I was faffing about the other day on the dashboard page of my blog and spotted a couple of tabs that for not really paying attention, I had never really noticed. The first of which was a 'Monetise' option. It is fairly cool the Google Gods basically use some sort of genius and unfathomable code to determine advertisements that you can make money from by inserting them into your blog. I think that is amazing if I'm honest but knowing that I'll have to do my own taxes for any monies earned and having a rather rocky past with the Inland Revenue - I think I'll give it a miss.
The second of which - and this is where I get excited - was 'Stats'. I have no idea apart from not paying attention how I had never noticed these two tabs, especially this one because I'm a stats kind of guy. I like to know facts, figures and information even more so when it specifically pertains to me. So I click this tab, just as I had the Monetise one and the first thing that caught my eye was a little map of the world. It was white apart from the UK and America were in green so I clicked the 'more' option and my face lit up. Honestly I must have looked like a kid at Christmas; my blog has been visited by people in America, Slovenia, Denmark and Singapore… How cool is that?
Now I have used the word 'visited' there for a reason. As much as I did have the cheesiest of grins on my face and a warm glow in my heart, I am not naive enough to believe that anyone who clicks on my link/site actually reads the 1500-ish word, almost essay like blog posts that I write. I am not going to lie, I like to think that, but for all I know it could just be some sort of automated website hit. Still, I like to stay positive and enthusiastic.
It was such an odd epiphany to have but I had never realised that my self gratifying, textual ramblings could actually be viewed by almost anyone in the world. It had oddly never occurred to me that it is the World Wide Web for just that reason. The more I thought about it, the more annoyed I got at myself for not tagging each of my blogs to associate the content, because I just figured it's on my Facebook and if people want to read it they can. I never considered for a second that someone might just stumble on it and have a read, which in itself is weird because I have done that multiple times myself. So there we go I am going or have gone global… in a fashion.
It's given me a rather fortuitous sense of pride. Here's a good example, there are dozens of video blogs across the world that are just your average everyday guy or girl who have hundreds or thousands or even hundreds of thousands of followers. These people make time to watch these other ordinary people talk about stuff that’s happened to them or what they think about things that are happening around the world. A lot of people have made money and even become famous from things like YouTube although a lot more people have become infamous but still…
I have no reservations about being famous - I'm also adult enough to understand that even if that’s what I did want, it would never happen, so it’s a good job I don't really. Nope, fame is not for me. What I would like is for people to just enjoy what I write for what it is. It kind of makes you think though doesn't it? I wonder how many people who are either using the internet the same way I do are getting a second income or even their primary income. More so, I wonder who many of those people actually expected that to happen. It's an odd thing to want to do, "What do you want to do when you grow up son?", "I want to write blogs online." I bet that conversation has never ever had that outcome before. It is however being an increasingly viable career choice though.
All in all what I am going on about is that I am clearly a little bit impressed but also disappointed in myself. I have my own little personal following and I like that. I also missed the opportunity to increase the readership I already have. On my list of things to do is go back through and add tags or labels to each of my previous posts so that maybe people can find them when they a Googling something that may be related. Second is to improve my profile page for this site, its very basic and I don't think it has any information about me at all. I feel as though I should get to know the people that do read my posts if they aren't part of my Facebook friends, so that I could conceivably write about things they may like. I'm just nice like that. I figure if people know more about me potentially they can relate to me a bit more and become a regular reader. Thirdly and finally is to gain a little more structure. I originally decided to write one post a week and then decided against it in case I couldn't think of anything to write but now I've changed my mind back again. I will hopefully be writing a post a week to be posted on a Sunday. Don't get your hopes up or arrange you evening around me or anything like that because I am not definitely committing but I'll be doing my best.
As I wrap up and end for another week, I would like to pose a question to you all; when you click my link do you read the whole post? Have you ever told anybody else to read it? I once was passed on a blog by a friend of mine in the office, it was amazing. Easily one of the best things I had ever read so I passed it on to loads of my friends and I even created a Facebook group. I don't want a Facebook group or page but you get the point and if you don't, the point is if you like it, spread it. As I said earlier these posts are a written mostly for me, but a lot of what I am thinking about when I write, is you whoever you are. I like to think that I put a smile on your face with my almost funny words and I like to think that you are thinking about whatever your image of me is.
So here I am, Mr. International… or at least kind of. I have one last thing that I would ask of any one that takes the time to read my posts. I currently have two followers, the second is my friend who will be creating a blog of his own fairly soon and we have some pretty cool plans for the New Year for mine… maybe. Anyway, what I am saying is that if you have the option to follow my blog please do, I would very much appreciate it, even more so if you are from some far off place and have stumbled across this by accident. Comments either good or bad are also welcomed, we might get a debate on the go - debate with me though and be prepared, you will lose. And as always thank you.
Thursday, 25 November 2010
Sunday, 21 November 2010
Beating Around The Bush
Ever heard the saying "Say what you see"? Of course you have. The tremendous Roy Walker and his amazingly horrific suits are no doubt jumping in front of your minds eye right now. As that is the only place I know that saying from it was the only example I could use but the wonderment of Catchphrase is not the subject of this post.
I use this posts as a kind of ironic diary. Something I can share that I can look back on and hopefully smile to myself at the odd context that I see the world and how it directly or indirectly affect my life. So, obviously there is an element of everything I do in these posts but I try to keep the details to a minimum because this is my blog and although the people I kind of mention read it, I don't think they want to be named etc. Or maybe it's just because I'm a little bit selfish and I don't want you to come away from reading this thinking "I wonder who Blah Blah is?".
And that ladles and gentlespoons is precisely the point of this newest of posts. To say exactly what you think. I am a little bit selfish, I'm probably a good 30-40% selfish (I think it fluctuates), it may even be more than that. And I'll tell you why I'm selfish. Because I like to tell the truth. That may well be the most obvious thing you've read or heard but I put to you how often you tell white lies without even thinking about it? I'm not saying I don't but I hate to, if someone is expecting me to like something and I don't I prefer not to say anything than lie. I won't get excited about something I have no interest in and I won't pander to other peoples attempts at trying to seek attention. I'd honestly rather say nothing.
Sometimes though to make a point, it is necessary to be that little bit evil and be straight talking. I am straight talking most of the time, I say what I think and I tend to have an answer for everything but I know it can be a bit harsh. I was having a conversation with my friend the other night, we were just talking about our lives and crap and I said (fairly bluntly) that if we had a kind of relationship where we had little in common and we argued a lot then we wouldn't be friends. To me that's simple. Why would you put yourself through the constant duress of disagreements and conflicts when you have the option to not. So for being blunt and a tad harsh if you read this, it is a public apology.
I seem to be contradicting myself a little because I am trying to endorse being straight talking and not lying but then I'm apologising for doing it. I must stress that I believe there are levels to which you can be like this and sometimes without trying you can go too far, especially with someone you care about. It is however with a certain sense of irony that I write this because when it comes to it, a lot of the time I can't be straight taking. That's another story though.
No my point is more around the people who do say what they think. When you can just pull no punches and tell it like it is. Most people call that being mouthy or gobby and lots of other different things, but you know what, I respect it. Usually those kinds of people have a habit of jumping to conclusions and can be wrong but still, whether they ever think about it or not it takes guts to be like that.
Obviously there is a time and a place, facebook is a prime example - nobody cares about reading whether he/she is the scum of the earth and you wish that they would just die. Get a grip. Being straight talking in malice is a little bit sad and childish. So I wouldn't say I condone that, but still if you are just saying what you think, I've gotta say well done. Obviously you could do it in a more productive manner though. First of all try saying these things to the person you are actually annoyed and then secondly, try being constructive. Honestly it helps.
I think that we suppress our opinions to the point of not having one sometimes because on the off chance it might actually offend somebody else. I say, if you do it in the right way and just say "Look, you idea isn't great, can you do something a little different?" why should they get offended? It's like when you have a meeting and there's always that one person who doesn’t let you get a word in edgeways, why do those people get annoyed about being interrupted if you're polite about it? It's all about making a point but without being nasty or horrible about it as you do. We all understand that everyone has an opinion so why are we so apprehensive about sharing them?
I have different levels of straight talking-ness, I'm probably at my finest when I'm at work which is weird because a lot of people are the opposite. I just think that if this is my job and I have to do it, then you should know what I think about it, good or bad. I obviously try to replicate this into my personal life also but depending up on the company I am with this may change. It seems to lessen outside of work though, probably because I have less to disagree with and that’s never a bad thing. That though, is because the people who I do spend my time with (and maybe its because we're all so close) but we do just say what we see.
So is it a good thing? I think it is. I think that being comfortable enough to express your opinion openly - not just to the odd one or two people later on when it turns into gossip - is brilliant. I consciously try to say what I want to because as I mentioned earlier, I don't like to lie. I just think why bother? There will always come a point when you regret not saying something be it professional or personal. Of course there is the alternative when you regret what you say but at least you can apologise for it, you'll never be able to go back in time.
It's kind of an odd thing to have to do but realistically, you have to first of all know what you want to say, then weigh up whether it might offend someone and consider if you care or not and then actually say it if you choose to. And as stupid as that is, that is the culture that we live in. We are becoming increasingly silenced, whatever happened to freedom of speech? I am in the constant belief that being a nice guy does indeed lead you to last place, so stand up make your point and let people know what you think whether they like it or not. A friend of mine said recently, you have as much right to laugh as they have to cry.
I say the same thing about you though. Yes you. If someone doesn't agree with you or they interrupt you because you have been rambling on for half an hour and are talking utter tripe, if they have a point, let them make it. And if you don't agree with it, don't get all annoyed and petty, come up with something better. That way you can diplomatically rub it in their face when you make their opinion look like something you wished you hadn't stepped in. So I encourage you all to speak up, but do it the right way.
I use this posts as a kind of ironic diary. Something I can share that I can look back on and hopefully smile to myself at the odd context that I see the world and how it directly or indirectly affect my life. So, obviously there is an element of everything I do in these posts but I try to keep the details to a minimum because this is my blog and although the people I kind of mention read it, I don't think they want to be named etc. Or maybe it's just because I'm a little bit selfish and I don't want you to come away from reading this thinking "I wonder who Blah Blah is?".
And that ladles and gentlespoons is precisely the point of this newest of posts. To say exactly what you think. I am a little bit selfish, I'm probably a good 30-40% selfish (I think it fluctuates), it may even be more than that. And I'll tell you why I'm selfish. Because I like to tell the truth. That may well be the most obvious thing you've read or heard but I put to you how often you tell white lies without even thinking about it? I'm not saying I don't but I hate to, if someone is expecting me to like something and I don't I prefer not to say anything than lie. I won't get excited about something I have no interest in and I won't pander to other peoples attempts at trying to seek attention. I'd honestly rather say nothing.
Sometimes though to make a point, it is necessary to be that little bit evil and be straight talking. I am straight talking most of the time, I say what I think and I tend to have an answer for everything but I know it can be a bit harsh. I was having a conversation with my friend the other night, we were just talking about our lives and crap and I said (fairly bluntly) that if we had a kind of relationship where we had little in common and we argued a lot then we wouldn't be friends. To me that's simple. Why would you put yourself through the constant duress of disagreements and conflicts when you have the option to not. So for being blunt and a tad harsh if you read this, it is a public apology.
I seem to be contradicting myself a little because I am trying to endorse being straight talking and not lying but then I'm apologising for doing it. I must stress that I believe there are levels to which you can be like this and sometimes without trying you can go too far, especially with someone you care about. It is however with a certain sense of irony that I write this because when it comes to it, a lot of the time I can't be straight taking. That's another story though.
No my point is more around the people who do say what they think. When you can just pull no punches and tell it like it is. Most people call that being mouthy or gobby and lots of other different things, but you know what, I respect it. Usually those kinds of people have a habit of jumping to conclusions and can be wrong but still, whether they ever think about it or not it takes guts to be like that.
Obviously there is a time and a place, facebook is a prime example - nobody cares about reading whether he/she is the scum of the earth and you wish that they would just die. Get a grip. Being straight talking in malice is a little bit sad and childish. So I wouldn't say I condone that, but still if you are just saying what you think, I've gotta say well done. Obviously you could do it in a more productive manner though. First of all try saying these things to the person you are actually annoyed and then secondly, try being constructive. Honestly it helps.
I think that we suppress our opinions to the point of not having one sometimes because on the off chance it might actually offend somebody else. I say, if you do it in the right way and just say "Look, you idea isn't great, can you do something a little different?" why should they get offended? It's like when you have a meeting and there's always that one person who doesn’t let you get a word in edgeways, why do those people get annoyed about being interrupted if you're polite about it? It's all about making a point but without being nasty or horrible about it as you do. We all understand that everyone has an opinion so why are we so apprehensive about sharing them?
I have different levels of straight talking-ness, I'm probably at my finest when I'm at work which is weird because a lot of people are the opposite. I just think that if this is my job and I have to do it, then you should know what I think about it, good or bad. I obviously try to replicate this into my personal life also but depending up on the company I am with this may change. It seems to lessen outside of work though, probably because I have less to disagree with and that’s never a bad thing. That though, is because the people who I do spend my time with (and maybe its because we're all so close) but we do just say what we see.
So is it a good thing? I think it is. I think that being comfortable enough to express your opinion openly - not just to the odd one or two people later on when it turns into gossip - is brilliant. I consciously try to say what I want to because as I mentioned earlier, I don't like to lie. I just think why bother? There will always come a point when you regret not saying something be it professional or personal. Of course there is the alternative when you regret what you say but at least you can apologise for it, you'll never be able to go back in time.
It's kind of an odd thing to have to do but realistically, you have to first of all know what you want to say, then weigh up whether it might offend someone and consider if you care or not and then actually say it if you choose to. And as stupid as that is, that is the culture that we live in. We are becoming increasingly silenced, whatever happened to freedom of speech? I am in the constant belief that being a nice guy does indeed lead you to last place, so stand up make your point and let people know what you think whether they like it or not. A friend of mine said recently, you have as much right to laugh as they have to cry.
I say the same thing about you though. Yes you. If someone doesn't agree with you or they interrupt you because you have been rambling on for half an hour and are talking utter tripe, if they have a point, let them make it. And if you don't agree with it, don't get all annoyed and petty, come up with something better. That way you can diplomatically rub it in their face when you make their opinion look like something you wished you hadn't stepped in. So I encourage you all to speak up, but do it the right way.
Sunday, 14 November 2010
Too Cool For School
Another one for me that I am a little bit, shall we say passionate about. I had a fairly good experience at school; in fact I'm one of those people who would go back. It wasn't the best school in the borough and I had my fair share of bullying (although it wasn't that bad), I got into fights, I got put on school report three times and I almost got suspended for skiving. So all in all pretty average I would say... But no, honestly, those were the bad things, not a lot really when you consider that you're in school for five years. I'm pretty sure I was given detention every day in my last year as well, the teachers knew I wouldn't go, I don't know why they bothered. I was never the best in class but I was always far from the worst, as I've said before I'm a pretty clever guy but I'm lazy. I also could have got much better grades had I actually applied myself properly, I didn't come off too bad I definitely have six C's and the rest were all D's I think, I honestly don't know anymore. It's one of my biggest regrets, I didn't take much notice of my grades because I didn't think you needed them, but you really do. Well kind of, they help, otherwise you've just got to back yourself up real well with experience but the grades definitely make it easier.
So I liked school, I had a great time - I'm not friends with many people anymore but I think that's kind of inevitable really for a lot of people. I have no bad feelings towards anyone; I just went a different. I suppose you're wondering by know why I'm being all nostalgic and what the point of this is, I'll start now...
The school system is an ever evolving thing, curriculums change almost every year and classes get bigger but the way school works is what I think needs to change completely. For those of you that know me, you will know that I am an American born in Britain. Not literally, but I would give anything to live there. One of the things I have always wanted to do is go to school in the States. They have it right. You have kindergarten, junior high and high school and then college/university. There are scholarships to award students for being exceptional both academically and in sports. Scholarships are a huge gap in the British education system because the thing that scared me the most about going to university and inevitably one of the deciding factors was the amount of debt you get into. Obviously not all of the students that graduate high school in the States get scholarships but at least the option is there to those who are willing to work for it.
Graduating is another thing. I love that. When you leave secondary/high school here, you just leave. There is no ceremony, usually the leavers just go somewhere and get drunk and that's what we all did anyway. Granted we would still all just get drunk afterwards anyway but imagine how cool it would be to graduate high school - a real show of achievement for the five years worth of studying and hard (or not so hard) work you do. The flip side of that of course is the being kept back a year if you aren't performing, I think that is just what we need over here. With the amount of disrespectful and disruptive chav like students in schools today, do you think they'd be so bad if they were threatened with having to do the same year again and again until they could pass? I think it would more efficiently separate those who really don't want to learn from those who are just easily distracted. Obviously there are downsides to this, the segregation may be seen as singling out and cause parents to become aggravated with the school and potentially the teachers involved. That is a downside but in my experience it is usually the parents to blame, if you don't care what your child is doing at school don't complain when they get punished for not achieving. And that's coming from a twenty-four year old with only what he sees to go by.
This is all well and good me saying this but obviously there schooling systems in Britain may have changed in the eight-ish years since I left but either way I bet it's not all that different.
It's obviously all funding. The government are the only source of income for most schools and that's why there is such a difference between the States and here. In America they use sports to help obtain funding for the rest of the school and there are also different levels of funding for overall academic achievement and school population. This is fairly similar - to my knowledge - for our system with the exception of the sporting industry. But the main thing I want to go on to say is about the age at which we leave. A lot of schools have the option of sixth form but generally those who choose to, are heading off to college at the age of sixteen. I know you don't think it at the time, but something you later understand is that you are just a child when you leave school. You have no idea what life is, you've been almost spoon fed everything up until this point and its now - when you have the most growing up to do, that you are asked to make a decision on what you want to do or be for the rest of your life! How ridiculous is that?
Personally, I barely knew what day it was let alone anything else. Some people manage it; some people have the foresight to know that doing one thing in particular is what they want and that it will make them happy. I used to think on and off that I wanted to teach English - the problem being I never focused enough on that idea to really believe it was right for me. Since I've been doing a lot of training in my job, that realisation has come to me far too late, I would love to tell younger Josh to follow it through - keep that thought but it does not do to dwell on dreams. So what I'm getting at is that the Americans keep their kids in school until they are 18. When you are 18 you are an adult... usually. You learn that little bit more to help you understand the world a bit better, two years when you're young is all you need to mature. And please don't think that all people under the age of 18 aren't grown up, there are some very bright and mature people in the world that know what they want and know how to get it and to those individuals I say well done you.
So I know a lot of you might not agree with me here - the obvious argument is that we are becoming too americanised as it is. I take that as a valid point but I still think that you have to take into consideration that there are more options for American kids than there are for British. When I have kids and they are growing up I will encourage them to apply to college in the States so they can take advantage of the mistakes I've made and the lessons I've learned and then hopefully they will get a job there and I can have a permanent holiday spot.
The first step in my opinion is to keep kids in school until they are 18, that's a definite. It would obviously affect the colleges in Britain but they could easily just merge with the surrounding schools, well maybe not easily but it could be done. I also think it is necessary to assist in kids learning to understand what they might want to do. Then we need to promote sports in a different way. High school and college sports are almost a religion in America and I love that, our problem is that the only real sport in Britain is football (or soccer to them Yanks) but we play loads of sports in schools. They all just seem to fizzle away after you leave. Like basketball, I don't mind telling you that I was probably the second or third best player at school. I loved it; watching NBA on the weekends and everything but there are no leagues or anything, nothing serious anyway. Building better sports facilities shout be step two. And finally the funding for better equipment etc. People may think that putting it last is a bit odd or even stupid but it's not. Not if you enforce academic achievement to be able to play on the teams in the first place, that way the schools grade average would hopefully increase and the government would have to provide better funding. Bish bash bosh, problem solved - or at least in my opinion anyway.
So I liked school, I had a great time - I'm not friends with many people anymore but I think that's kind of inevitable really for a lot of people. I have no bad feelings towards anyone; I just went a different. I suppose you're wondering by know why I'm being all nostalgic and what the point of this is, I'll start now...
The school system is an ever evolving thing, curriculums change almost every year and classes get bigger but the way school works is what I think needs to change completely. For those of you that know me, you will know that I am an American born in Britain. Not literally, but I would give anything to live there. One of the things I have always wanted to do is go to school in the States. They have it right. You have kindergarten, junior high and high school and then college/university. There are scholarships to award students for being exceptional both academically and in sports. Scholarships are a huge gap in the British education system because the thing that scared me the most about going to university and inevitably one of the deciding factors was the amount of debt you get into. Obviously not all of the students that graduate high school in the States get scholarships but at least the option is there to those who are willing to work for it.
Graduating is another thing. I love that. When you leave secondary/high school here, you just leave. There is no ceremony, usually the leavers just go somewhere and get drunk and that's what we all did anyway. Granted we would still all just get drunk afterwards anyway but imagine how cool it would be to graduate high school - a real show of achievement for the five years worth of studying and hard (or not so hard) work you do. The flip side of that of course is the being kept back a year if you aren't performing, I think that is just what we need over here. With the amount of disrespectful and disruptive chav like students in schools today, do you think they'd be so bad if they were threatened with having to do the same year again and again until they could pass? I think it would more efficiently separate those who really don't want to learn from those who are just easily distracted. Obviously there are downsides to this, the segregation may be seen as singling out and cause parents to become aggravated with the school and potentially the teachers involved. That is a downside but in my experience it is usually the parents to blame, if you don't care what your child is doing at school don't complain when they get punished for not achieving. And that's coming from a twenty-four year old with only what he sees to go by.
This is all well and good me saying this but obviously there schooling systems in Britain may have changed in the eight-ish years since I left but either way I bet it's not all that different.
It's obviously all funding. The government are the only source of income for most schools and that's why there is such a difference between the States and here. In America they use sports to help obtain funding for the rest of the school and there are also different levels of funding for overall academic achievement and school population. This is fairly similar - to my knowledge - for our system with the exception of the sporting industry. But the main thing I want to go on to say is about the age at which we leave. A lot of schools have the option of sixth form but generally those who choose to, are heading off to college at the age of sixteen. I know you don't think it at the time, but something you later understand is that you are just a child when you leave school. You have no idea what life is, you've been almost spoon fed everything up until this point and its now - when you have the most growing up to do, that you are asked to make a decision on what you want to do or be for the rest of your life! How ridiculous is that?
Personally, I barely knew what day it was let alone anything else. Some people manage it; some people have the foresight to know that doing one thing in particular is what they want and that it will make them happy. I used to think on and off that I wanted to teach English - the problem being I never focused enough on that idea to really believe it was right for me. Since I've been doing a lot of training in my job, that realisation has come to me far too late, I would love to tell younger Josh to follow it through - keep that thought but it does not do to dwell on dreams. So what I'm getting at is that the Americans keep their kids in school until they are 18. When you are 18 you are an adult... usually. You learn that little bit more to help you understand the world a bit better, two years when you're young is all you need to mature. And please don't think that all people under the age of 18 aren't grown up, there are some very bright and mature people in the world that know what they want and know how to get it and to those individuals I say well done you.
So I know a lot of you might not agree with me here - the obvious argument is that we are becoming too americanised as it is. I take that as a valid point but I still think that you have to take into consideration that there are more options for American kids than there are for British. When I have kids and they are growing up I will encourage them to apply to college in the States so they can take advantage of the mistakes I've made and the lessons I've learned and then hopefully they will get a job there and I can have a permanent holiday spot.
The first step in my opinion is to keep kids in school until they are 18, that's a definite. It would obviously affect the colleges in Britain but they could easily just merge with the surrounding schools, well maybe not easily but it could be done. I also think it is necessary to assist in kids learning to understand what they might want to do. Then we need to promote sports in a different way. High school and college sports are almost a religion in America and I love that, our problem is that the only real sport in Britain is football (or soccer to them Yanks) but we play loads of sports in schools. They all just seem to fizzle away after you leave. Like basketball, I don't mind telling you that I was probably the second or third best player at school. I loved it; watching NBA on the weekends and everything but there are no leagues or anything, nothing serious anyway. Building better sports facilities shout be step two. And finally the funding for better equipment etc. People may think that putting it last is a bit odd or even stupid but it's not. Not if you enforce academic achievement to be able to play on the teams in the first place, that way the schools grade average would hopefully increase and the government would have to provide better funding. Bish bash bosh, problem solved - or at least in my opinion anyway.
Friday, 5 November 2010
Being A Smoker.
This is just something I've been considering for some time. Somewhere since 07/2007 when the smoking ban came in. Now all smokers know, whether they choose to admit it or not that it's a bit of a dirty habit. What non-smokers seem to forget is that it's more than just a habit. It's an addiction. If you hear someone was addicted to alcohol or to some sort of classified illegal drug then it's really bad. Although smoking has no real affect on your mentality directly (which is why it's legal) it does make you want cigarettes all the time.
I am what I like to call a considerate smoker. I don't like to exhale smoke so the wind blows it in somebody's face. I never smoke in public doorways and I don't smoke in front of or around kids. There are some, well lots of smokers who are arrogant and inconsiderate of those around them. Those people are probably just rude anyway and the smoking is just an add on.
So as far as the addiction goes, I quit. I was a former smoker (only people who have never smoked can be called non-smokers) and went almost 7 months without smoking but all that needed to get me started again was stressing over being ill and a bad decision. I didn't think I would start smoking for the sake of it, without really realising I'd gone to the shop and bought some cigarettes to 'ease the stress'. Now I am intelligent enough to understand that even though I hadn't smoked in so long my former addiction kicked in and convinced me it was the 'right' thing to do.
I got dizzy with nicotine rush and it made me feel a bit sick but I can't deny that I enjoyed it. My comfort mechanism just kicked in and told me that this was my way of dealing with stress. And so three months later I am still smoking.
I didn't find quitting very difficult the first time, I had been telling my self for months leading up to New Years I wasn't going to smoke anymore. When New Years day came round, I didn't even crave one. I may have tried to take a drag a couple of times, one I can remember for sure but all in all my former smoker-ness went well.
So now that I am smoking again I have started thinking about how biased the smoking ban is. Like I said I know that its a bad habit. It's not a very nice smell to start with and then obviously there is the passive smoking aspect of it all. There is also smoking around food (which I also don't like), I will have a cigarette after a meal as my own little pudding but I don't like to eat when someone else is smoking. I can absolutely appreciate a non-smokers opinion on that.
But, is banning smoking in pubs and clubs really fair and/or the right thing to do? I have said from the off, why not allow a smoking licence? That way people could have the prior knowledge of smokers in the establishment and choose whether or not to go into it. That's a little bit biased on my part I'll grant you but as silly as it sounds it's all about the equality of it. When I wasn't smoking I didn't mind sitting in the company of other smokers and I know people who don't smoke and have no problem with it either.
We all choose to smoke, when you first get offered one by whoever it might be we could just say no. It isn't difficult but for me there was always something that made me want to try it. I think it started when my mom used to smoke in the house. I loved the smell of a lit cigarette and I used to sort of sit in the living room so I could be there when she lit up.
As it goes my point will probably fall on deaf ears to most non-smokers but I would still like you to look at it with an open mind. I think what I am trying to get towards is that I don't think that smokers are catered to properly. Smoking shelters are never what they should be, which I think is my main source of feeling a little hard done to. I was in Merry Hill a little earlier on, and I went to have a smoke while I was just waiting around. On my way out there was a man smoking in the doorway of the Sainsbury's exit/entrance. Granted this person was probably just someone of caveman level intelligence who has no other concerns than his own. Those kind of people are what give the rest of us bad press. Most smokers would never intentionally block others paths and make them inhale smoke but it still brings up the question of whether or not you non-smokers would have to deal with imbeciles such as the Sainsbury's man if there was a smoking shelter in the first place.
Now I know you think I'm being a bit selfish but I don't think that it would be too much to ask for large shopping centres, supermarkets and businesses to shell out what would be an insignificant sum (for them) to make better and more adequate smoking facilities. You might well disagree with everything I've said and that's fine, but like many others I don't want to smoke for the rest of my life. I plan to start smoke free me 2.0 this New Year again and my mental preparation for it is well under way, but my stand point on this subject will not change. Let the smokers have a smoking shelter and please put seats in it.
In fact I wouldn’t mind if there was some adequate shelter full stop. What I don’t get is why has a smoking shelter got to be less than fifty percent covered sort of thing? If it’s only smokers that are going to use it in the first place why does that even matter? It’s just another thing about the smoking laws that just don’t make sense to me. I don’t want to be treated like some sort of segregated society but I think that the laws and legislations that have been put in place are for the ‘benefit’ of non-smokers and there has been little to no consideration for people who do smoke.
It is all a little political and I might well be taking it all a little bit too seriously but I would just like things to be a little fairer. I mean after all the government raises taxes on cigarettes every year so why can’t they use some of that to make everything a little more smoker convenient. And before you start I am not trying to say that I want to walk around pub, clubs and shopping complexes with a cigarette in my hand, I would like to be able to go and sit somewhere comfortable and enjoy the little break I allow myself.
I am what I like to call a considerate smoker. I don't like to exhale smoke so the wind blows it in somebody's face. I never smoke in public doorways and I don't smoke in front of or around kids. There are some, well lots of smokers who are arrogant and inconsiderate of those around them. Those people are probably just rude anyway and the smoking is just an add on.
So as far as the addiction goes, I quit. I was a former smoker (only people who have never smoked can be called non-smokers) and went almost 7 months without smoking but all that needed to get me started again was stressing over being ill and a bad decision. I didn't think I would start smoking for the sake of it, without really realising I'd gone to the shop and bought some cigarettes to 'ease the stress'. Now I am intelligent enough to understand that even though I hadn't smoked in so long my former addiction kicked in and convinced me it was the 'right' thing to do.
I got dizzy with nicotine rush and it made me feel a bit sick but I can't deny that I enjoyed it. My comfort mechanism just kicked in and told me that this was my way of dealing with stress. And so three months later I am still smoking.
I didn't find quitting very difficult the first time, I had been telling my self for months leading up to New Years I wasn't going to smoke anymore. When New Years day came round, I didn't even crave one. I may have tried to take a drag a couple of times, one I can remember for sure but all in all my former smoker-ness went well.
So now that I am smoking again I have started thinking about how biased the smoking ban is. Like I said I know that its a bad habit. It's not a very nice smell to start with and then obviously there is the passive smoking aspect of it all. There is also smoking around food (which I also don't like), I will have a cigarette after a meal as my own little pudding but I don't like to eat when someone else is smoking. I can absolutely appreciate a non-smokers opinion on that.
But, is banning smoking in pubs and clubs really fair and/or the right thing to do? I have said from the off, why not allow a smoking licence? That way people could have the prior knowledge of smokers in the establishment and choose whether or not to go into it. That's a little bit biased on my part I'll grant you but as silly as it sounds it's all about the equality of it. When I wasn't smoking I didn't mind sitting in the company of other smokers and I know people who don't smoke and have no problem with it either.
We all choose to smoke, when you first get offered one by whoever it might be we could just say no. It isn't difficult but for me there was always something that made me want to try it. I think it started when my mom used to smoke in the house. I loved the smell of a lit cigarette and I used to sort of sit in the living room so I could be there when she lit up.
As it goes my point will probably fall on deaf ears to most non-smokers but I would still like you to look at it with an open mind. I think what I am trying to get towards is that I don't think that smokers are catered to properly. Smoking shelters are never what they should be, which I think is my main source of feeling a little hard done to. I was in Merry Hill a little earlier on, and I went to have a smoke while I was just waiting around. On my way out there was a man smoking in the doorway of the Sainsbury's exit/entrance. Granted this person was probably just someone of caveman level intelligence who has no other concerns than his own. Those kind of people are what give the rest of us bad press. Most smokers would never intentionally block others paths and make them inhale smoke but it still brings up the question of whether or not you non-smokers would have to deal with imbeciles such as the Sainsbury's man if there was a smoking shelter in the first place.
Now I know you think I'm being a bit selfish but I don't think that it would be too much to ask for large shopping centres, supermarkets and businesses to shell out what would be an insignificant sum (for them) to make better and more adequate smoking facilities. You might well disagree with everything I've said and that's fine, but like many others I don't want to smoke for the rest of my life. I plan to start smoke free me 2.0 this New Year again and my mental preparation for it is well under way, but my stand point on this subject will not change. Let the smokers have a smoking shelter and please put seats in it.
In fact I wouldn’t mind if there was some adequate shelter full stop. What I don’t get is why has a smoking shelter got to be less than fifty percent covered sort of thing? If it’s only smokers that are going to use it in the first place why does that even matter? It’s just another thing about the smoking laws that just don’t make sense to me. I don’t want to be treated like some sort of segregated society but I think that the laws and legislations that have been put in place are for the ‘benefit’ of non-smokers and there has been little to no consideration for people who do smoke.
It is all a little political and I might well be taking it all a little bit too seriously but I would just like things to be a little fairer. I mean after all the government raises taxes on cigarettes every year so why can’t they use some of that to make everything a little more smoker convenient. And before you start I am not trying to say that I want to walk around pub, clubs and shopping complexes with a cigarette in my hand, I would like to be able to go and sit somewhere comfortable and enjoy the little break I allow myself.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)