Comment to Anisha Patel's Blog 'Crime'.

Link to relevant Blog

I'm curious about your opinion that all crime is wrong - granted that crime is committed when the laws and/or rules of society are broken but they don't always hurt other people and the people breaking the law don't always have a choice. A lot of people are forced into poverty or desperate situations and to just say that they're bad and shouldn't do it is a little short-sighted I think.

Would you really condemn a homeless person for stealing bread, or a bottle of water? Does that mean that they "aren't nice people"?

The people who define crime are often those in a position or situation where they don't need to commit it!

Also a lot of people who uphold the law and write the law (police, judges etc) break the law without punishment - how do you feel about that?

Is someone guilty of committing a crime even if they aren't caught or arrested for it? What if the person the crime was committed against isn't aware that the crime has even taken place, like with tax evasion, if it goes undetected and the vicitim never knows is it still a 'bad thing to do'?

Comment to Karim Nusarat's Blog about Cannibis Factories.

Link to relevant blog

I'm just curious as to why you think what "these people" are doing is so bad? I mean do you feel the same way about people who smoke cannabis? I used to smoke a lot of pot, but cleaned myself up. Whilst I don't think that cannabis is this glorified and productive drug that a lot of its users argue I don't necessarily think its that bad or evil. People who grow cannabis take a big risk or jail time and they also have to invest a fair amount of money into it to grow drugs that are good enough to sell. I think to say that its bad without giving your reasoning is maybe a little niave and arrogant. Are they really any worse than any business man who uses the labour of others to make money for himself?

The only "Bad" things I can relate to people who grow cannabis is that they don't pay tax and that its illegal - in this sense I know a lot of people who are 'bad'. A lot of legitimate business men and people who make money do so without paying tax... Wesley Snipes was recently jailed for tax evasion in The States and most people break laws on a regular basis, speeding is probably one of the most common ways.

Do you draw distinctions between levels of illegality? If so what makes you think that you have the right to do so?

Final Blog Entry.

Age?

25

Sex?

Male

What is your degree subject (both if joint)?

English with Creative and Professional Writing

Does ‘Being Bad’ relate well to the other modules you are taking?

It relates to the Creative Writing side to a certain extent, but in terms of actual assessment etc no, not really.

If so, how? And if not, why not?

Philosophy is useful to writing fiction in particular contexts, so thats why its useful. It isn't that useful in the sense that it feels like the module has been deliberately expanded to embrace several subjects just to validate its experience. The creative writing essay's about subjects are fairly pointless and since we don't get taught how to deal with handling philosophic subjects in a fictional sense we don't learn anything directly related to Creative Writing.

Have you found ‘Being Bad’ too demanding, too easy, or at an appropriate level?

Yes...


Its ok, the blogs seem a bit pointless though, especially the quantity of them needed.

Do you think the list of topics covered on the module was appropriate?

How can discussing masturbation ever be inappropriate?!? Yes the topics were fine.

Are there any topics not included in the module that you would like to see included?

FIGHTING! See my blog on it.. ok so my blog was rushed but there's room there for it!

Do you think that the format for classes has worked well?

Honestly? I'm a level 2 student and I only did this module this year because I needed to meet the requirements for my degree - since the grades I get for this don't effect my degree I focuses on my other subjects more... I didn't attend enough to comment really...

What did you think of the module team?

Despite my previous comment I've actually had almost all the lecturers off the list for other modules and they're great lecturers, so I'd say it was fine, but that may be short-sighted and presumptious of me.

Do you think it would have been better to have had more:

Small group discussions?

Small group discussions normally suck no-matter what the subject.

Discussion and debate among the class as a whole?

Never works because only a few members of the class will have the courage to speak their mind in a community situation.

Information and talk from lecturers?

Eh? Lecturers talk lots and are meant to be deliver information anyway - do you think you get away with doing less than you need to?

The approach taken in the module is interdisciplinary (drawing on perspectives from English Literature, Film Studies, Creative Writing, Philosophy, Religious Studies, Media Studies and Politics): do you think this a useful way of approaching the topics covered in the module?

No, Jack of all trades is a master of none and another load of cliche responses.

Do you think that interdisciplinary modules are a good idea?

See Above.

Do you think you have benefited from the interdisciplinary approach taken in the module?

hmmm, See above.

Would you like to see more modules that cover this kind of subject matter?

No.

Are you planning to take the follow-up module PH2004 ‘It Shouldn’t Be Allowed’ at level 2?

I did take it and it was ok, Philosophy is interesting.

Would you recommend ‘Being Bad’ to a friend?

Depends on what they wanted out of uni modules...

Do you think that the blogs (web logs) were a good idea?

No

What did you think of the other assessments (e.g. would it be better to have one longer assessment rather than two shorter ones?)?

I think that Weblogs and 2 short essays is too much. Either loose an Essay or the weblogs.

What have you learned from the module?

Seriously? Bad is a point of view.

What parts of the module have you found most useful and why?

I didn't really find this module that useful.

What parts do you think were a waste of time and why?

This questionnaire - end of module evaluation forms are much easier and a lot bloody shorter! Who came up with some of these questions anyway?

Are there any other comments you wish to make regarding ‘Being Bad’?

No.

Fighting IS Entertaining.

There is a certain kind of feeling you get from being in a brawl or a fight with someone. From the simple feeling of winning an all out screaming contest with someone in your family to smacking the idiot you just cut you up in the face.

Humans are a volitile and aggressive species by nature. I don't think there has been any point in time when one country, tribe, people or race haven't been fighting another be it religiously, economically or vendetta based people fight other people. They always have and they always will but what about fighting as a sport and a mode of entertainment?

Watching a fight is almost as fun as being in a fight - in my opinion. But before I'm misunderstood or judged prematurely I should state that I don't find a group of people beating up a single person purely because they can and there are more of them than there are of the other fun. That's bullying its not fighting - that's what America does to the Middle-East and its not admirable or entertaining. But seeing two people solve their differences in a contest of strength has a certain, old, tradional and pure feeling to it.

I'm a massive fan of and active participant in a sport called MMA - also known as 'Cage Fighting' - a name I dislike because of the negative connotations it carries with it; but that's not something I'm going to get into here and now as its off subject and to be frank i'm quite tired of having to defend my sport against the slander and misinformed arrogant opinions of idiots who have no idea what they're talking about - and the funniest thing about that is a LOT of them are boxers would you believe?!

But to get back on the subject - fighting is natural and its entertaining - I prefer it to be monitored and maintained as a sport rather than a street event which any idiot can get involved and in that sense I think its the greatest and purest sport on the planet. 2 men or women, who have spent years learning to fight properly and effectively and months preparing there physical conditioning for this one fight, this one battle where they either win or lose but no matter what the result they give everything they have both mentally and physically in one 15minute fight and leave with no bitterness and no regrets. If wars were fought in a cage with a refereee we'd have no need for a military and the world could maintain its constant state of war without anyone ever dying as an effect of it.

MMA: The Bastard Sport?

Swearing and Taboo Words.

If I say "I really didn't like that" or "I've a strong aversion to it" noone would bat an eyelid (depending on what I was talking about obviously, but thats immaterial). But the second you say "That was shit" or "I fucking hate that" then jaws drop and people just can't believe 'you mouth'. But what, seriously, is the big deal? The statements relay the the same message just in different ways so who cares? Why are 'swear words' or 'profanity' so stigmatised in society? It seems to me to be a highly pedantic and snobby method of maintaining a class system.

Its nothing more than a means of glorifying the educated (who more often than not are the more wealthy members of society) and holding them up above the less educated and poor etchelons in our social hierachy.

People who swear are accused of lacking vocabularly and are pictured as being stupid which is quite hilarious considering almost everyone in society does swear. The only difference lies in when people choose to do so. So surely then the whole notion of swearing being anti-social is nothing more than a facade - its a guise we keep around for no better reason than that's what we were taught when we were growing up. So is swearing so wrong?

If you argue that its the action or the gesture that a swear word represents that is offensive then words like penis, vagina, sex and masturbation should all be as equally offensive, but of course they're not - they're not because they are less common and are less used by the "Simplier" members of society.

An Interesting Article About Swearing in Society

Comment to Denise Williams blog about 'Bad Religion'

Link to relevent blog

Obviously, like anyone who enjoys a bit of piece of quite and dislikes being harrassed I'm not of a fan of people who try to convert me. But I would say there is a difference between someone trying to convert you and someone trying to help you improve your life and the lives of those around you - its just a shame that religions (particularly Christianity) has driven its focus on the former and not the latter.


I found it interesting that you spoke of Christmas "loosing its meaning" - it never had one! The Christmas holiday was 'stolen' from the Pagan Yule-tide. Jesus was rumoured to of been born on the 25th of December and the holiday long ago ceased to be a celebration of 'Our Saviours' life and became more about the contractual aggreement of 'gift' giving - (You'll have the chance to explore that in 'It Shouldn't Be Allowed' at level two, its called The Danger of Reciprocity).

I also shared some of my light-hearted views on antiquated religious beliefs in my blog. I think there is a lot religion should change if it wants to grow back to where it was. Only now perhaps we should make religion more about love and peace as opposed to its past of violence, hatred and dogma.

Being too Religious...

Ok, so i've had a little saying which I refer to amongst my close friends which is "Crazy Christians". It's not an open-attack on Christianity itself, despite the fact that I have some serious issues with this religion... and the least of which is the fact that it sold itself it to conquer the world. Seriously what self-respecting religion sells it self to get bums in seats? When did belief become more interested with numbers than a university eh? Not to say that religion shouldn't suit the times - I mean we understand the patriarchal influences and agenda that plagued and shaped the model for religions in the past - we know that White men used religion as another mode of power and they abused it for their own uses. But what about the crazy people who don't know this?

What about these nut-jobs who think that by blowing themselves up they'll wake up surrounded by virgins who think they're legitimately great people and that by killing a bunch of people who didn't do anything to them they have achieved some great, higher purpose?

I think there's a difference between being religious and being stupid - its when you mix the two together than everything goes to hell (like the pun eh?). Seriously what greater divine being would want you to run around murdering people? Thats not a heavenly God thats a malicious devil. There's no glory in massacre only shame.

I have no problem with religion and belief, but I do ask that 1) it makes a bit of sense and 2) people who practice it learn what a metaphor is.

Fanatics are EVERYWHERE ***shifty-eyes***

Anti-Social Behaviour

We've all seen and witnessed it. Some of us undoubtedly have participated in it - but why are people anti-social so wantonly?

Have you ever walked up to your local shop and see a small (or sometimes big) gang of youths hanging around the entrance, littering, swearing and talking in a dialectal slang so thick you could walk on it? I know I have, they speak another language, they start fights with people who look vulnerable and they're generally abusive to anyone and more recently they've been dubbed as "Chav's" but also go by the names of Townies, Neds and Scallies.

Chav's are more than just assholes who annoy people though. They're an element of youth culture and with it they bring their own style, dress-sense and (lack of?) morals. But what is the underlying force behind this phenomenom?

Glorified bully's and seen by many as a plague on society Chav's torment and ridicule everyone and anyone including other Chav's. Some approaches to explaining this rise in anti-social behaviour tackle it from from Darwinism approach of survival of the fitest. But surely this natural selection theory is dependent upon context - the fittest people to survive in one climate differ from that of a different climate, so what is it in today's society that makes the physcological makeup of a Chav? Or is it just bordom and a lack of discipline and stimulae that breeds these aggressive super-bullies?

Darwin Theory

Nasty Comedy is Most Comedy!

What makes you laugh? Honestly now? Lets just get straight to the point here, nasty things are funny. Of course there is room for a real semantic argument on the whole subject, one persons understanding of the word 'nasty' differs to that of the next person but if I'm walking down a street and I see someone walk into a lamp-post or slip over I will laugh - instinctively and naturally. Sure I may worry for their health or safety if they show signs of legitimate injury but that won't be until after i've had a good laugh at their misfortune.

I also feel a lot for other people in bad situations, old people who maybe aren't treated with the respect that society owes them - handicapped or mentally disabled people who through no fault of their own struggle with the daily practices us perfectly healthy (and fortunate) people completely take for granted. But if someone makes a joke about them I WILL LAUGH. It's not that i'm an unkind or particularly malicious person - I won't tolerate racist or ageist comments if they are uttered with malice or hatred because that isn't funny. But if someone is going to make fun of something for no other reason than a bit of fun and with no real ill-will intended then thats not a bad thing. The first real rule of comedy is that you don't make fun of someone else if you can't make fun of yourself and I truely believe in this rule.

Mat Stone and Trey Parker said it themselves when defending there animated show southpark "The moment we stop making fun of everyone and everything we become racists - if we don't make fun of black people or disabled people then we are singling them out and being racist". SOURCE

Body Modification - Individual or Normal?

How long does it take for motions of rebellion and efforts at individualism to catch on and develop into a trend? How many people get a tattoo to try to make a statement about themselves but just end up with a rose on their left breast or a half-naked women on their bicep. Then Celtic tribal patterns became the 'in-thing' until they were popular and then it was cryptic messages written in Chinese or Japanese and the customer relying heavily on the tattooists ability to read the language.

At first it was guys gettin an ear pierced, then when that caught on it was the cartilage, then it was nose and eyebrows, then tongues and lips. Then the more daring went right on ahead and had there genitals pierced - which really confuses me as noone can even see it. From a male perspective I know a few people with a "Prince Albert" and they explain how it hightens the sexual experience but makes urinating an awkward enterprise, for women I guess it helps the less experienced locate the right areas...

But with everything just becoming another trend where does it end? As each new notion becomes accepted by a wider audience those seeking individuality push it that one step further - you start with a single tattoo and then before you know it you're entire arm is covered in a 'sleeve', you've got a £3000 tattoo that covers you're back and 19 body piercings which are as impracticle as they are grotesque.

Don't get me wrong I totally believe that people should be who they want and that the only person who needs to be happy with YOUR appearance is YOU. But where does it all end? Couldn't you spend all your money on something more worth while? But how am I to judge, but I will say one thing, tattoos and piercings don't make you individual anymore they merely make you common.

I feel unique amongst my peers and friends because I'm only of the only people I know without a tattoo or piercing.

Tattoos and Cattlebrands

Masturbation and Pornography

You show me a man who doesn't masturbate and i'll show you the pope and thats only because his body doesn't work right anymore! Masturbation and pornography are something of a joint prospect now that the internet and ***cough*** free ***cough*** downloading is so readily available. Gone are the days where we had to rely on our imaginations when we felt the urge to tug one off.

But with all this provocative imagery and information flying about what effect is it going to have on our daily lives. The film industry and advertising stategies all ready rely heavily and even prey on mans libido and his preoccupation with sex. Women are objectified in cinema and seduce us half naked on music videos. You can't even see an advert for something as simple as a pair of socks without there being a busty blond demonstrating the product, in slow, subtle and suggestive movements. So with all these religious fanatics and "morally sound" people who are crying about the corruption of our youth and the decadence of present day society - all of which seem to blame the internet and pornography Click here for an Example - what really is to blame and is there anything truely wrong with masturbation and pornography.

Movies, advertising and music videos stir an urge in people - pornography and masturbation sate and satisfy that urge so that we can continue to live productive lives with more on our minds than getting our ends away!

The Glorification of Smoking

I should admit right now that I smoked for years when I was younger. I first tried a cigarrette at around 8 years old, in my parents kitchen, in front of all my dads mates by taking a drag off my dads cigarrette - they all thought it was hilarious; looking back now I don't think it was.

But why do people smoke? Knowing that it can cause disease amongst the other numerous problems health-groups and watchdogs claim (aging of the skin etc) what is the appeal of cigarrettes. I think its a fairly accurate assumption that most people start smoking when they're young now-a-days. Most people, if being honest, will admit they first tried a cigarrette at school, or with there peers/friends when they were young. I know, outside of the experience in my dads kitchen, that I did.

I thought it was cool to smoke, so despite the disgusting taste and the expense of it I tried my hardest to get 'fags' as often as possible and smoked socially. It was more than just something to do when I was bored, it was an image and and it was a statement of rebellion. But why did I think like that? Was it because of the glorification of smoking on television? How many films feature a character smoking in them and how often is that character cast as being a cool person whom we are supposed to look up to? Was it because of my dad's smoking habit that I tried to emulate him in some misguided sense of hero-worship?

No matter why I started smoking there is one thing I can be sure of - quitting was one of the best things I ever did. I've got more money, I'm in a healthier, fitter (more productive, comfortable... sorry Radiohead moment) and better smelling person for it - I'd recommend taking that stage of dedication to anyone and everyone - smoking is bad mmm'kay?

Smoking IS Cool!

The Most Commonly Accepted Drug Today is Alcohol...

It seems like the deep bred stupidity that only us humans seem to have truely mastered could allow us to accept alcohol as a suitable and even encouraged social drug when it really is the most anti-social and disruptive force on our lives.

As a volunteer 'wagon-rider' I can honestly say nothing annoys me more than when someone I go out for a night with insists that I have a drink with them to "have a good time" or some fun. I can't speak for everyone but I'm going to anyway - YOU DO NOT NEED TO GET DRUNK TO HAVE FUN OK? Honestly why do people feel that the only way they can enjoy themselves is to drink rediculously expensive beverages in stupidly large quantities, then loose control of their own basic motorskills, and apparently, commonsense and make a complete idiot out of themselves before stumbling home, picking up some disgusting takeaway that barely meets the requirements to hold the title of 'Food' and passing out in their beds, or over the toilet throwing up. They then wake up in the morning/afternoon with a blinding headache and extreme sensitivity to light and do nothing productive for a whole day whilst swearing they'll never drink again only to repeat the process the next weekend, or in somecases the same night or a few days later.

The worst is the people who feel that having a few "bevvies at the local" is the great way to start a night and then hurling abuse at people and starting a fight with a complete stranger for no real, good reason is part of a good night out.

The sooner people learn that life isn't just about getting wasted on the weekends and working in a job you hate for the other 5 days the sooner society can unshackle itself from these useless and silly cultural norms and progress forward towards some other common goals like, oh i don't know, happiness.

Save yourself - Talk to Frank!