Thursday, 21 May 2015

Today's Likes and Dislikes

I shall now sit here, in the chill air, and write a list of things that I'm either liking or disliking today:

1. I am disliking the constant misapplication of the word 'misogyny'.  I read female-centric blog sites occasionally, and see this insidious phenomenon occurring more than it should.  If you're wondering how often this misapplication should occur in order to be still considered acceptable the answer is: never.  Yet it's been recurring at the rate of gonorrhoea in a gay bath house pre-1980s Safe Sex Days. I blame frigging Julia Gillard for this.  When she blew up in Question Time and yelled about 'misogyny' whilst referring to Abbott, she set off a disastrous chain reaction that has resulted in the bloody word, which means a deep-seated mistrust and loathing of women, being used in instances of casual sexism and chauvinistic buffoonery.  I've just been complaining on a social media thread after it appeared AGAIN in an article, and suggested the author of the article get a dictionary. 

2.  I am disliking that it is cold and wet today, and I had to work.  I like being at home when it's cold and wet. 

3.  I am disliking the she-tool driving the taxi who cut me off on the roundabout today.  You, madam, are a complete moron.  I was already on the roundabout, and well and truly coming around the arc approaching the point from where you intended to enter, and therefore I had right of way.  You chose to ignore this and came hooning into my line of drive, thus causing me to slam on my brake and let forth a string of profanities from my mouth that would have embarrassed the Navy.

4. I am disliking the discovery I made upon my return home from work that my mini foxie had puked on the cushion I inherited from my late aunt. I had hoped to make a nice comforting cup of hot chocolate, and instead was faced with a solid mass of khaki coloured dog effluvium with which I had to deal.  I dealt accordingly, and managed to keep my gorge down.

5. I am liking being right.  Again, with the social media argument theme, I found myself in discussion about the pending appeal of the dude who burned down the nursing home in Quakers Hill in 2011.  The question was asked should he have legal aid funding for his appeal.  I stated if he met the criteria for funding, then yes.  I stand by that.  I was told it would cost $3K per day, and it was his sixth appeal.  I pointed out we have two appellate courts in Australia, being the Court of Criminal Appeal  and the High Court.  I asked for clarification of this sixth appeal, and none was forthcoming.  Some friends of mine weighed into the discussion, which stemmed from a fallacious article.  Of my three weighing-in friends, two are criminal defence lawyers (and one did for a long time specialise in legally aided appeals), and are therefore well equipped to point out the facts.  I will also point out of have a background in criminal law, for those of you who don't know this.  What really got us irked, is the original article was based on misinformation and particularly designed to inflame.  I will point out the appeal is not costing the taxpayer $3,000 per day, and it is only his first appeal - which has had some extensions of time.  An adjournment or extension of time is not the same as a new appeal.  Okay?

6. I am liking that I am about to make that hot chocolate.  My appetite has returned since the Great Disposal Of Dog Puke Drama, so I think I will enjoy it.  So will my kids, home from school.

No comments:

Post a Comment