How To Solve Things

There are two kinds of solutions. Solutions which negate problems, and solutions which end problems.

When faced with a problem, your choice (apart from giving up) is to try and skirt around the problem and continue on your way, or to stop the problem from existing so that it never comes up again. To climb over the wall, or to pull it down.

People (very much including me) often opt for the former. The negating-problem-solution usually takes less effort, and we have faith that sooner or later someone better than us will come along and sort out the problem for good.

But as always seems to be the case, the world would be much better if we chose the more effortous option. If we were more willing to face problems head-on and sort them out, it would be much more beneficial for both us and the rest of humanity.

Politicians (as well as, like, everyone) often seem to go for the former kind of solution. You often see our world leaders tackling issues by trying to push the effects further into the future, so that someone else with more time on their hands can sort it out, not them. Global warming and the endless debt crisis are good examples of this. And we all know where we're ending up there.

It's like there's a room full of deadly lasers which everyone keeps having to move around in order to live their lives. The switch to turn off the lasers is all the way on the other side of the room, and no-one wants to walk all the way over there when they can just compensate by ducking or stepping over beams occasionally. It would make much more sense to make the long bendy trip over to the switch once, instead of letting everyone carry on trying to ignore and evade the lasers of doom everywhere.

So that's my musing for today. I hope it brought joy to your life.

Hello there. I'm a crazy person.

Ten minutes ago I ate a banana. 

Five minutes after that I panicked, thinking "did I really eat that banana, or did I just pull it off the bunch and leave it?"

I've just checked the compost bin, and concluded that I must have eaten the banana. So all is well.

Except IT ISN'T.

Because I shouldn't have to panic over which fruit I may or may not have consumed.

I spend about 70% of my life freaking out about shit which doesn't actually matter.
You know when you like someone romantically, and you analyse every single thing they say to you and the way they say it for evidence that they love or hate you? I do that with every single human being I ever talk to ever. It's really frustrating.

The top three concerns which take up nearly all of my thinking time are:
a) Does everyone hate me?
b) Did that thing just happen or is my shitty memory making it up?
c) Why am I not working ZOMG I'm such a failure! (this occurs even when I don't actually have any work)

It's silly, because the human brain is amazing, and I should be using mine to think of actual consequential things, like how to solve problems and discover unknown mysteries of the universe. But all I ever seem to be able to focus on are the stupid concerns of an over-hormonal teenager.

It's gotten to the point where I just don't seem able to cope with life any more. I can't look at a situation without deciding it's going to go wrong and then coming up with eight million reasons why. When things do go wrong, or even slightly less than ideal, I just can't manage it. Somewhere in my neural relays it is decided, against my will, that this lack of total success is the end of the world. 

The bright side is that it rarely stops me from actually doing anything. All it does is makes it nigh-impossible for me to enjoy most of the things I do with my time. And, pfft, who needs enjoyment!

Bleh. I don't know why I'm telling the internet this. Probably out of some desire to be honest with my bloggamareaders (or whatever I'm supposed to call them/you).   

There are ways of curing such a state of mind. Mainly this one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ovLKUoMqPSg

And on that slightly brighter note, until next time! (When I'll go back to blogging about political issues etc. instead of my life. *relief for all*) 

The Royal Family

Today I have the inexplicable whim to blog about the Royal Family and the controversy theresurrounding. So here goes. Please note that, as always, everything I say in this post is nothing more than the subjective opinion of a teenager with internet access, and you shouldn't take anything I say too seriously.

As far as the abstract concept of a royal family goes, I hate it. I am as vehemently opposed to the class system and the power of the birth lottery as the most radical of socialists. I don't even care about the money they have so much, as material inequality is pretty much unavoidable, but the status thing I can barely stand. The fact that we in Britain are supposed to be so reverent and loyal to people who achieved nothing more than being born to parents who were born to parents who were born to parents whose ancestors won some battle centuries ago grinds my stubbornly egalitarian gears. I don't consider the Queen to be superior to me or anyone else in the middle or working class, and if I'm going to ask God to save someone in song, I'd much rather it were Stephen Fry or Chris Colfer or some such awesome person.

That aside, what of the Royal Family we have today? Do I want them all cast into the North Sea?

I've actually blogged about this before, and I don't consider the modern British Royals to be much of a problem.
The reason for this is that the Royals are no longer considered our divine overlords. While they still, technically, have the same status, they have none of the power they had in times of old. Yes, the United Kingdom is not as democratic as I would like it to be, but that has nothing to do the Royals and everything to do with corrupt politicians and a completely immoral banking sector. If you think about it, the Royals have more or less the same status as the rest of us. They are taxed by the government, ridiculed by the media and gossiped about by the public, and can't do anything about it. They are, really, little more than a convenient source of income for parliament, and an effective tourist-magnet.

Officially, yes, all power in parliament is derived from the Monarch. But as we all know, this is nothing more than a ceremonial procedure. It's both slightly bizarre and slightly irksome that the Queen has to sign all our bills and permit every government to form, but no monarch today would be stupid enough to try and wield that power for real. I think that kind of ceremonial power is a fair exchange for the amount of revenue the royals generate for us.
Besides, a lot of people like the royals. In fact, the majority of Brits find Liz and Co endearing to a certain degree. It's probably unfair to get rid of them based on a dogmatic principle of mine.

So, that's a vague summary of what I feel vis-a-vis the House of Windsor.

Until next time.

The Robin Hood Tax

I would like to quickly introduce you all to a thing.

The Robin Hood tax is a proposed fiscal policy which would tax business interactions in the City of London and subsequently raise a lot of money to tackle poverty and climate change and avoid public service cuts.

Check out this video and the website in links to for the lowdown:

Ten Things I Love

I'm in a mood for appreciating the world. As such, here are ten of the things in the universe which I happen to love, and a short squealing of adoration about each thing. They are in no particular order and have no real theme, other than that I love them. So, yeah. Enjoy!

 1. Adele. As in, the singer.
Oh my God. I love this woman and her music so much. Her voice makes me happy, and her lyrics are so clever and gorgeous and beautiful, and the instrumentation for her songs is always perfect. She breaks my heart every time. I love her. I could literally listen to nothing but Adele for ever, if only there wasn't so much other awesome music in the world.

2. The English Language. As in, the thing I'm writing in now. 
Words and sentences excite me. Which is good, because I spend at least half my wakened life writing something or other. Sometimes, it just takes a new word or someone's inventive use of a phrase to make my day. Language is so beautiful and fantastic. It's probably the only reason I'd rather be a human than any other animal. Well, probably not. But it might be the biggest reason.

3. All of the books by Malorie Blackman.
Malorie Blackman (the woman who wrote the Noughts and Crosses saga, The Stuff of Nightmares, Pig-Heart Boy, and much else besides) will probably always retain her ceremonial status as "my favourite author", even though she stands in a bookcase now populated by John Green, Bill Bryson, Phillip Reeve, Emma Donaghue and about a hundred others. I thought back on it a while ago, and realised that she was essentially the one who first introduced me to the "adult world" (you know, the one with sex and racism in it) through her books. My perspective has been so influenced by her work, and I am very indebted by her. Also, her books are always heartbreaking, gripping, hilarious, moving and populated by intensely beloveable characters. The literary world is a far richer place with Ms Blackman in it.

4. Playing the flute. You know, that instrument with the holes in.
So yeah, I play the flute. I'm generally vaguely hesitant to admit such a thing, because I think the flute is generally seen as an instrument played only by stuck-up middle class types who are far more interested in creating correct music than beautiful music. But, who care. I get to make amazing sounds with my mouth because of that thing. I get to create my own renditions of songs I love even if they are far beyond my vocal range. It's one of the most fun things I do with my life. So yes. It definitely earns it's place in the ten.

5. Wearing images of sea creatures around my neck.I used to have a drum necklace, which was awesome, but sadly is no more. Now I have a seahorse and a dolphin necklace, which together make up for it. Yay. Also, seahorses are awesome.

6. Trees. LOLOLOL HIPPY.
Seriously though, I really like trees. They make me happy. Not too happy. Just a little bit happy. But trees are beautiful and make landscapes more awesome when they are present. I like the fact that there are trees in the world. Only when there are no trees will I ever lose hope.

7. The human urge to make things.
I think this urge is present in all of us, and it drives people to do the most amazing things ever. It motivates me, and it appears to motivate a hell of a lot of other people, too. Being creative is one of the most spiritual and wholesome things we can do with our lives, and it makes me happy that so many people are not just willing, but eager, to create new things in the world.

8. Studying A-level Philosophy. No, I'm serious. Stop laughing.
Actually, you're probably not laughing. I suspect I'm nerdy enough for such a love to be believable- predictable, even.
Studying philosophy lets me think in ways I would never have the opportunity to think otherwise. It draws my attention to moral and political and metaphysical issues which I would probably not have noticed otherwise. And the discussions you get in philosophy lessons (provided everyone is awake) are hilarious and engaging and brilliant. It makes my brain better. Therefore, I love it.

9. John and Hank Green, a.k.a. the Vlogbrothers.
Yes, I know I talk about them all the freaking time. But the Green Brothers are two of the most awesome people in the universe, and a lot of the posts I post on here (including this one) wouldn't exist if I hadn't been inspired by one or more of their videos. So I probably owe them all the sentences I use blathering about them. If you don't understand who I'm talking about, then a) ZOMG you have not been paying attention! and b) you can find their Youtube channel thisaway:  http://www.youtube.com/vlogbrothers

10. This.

Thus concludes a reasonable summary of why I still find the universe awesome.

Until next time, folks!

Should you try to be straight?

So I was egocentrically browsing blogger stats just now, and learnt that people were stumbling across my blog by searching the term "should I try to be straight?" in Google. Google was subsequently linking them to this blog post, which, while amazing, I feel is too politically-anchored to be of much use to the Googlers in question. As such, I am going to try and answer the question "should I try to be straight" on a more personal level. Because, you know, I aim to please.

Basically, no. 
There is no reason for you to try to be straight if you are in fact gay or bisexual.

I completely sympathise with what you are going through right now. Realising you are attracted to members of the same sex is, in this world, one of the most painful processes you can go through as a person. It shouldn't be like this, but unfortunately, in a society dominated by ignorance and the phobia of diversity, being anything other than heterosexual is something that marks you as a target for hate from a small but extremely loud section of the human race.

But the good news is, you are better than they are.
Well, okay, not really. Strictly speaking, all humans are morally equal.
But homophobia, like all other forms of prejudice, is a sign of weakness, ignorance and fear. Throwing proverbial stones at anything different from yourself reduces you to one of the lowest possible stages of human development.
As such, you should never, ever let homophobic people dictate how your life is lived.

The main complication with this, of course, is that your family or close friends may disapprove of homosexuality, or you may fear they will.

Here's the deal. Most people come to terms with sexual orientation in their teenage years, a point in time where we have been trained to panic about anything about ourselves which appears different of unusual. So the great news is, much of your concern over what your mum/dad/sibling/BFF might say is irrational, and does not reflect on reality. You find being not-straight to be something disconcerting and panic-inducing, so you assume that everyone else will think along the same lines. But this often turns out to be false.

Of course, some parents do have a problem with their kids being gay. And because they're your parents, you can't dismiss them like you can with general homophobes.
But know this. Your family's disapproval of what you are is irrational and unfair. There is nothing wrong with loving members of the same gender. You do not need to feel ashamed or guilty of this part of yourself.
Be patient with your parents, and let them come around, as, if they have a modicum of sanity, they most assuredly will. It may take a week or a year, but they will come around. And you will be closer and happier than ever before because of it.

The other thing worth mentioning is that sexual orientation isn't something that goes away if you choose to act like it isn't there. If you try to start heterosexual relationships and even families based on heterosexual relationships, you will only end up hurting yourself and all other parties involved. It's not a route you want to go down.
For some bizarre reason, I'm reminded of the TV license adverts: "Easier to pay, harder to avoid". Because in a similar way, getting through the short-term sharp pain of coming out now will save a much greater amount of pain later on in life.

So, that's about that.

Being the person you were born as does not make you any less of a person.

Gay is fine. If nothing else, Stephen Fry's gay, so it must be vaguely okay.

Until next time! 

The Definition of Marriage

So recently, I've heard what seems like an inordinate amount of people claim that same sex marriage is a logical impossibility; that the definition of marriage is between a man and a woman. Many people like to lend support for same-sex civil unions, but get out of supporting gay marriage by using the above claim. There are a number of problems with this.

Opponents of SSM like to promote the idea that gay marriage is some silly modern fad that goes against tradition and everyone will forget about in time. But this is simply historically false. The first instances of definite-for-real marriage between members of the same sex happened in the early Roman Empire (Emperor Nero himself had one), and there are examples of same-sex partnerships which may or may not have been on a similar vein to marriage from even earlier, in ancient China.

Of course, anti-SSM types will still say that these somehow weren't real marriages, and that the people of yonder had some misguided perception about what marriage is. The natural question to ask, then, is where does this infallible definition of marriage come from?

Many claim it comes from religion, specifically Christianity. The problem with this is that marriage has existed for far longer than the Christian tradition, or even the Juedo-Christian tradition. Plus, we have a secular, state-run institution of marriage today anyway. It is absurd, frankly, to suggest that the institution of marriage belongs to and can be defined by the Church.

Other's make argument in regard to procreation. Same-sex relations don't make babies, therefore they aren't valuable enough to be recognised as marriage. Or so the argument goes.
There are two problems with this:
a)  Marriage is not, and has never been, just about making babies. It is about recognising and celebrating the decision of two people to live their lives together, and in a broader sense, the need of humans to be connected to one another.
b) Many gay people or same sex couples raise children anyway, through adoption or through IVF or various other kinds of science, and marriage makes it easier for these children to be raised by the couple whom are considered the child's parents by all involved. Thus, if protection of children is a function of marriage, then same-sex marriage fulfills this wonderfully.

In short, the definition of marriage has never been fixed down. It is a strong societal institution, yes, but it is one which has evolved and developed fluidly to best accomplish what it sets out to accomplish.

You may see marriage as a sacrament, or baby-making process, or some other such thing which excludes same-sex couples, and that's fine. Whatever. But you do not have the power to declare that as the one and only correct definition of marriage, nor the right to make everyone else follow that definition.
It's laughable when anti-SSM organisations accuse progay activists of enforcing their definition of marriage on everyone else. Because that's exactly what a) the antigay camp want to do, and b) the progay camp want to prevent. The antigays want the world to conform to their views on social institution, and exclude everyone who doesn't. The progays want to open up the institution of marriage so that no one camp is able to dictate what family should look like to everyone else.

So is same-sex marriage an oxymoron?
No.
Marriage = an institution which allows legal and social recognition of a couple's commitment to each other*
Same-sex = something which occurs between two people of the same genitalia
There is nothing in those two concepts which is contradictory.
Lets' celebrate love and commitment in all the forms it takes.

The end.




* roughly, anyway; no definition of something like marriage is ever perfect.

Keep Calm and Carry On

There's a poster in my room now which reads "Keep Calm and DFTBA". I would like to share it's significance for me with you lot.

The poster is of course yet another spin on the "Keep Calm and Carry On" posters which were present in the UK during the blitz. These posters were set up everywhere to remind people not to despair at the world falling to pieces around them, but to pick themselves up and carry on until the future dawned.

People (including me) often find themselves going through what we might call emotional blitzes. Times when everything hurts to the extent where you can't even enjoy the good things in life properly. Times when everything you depend on seems to be falling apart. Times when all you want to do is curl up into a ball and hide from the world forever.

My poster is a reminder of three things.
-John and Hank Green and the Nerdfighter community, and all the awesome which espouses from them.
-To Not Forget to be Awesome
-To Keep Calm and Carry On during the times I outlined above.

We all need reminders during the long nights that day will follow. For me, my new poster is one of them. For you, I hope this blog post can be one. (Though that's probably a bit pretentious.)

Depression is ultimately temporary. Don't let it take away the rest of your future. Because the rest of your future is damn worth the wait.

Keep Calm and Carry On. 

Human Rights etc.

In political discourse, there is a certain cesspit of terms which are condemned as "liberal", in the most sneering and contemptuous use of the word possible. Right-wingers jeer tirelessly when terms in this cesspit are used, and left-wingers give them a wide berth to avoid said jeering. The rest of us are left with the impression that the condemned phrases are weak, empty, pointless phrases, and that the non-ironic use of them is a sign of ideological deficiency. Terms in the cesspit include "political correctness", "multiculturalism", and anything remotely synonymous with "co-operation". Some, clearly, are more deserving than others.

For me, it's a source of great concern that another term which appears to be teetering on the edge of this pit is "human rights". So this is my humble offering of explanation as to why human rights matter.

The impression which a great deal too many politicians and media outlets seem to be able to pull off is that human rights are a foolish wet liberal concept which was doomed from the start, and is only used as an excuse for the state to grow, the EU to take over, and convicted paedophiles to roam free. This is impossibly far from the truth.

Human rights are, by definition, rights which apply to all humans equally. They mean that the justice system cannot favour a certain group of people over another, but that we are all treated fairly by the law. They hold the state and the government responsible towards every one of their citizens, not just the elite. They ensure that no group of people is ever considered just a means to an end by another group. 

The alternative to human rights is legal rights- rights which are provided by and remain subject to the wishes of the state. The concept of legal rights means that what you are worth, and to what extent you are protected by the law, depends on the whim of whoever is running the country at the time. It also mean that different rights could be dispersed to different groups of people.

The absence of constitutional, inalienable human rights leaves people at the complete mercy of their government. To that extent, without human rights, liberal democracy cannot exist, and the ideology of the Magna Carta/French and American revolutions/Enlightenment cannot be put into practice.

It frustrates me that so many people take for granted the right to freedom of speech, the right to a fair trial, the right to openly practice a religion, the right to education and healthcare and decent working conditions- and yet sneer at human rights like some irrelevant fringe concept. Or worse, they know more or less exactly what human rights entail, and still want to deny them to others. How many people have we heard claiming that those of the Islamic faith are somehow too dangerous to be allowed to exist in liberty, that somehow allowing Muslims to speak openly as we do is a threat to all we hold dear?
Actually, I'll blog more about human rights + Islamophobia another time. It's too much to stick on the end of another blog post.

Basically, every time you call David Cameron a wanker, every time you apply for a job without your personal and spiritual life being scrutinised, every time you walk past a policeman without him bashing your head in for no reason- thank human rights. That the people who have worked for hundreds of years to make rights for humans a recognised thing. And don't belittle their efforts by taking a Daily Mail, or even a Telegraph stance on the matter.


(Apologies for the anger. I was always going to do a slightly angry blog once in a while.)