I was having a bit of trouble getting into the Christmas spirit, so I made a very cheesey festive montage. Well, it worked, I just never want to hear Judy Garland's voice again.

Music Snobbery

Isn't it weird that people always claim that a mainstream version of something a little less well known simply murders the original? How very odd that a later version with much more funding is always classed as a brutal slaughtering. Do they do it on purpose?

I am talking about music, films, and other such media that attempt to remake or cover the original. I appreciate that it's always important to hold the original with some regard, but why on earth do people have this overwhelming need to slip into the conversation that they saw/heard the original before the arrival of the revised edition?

"The Japanese one was better."
"It's not as good as the book is" (Don't get me started on this one)
"They MURDERED that song."

Notice how, when someone covers an already famous song, people are less inclined to express sentences of this nature? Furthermore, it seems to work the other way round; "Yes, X is a great song, but I've heard this acoustic version by a band you've never heard of and it's SO much better." What do you want, a frigging medal?

I found the American version of "The Ring" scarier, and I think Leona's version of "Run" is better than Snow Patrol's. What are you going to do about it?

More Bullshit: "What's the Point in Animal X?"

Take this scenario. You and your friends are having a picnic in the summer. Suddenly a wasp is buzzing around and lands on one of your shitty plastic glasses. Everyone over-reacts, and chances are that some idiot mutters, "Why do we have wasps? They serve no purpose."

Where do I start?

Firstly, the speaker is implying that every other creature in the world plays some sort of distinct role. I am never sure whether they mean that this is for the sake of human beings or for the interests of the earth itself. Either way, unless you're a religious person of sorts, this is an entirely illogical statement. According to the theory of evolution, or more specifically that of natural selection, heritable traits that are useful for survival become more common in a given population. In other words, any species that has survived has done so based solely on its own interests.

Secondly, it's this egotistical nature in human beings that I cannot stand. The world does not revolve around us. According to the timeline covering the whole of Time Itself, we would take up less than a millimetre. And even if this was the case, I doubt that Time Itself would give a shit that it has unleashed a species that occasionally gives people a little "ouchy."

THIRDLY, there are massive worldwide fucking charities dedicated to saving animals that serve little purpose beyond the fact that they look very nice... (cough, pandas, cough). There is nothing beyond this factor that separates animals of this sort from the little beasts... worms... wasps... slugs... flies... etc. I find myself with huge amounts of empathy for bigger and "cuter" animals, but is it just me that notices how absurd it is to reserve our respect only for the superficially nice species?

Fourthly, I'd like to conclude by saying that wasps serve, a million fucking times over, the purpose of humans. Oh wait, that would put the figure into negative numbers.

B3TA Question of the Week

I should probably read more of the newsletter than just the one part, but never mind. B3TA's summary of the best bits of "Question of the Week" really cracked me up today.

QUESTION OF THE WEEK
Common as muck

Last week we wanted to know what you saw as
common. This generated a huge flame war of
snobbery, one-upmanship and hate. Excellent:
http://www.b3ta.com/questions/common/

* COMMON KIDS - My husband works at a primary
school on a council estate. One child, a girl,
is called... Nokia. (Mrs Liveinabin)

* COMMON MUMS - I used to work in an opticians
in Essex. I think the most common thing I ever
was the woman who, when booking her children in
for eye tests, checked her tattoos for their
dates of birth. (Mrs Liveinabi again)

* COMMON GRANS - when I lived in Newcastle there
was a banner hanging outside of a house that
read "HAPPY 30th GRANDMA". (cowjam)

Don't Blame the Parents

It seems as though people are keen to blame absolutely anything they can on one's upbringing, especially when looking at antisocial behaviour issues. Whilst this seems like a logical conclusion to make, might I add that most of the people I associate with do not have children. I used (and am still tempted) to spout such easy-to-say-when-you-haven't-been-through-it shit, but I stop myself because being a parent is probably very much different to not being one. So when people say "oh just discipline them, it's not hard!" they have absolutely no leg to stand on - how do they know whether or not it's hard?

The problem with this type of discussion is that it will often lead to a general debate about upbringing, at which point everyone seems to argue a certain point: "I was brought up dat way n I'm fine lol!!11" Far be it from me to tell them that they're spoilt and self-centred, don't behave well at school, and don't have a very good relationship with their parents. How can you really look at yourself objectively like that? Not to mention that statistical evidence might say something entirely different, but as long as you "turned out OK" that's all that matters, right?

So in sum, maybe parents can have a little conversation about upbringing, or perhaps those that have investigated the research and are doing it within a professional setting. Other than that, watching Supernanny and snubbing the featured parents' techniques does not make you an expert.

"Here's an idea. Let's give the girl with low self-esteem a makeover."

That's right, it's not just an element of American high school films; it happens in real life, too. And it completely baffles me.

What possesses people to think that it will be a good idea to imply to someone "Hey, you've got shit dress sense and look like a dog, so we're going to try and counter-act those factors"? That's right, it's a shit idea, and it always seems to be targeted towards those that are unsure of themselves in the first place. Let me tell you people some home truths: some basic cosmetic modification is not going to offset years of low self-esteem. Actually, your authoritarian approach to the superficial matter will most likely suck whatever's left of it completely dry.

I hate women.

Peter Kay's Britain's Got The Pop Factor And Possibly A New Celebrity Jesus Christ Soapstar Superstar Strictly On Ice

I can't wait for this.