My Two Cents

I haven't been blogging this last week, and that's mainly because when it's school holidays, my kids commandeer the 'pute. Also, I've been working a lot, and tutoring a fair bit, too. However, today I am commencing two weeks of holiday, and want to resume my writing.

But what is there to write about? The things that seem to be clogging up my newsfeed lately involve the Duke and Duchess of Sussex - and I'm sure they still retain those titles. I would like to know why Murdoch-helmed news (hah!) programs feel they have to draw comment from Thomas Markle and Samantha Markle. These two clumps of toxic toad smegma talk absolute shit. If it's not those two, the other persons approached for opinion seem to be Katie Hopkins, another toad-jizz globule who talks shit, only really spiteful shit; and Piers Morgan, who is one step away from being totally tragic in his constant nasty commenting and tweeting about Meghan. Seriously, Piers, she didn't want to be your friend, now get over it - you sound like the male equivalent of a bunny boiler, and frankly I can understand why she doesn't want you in her life.

Let's get a little perspective here, folks:

1. Harry is in his mid-thirties, and pretty capable of making up his own mind about his life, so stop complaining that he's abandoned the 'firm', or that he's pussy-whipped by his wife. We don't know if he is, and the only people who know if he is are the people directly concerned.

2. Harry is sixth in line to the throne, so his stepping back really has bugger-all impact on what happens in the House of Windsor.

3. Harry lost his mother when he was only twelve years old, and we all know the circumstances leading up to Diana's death, so it's quite feasible he wouldn't want his own family to deal with this needless drama.

Just leave 'em alone!

The other thing that's got everyone upset is a $20K arts grant and Paris residency that has been awarded to Yassmin Abdul-Mageid. I neither like nor dislike Yassmin; I've never met her.  Anyway, to the naysayers (particularly Pauline Hanson and Amanda Vanstone), let me play Devil's advocate:

1. Did Yassmin apply for the grant in accordance to the terms and conditions? If so, then what's the problem?

2. Did the judging committee rule Yassmin met the criteria and rule accordingly and in good faith as per their mandate? If so, then what's the problem?

To Pauline, who complains art grants are a waste of taxpayer's money, here's a challenge: spend the next week listening to no music, viewing no television, watching no movies, and reading no books (oh, wait - you've probably never opened a book in your life). Then tell me art is a waste. Oh by the way, you were willing to compromise our safety by sucking up to the NRA. How's that working out for you?

To Amanda, who's complained about the $20,000 grant: Scott Cam received a salary of $345K. What do you say to that?

Anyway, I have an article to work on. It's about ME, and it's for an online arts zine.

Thanks for reading.