© Johannes Siig
All photos taken with an Apple iPhone 3G
Edited in Final Cut Pro
Color Graded in Apple Color

The World According to Clarkson is a non-fiction book that looks at the modern British everyday life in a satirical way. What it is then, is a collection of his newspaper column articles, on the topic of Britain.

One recurring theme in the book is his comparisons with mainland Europe. Within the book, he even mentions Estonia in a chapter, a couple of times, writing:

“He ended up with an extraordinary collection including Estonia, which did have an army in 1993. But lost it. No, really. The Estonian army was ordered to capture a Russian military town but the soldiers decided this was an unpleasant way of earning a living and went off, on their own, to fight organised crime instead.”

Another recurring theme are his constant complaints about the government, the EU and generally, everyday life. His witty remarks make almost every subject a lot more interesting.

I agree with Jeremy Clarkson on most topics. I agree with him that “Health and Safety” is pointless. In fact, in the Top Gear production office, they call it the PPD – the Programme Prevention Department. I agree that Europe should have the same plug sockets. That’s something more necessary than the Euro.

I loved the book. It was witty and interesting. I read it straight from start to finish because it was simply so interesting to read. It wasn’t a single story, but a collection of ideas and thoughts as he travelled throughout the UK, Europe and the world. With most books, I want to take a couple of breaks because I get tired of reading them. With this, I simply kept going for hours and hours, until I’d finished it. I payed attention to… everything! Which isn’t something that happens to me very often. And what an experience it was! My world view didn’t change much, but my mind was definitely broadened by it.

The man has a point.

Originally written as a school book report. ©Johannes Siig, All Rights Reserved.

Everywhere I look these days, even in this über-liberal tiny northern European country of Estonia, there are heated discussions whether gay marriages and adoption should be legalised.

The main argument seems to be that homosexuality is unnatural. But what does unnatural mean? What is natural? What is unnatural? And is unnatural necessarily bad?

I’m not so sure. After all – it is unnatural for humans to fly. Yet most of us use planes. It’s unnatural for humans to survive tough diseases – yet we can due to advances in medicine. It’s unnatural to sit in front of a glowing box and constantly watch it for hours. And yet almost all of us do it.

So, unnatural definitely isn’t bad.

Another argument people propose is that the Bible is against homosexuality – therefore they should not have the right to get married. Well, this argument is ultimately stupid, since it is based on nothing more than just religious views and no logical evidence.

You have to remember – not everyone is of the same faith as you. In fact, most people aren’t.

Gay adoption, however is another topic. But ultimately, there’s not much difference.

There is one main argument against gay adoption is that the child would be bullied at school if anyone were to find out. Yet I don’t see how that’s different from bullying due to other reasons – being too fat or too thin, too short or too tall… Kids have always been bullied for different reasons. In school you are either the bully or you get bullied. There’s no third option.

And you have to remember that there is absolutely no link between homosexuality and paedophilia. In fact, the reverse has been observed…

Really, if two homosexuals want to get married, why do you prohibit it? What’s your problem with them?
They aren’t trying to get special rights. Simply equal rights…

What’s your problem with them? Are you saying your sexuality (straight) should be the only and dominant one?

You sound like a Ku Klux Klan member now – saying your sexuality is the only right one is like saying your race is the only right one.

Have you ever heard of a concept called “free promotion”? Basically, the product you sell gets advertised, without you paying for the advertising… Well, how does it work?

Let’s take an example –  youtube. A user posts a video containing your music. Or a music video by an artist that’s signed under your label.

You think to yourself – “oh my god they are stealing our music.” First of all, why do you assume that they are stealing, and why do you assume it will create a loss in profit?

In fact, common sense tells us that if a song is advertised *anywhere* and people like it, people will probably buy it. But if the song isn’t available on, for example, youtube,  then your song will be unheard, and probably bought a lot less.

I agree on one point, though. If the author of the song isn’t credited or any mention of the song’s name and performer isn’t there, then it should count as copyright infringement. But if the author and/or performer is credited and the song’s title given and (preferably) a link to the song on, let’s say, umm, iTunes is given, then what’s the f**king problem?

Have you heard of these things, called, err, common sense and independent thought?

Because if you had any of either, you’d realise disabling audio on infringing promoting videos is clearly… retarded.

WARNING! The following post contains “profane” words in a reported manner. If you are deeply religious or otherwise can not stand anything closely related to reproduction, please, do not read this post for the sake of your mental health. Otherwise, carry on reading.

If you’ve read some of my posts, you probably know I sometimes use profanity. Sometimes I use the word “b*tch,” sometimes I use the word “f*ck.” Sometimes I use the word “sh*t.”

But, what’s so bad about those words, actually? As hard as I’m thinking, I can’t think of anything wrong with those words. The society tells us these words are profane and inappropriate. But what makes these words inappropriate?

Why can we use the word excrement or stool, but not sh*t? Why can we use the phrase “have sex” instead of “f*ck”? Wouldn’t it be easier to just say “to f*ck each other” instead of “to have sex with each other” or even “to have sexual intercourse with each other”?

What’s so bad about the word “f*ck”, anyways?

Wikipedia defines profanity as following:
“As a result, “profane” and “profanity” has therefore come to describe a word, expression, gesture, or other social behaviour which is socially constructed or interpreted as insulting, rudeness, vulgarism, desecrating, or showing disrespect.”

Is the word “f*ck” insulting, rude, vulgar, desecrating or disrespectful? There’s nothing insulting in it. And what does “rude” even mean? As in “disrespectful”? Why is “f*ck” disrespectful? It’s just a word, a synonym to sexual intercourse. Desecrating? Seriously? Yes, sex is not allowed outside marriage by the christian “law…”. But inside the marriage, there seems to be no problem with it. So why is referring to it such a desecration?

Is the word sh*t insulting, rude, vulgar, desecrating or disrespectful? No. None of those things. “Sh*t” is a synonym to stool, excrement. Both are things our bodies produce. Therefore, are our bodies rude, insulting, vulgar, desecrating or disrespectful? Why would they be? We are a part of nature. Why does our body insult anyone? (does it?) Why is our body rude? (is it?) Why is it vulgar? (is it?)
And why would our body be desecrating, as, according to the Christians, man was made by god. Therefore god’s work isn’t sacred?

Is the word b*tch insulting, rude, vulgar, desecrating or disrespectful? Why would it be? It’s literal meaning, up to this day, is female dog. Yes, I can see how being called a dog can be insulting. But if it’s used not in the context of calling someone it and used as “b*tching about something” then how come it’s wrong to use it in that context?

How come has our society learned to avoid these words? How come do we avoid people who use these words?

They are just words… Words alone do no harm. It’s what you can do with those words is the problem.

5 weird, sad or funny but true facts you might not have known until now.

… that in the Russian language, the word for the “@” sign is the same as the word for “dog”?

… that in New York City, approximately 1,600 people are bitten by other humans annually?

… that 1 out of every 4 kids in the USA is overweight?

… that in the Estonian language, the word for “Twelve Months” sounds EXACTLY like “C*cks taste good”?

… that the original name of Bank of America was Bank of Italy?

Good:
The Butterfly Effect
Easy Virtue

Bad:
Bruno
Little Nicky

1. Breakeven by The Script
2. Take Her Back by The Pigeon Detectives
3. Shut Up And Let Me Go by The Ting Tings
4. Beautiful Day by U2
5. Bohemian Like You by The Dandy Warhols
6. Glorious by Andreas Johnson
7. Love is Noise by The Verve
8. The Day We Caught The Train by Ocean Colour Scene
9. Hush by Kula Shaker
10. New Shoes by Paolo Nutini

1) House. Last series ended with a huge cliffhanger of Greg House’s health

2) Grey’s Anatomy. Last series ended with a HUGE cliffhanger of two main characters possibly dying

3) The Big Bang Theory. Last series ended with the 4 guys going to the North Pole for three months

4) Bones. Last series ended with Booth in a hospital, recovering from brain surgery

The Sky+HD (UK) radio ad (on Absolute Radio (UK)):

So, let’s break it down:

They say they have 10 dedicated movie channels. (on their website they have 12, but well…)

In total 600 movies per month.

600/10 = 60 movies per channel per month.

60/30 (days in a month) = 2 movies per day? What the ****?

How the HELL can anyone call something a dedicated movie channel when it shows, on average, 2 movies per day?

Advertisements lie these days way too much.

What do you think? Leave a comment below.