#brokenblogger

Me: These pills aren't working.

Doctor: LET'S GIVE YOU A STRONGER DOSE!

Wait! No! 

I'm pretty sure a side-effect of sleeping pills is supposed to be drowsiness. Yet, here I am, three hours after taking the bloody things and I'm still awake. 

  Maybe I need to try a different tactic with my doctor, like throwing the fucking pills in his face and telling him to shove them up a baboon's arse

I doubt that will work, I still won't be able to sleep. But, it might make me feel better. 

Anyway, here I am, typing, probably ineligibly, ranting about sleeping pills that only work for making me feel like absolute crap without actually helping me sleep. 

Once again, Universities and Lectures are coming under fire, and once again, I'm at my computer trying to defend them. 

The Guardian posted this morning a news-story claiming that lectures should be abolished, and then replaced with "online" lectures that would then be accessible to all students.

Within this philosophy I can already see a number of gaping holes:

(1) Technology, at the best of times, is unreliable, and therefore, no one can guarantee that all students will receive the lectures. 

(2) Students are lazy! I should know, I am one. Most students pass the day by doing the bare minimum. If lectures become solely available "online", I can almost guarantee that the amount of people who use them will be less than the amount of people attending lectures. 

(3) There will be no help available to students. If everything is online, then there will be no face-to-face advice that I have found incredibly valuable during my time at university. 

To say we should abolish lectures because there are faults with them is ridiculous. There are huge faults within compulsory education and no one is suggesting to abolish classes for 11-16 year olds. 

The only thing that I can, even slightly, agree with is that, yes, there are times, when travelling to and fro lectures can be tedious and expensive, but the alternative is going to promote unsociable adults who will have little knowledge on how to communicate when they come to the working world. 

for repeatedly banging on about professional wrestling. 

But this has annoyed me. 

A wrestling great, The Ultimate Warrior, passed away last week, and before anything, I repeat, ANYTHING, was confirmed by medical professionals, the media sought to attack professional wrestling. 

Immediately they go all out to say how wrestling is killing people far too young. One particular video gave a list of wrestlers who died before the age of 40. Here is that list. 

Mike Von Erich

Art Barr

Rick McGraw

Buzz Sawyer

D.J. Peterson

Owen Hart

Gary Albright

Big Dick Dudley

Pitbull #2 

A truly horrifying list of names and their deaths are, indeed, tragic. But to blame professional wrestling for their early departure is facile, and here's why; Mike Von Erich committed suicide. Art Barr's cause of death is, to this day, unknown. Rick McGCraw overdosed on illegal drugs. Buzz Sawyer was murdered. D.J. Peterson was killed in a motorcycle accident.Owen Hart was killed when a stunt went wrong. Gary Albright had a heart-attack (granted, whilst in-ring). Big Dick Dudley suffered from kidney failure and Pitball #2 overdosed on prescription drugs. 

All of those tragic deaths, and only two of them happened whilst in the ring, and one of them was a stunt that went wrong. It had nothing to do with a wrestling match or his lifestyle. Two people, who this news company decide to mention, died in the ring. TWO! 

Then the broadcasters go on to blame the lifestyle. Wrestling made them take drugs. Wrestling made them depressed. Hold on, that's bullshit! 

Why is it that wrestling gets blamed for people taking drugs?

That doesn't happen in the music industry. When Kirk Cobain killed himself no one blamed the music industry. When Amy Winehouse died, no one blamed the music industry. 

Neither does it happen in most other sports industries. When Fabrice Muamba suffered a near-fatal heart-attack whilst on the pitch, no one blamed football. So why is it okay to blame wrestling? Why the hate?

I say that, yes, the death's of these young men are tragic. But is wrestling to blame for their death? No. Not at all! 

I completely understand why some people don't like wrestling. 

I completely understand why some people say it's not as good as it used to be. 

I completely understand why some people view it the way that they do. 

However, I would like to bring something to attention. A lot of people believe that wrestling companies like the WWE promote nothing but violence and poor morales, and it is to those people I present the following link:

http://www.wrestlezone.com/news/276877-video-2k-legends-convention-featuring-ric-flair-jim-ross-steve-austin-ziggler-foley-a-more

Taking into account that the video is over an hour long I will summarise my point. Ric Flair tells the story of how, when he lost his son, the company he worked for, and later turned his back on, treated him and cared for him like family. 

It's a moments like this that people should realise that the WWE is not all about violence and that there are people behind the characters; people who bond, form relationships, become friends and ultimately, become family. 

By all accounts, Ric's story is beautifully tragic, but does show the world of professional wrestling in a completely different light. 

I understand that Chelsea have, by far, been a better team than Manchester United this year. 

But I am sick of hearing the bias commentators who praise Chelsea in a light that teams like United would not receive. 

Surely, football commentators should be unbias and completely neutral but apparently, this is not part of the job description. 

Prime example, Lampard has just made a foul and been given a yellow card. Both commentators agreed that the foul was unfair and card-worthy, but then continue on to say how Lampard "took one for the team" and was "brave" to do so. 

If a United player were to commit such a foul, they would be dragged over hot coals and commentators would berate them and likely say that they deserved to be sent-off. 

If a player, on any team, concedes a free-kick for their actions, surely the response from commentators should be exactly the same no matter who the player is. 

But apparently not. . . 

I've heard a lot of people demean creative writing classes because "it's not an actual skill" and "all you're doing is writing stories" and to these people I say, "that's a crock of shit." 

 If we ignore the fact that my creative writing course has given me the tools to master my craft and, instead, focus on the personal side of writing, how about we mention the fact that without my course, I would in no way feel confident enough to write anything that would go on to a publisher. 

I've learnt my strengths, and I've learnt my weaknesses, and you know why that is? It's because my tutors have been able to show me where I'm stronger and where I'm weaker. 

  And then, and only then, have I been able to better myself. If you're under the impression that all we do is write "stories" then please, message me personally, and I will give you a very long rant about how that is not the case. 

Most importantly, my course, the thing that "I drag my arse along to three times a week", has enabled me to stop calling myself a "person who writes" and start calling myself a "writer". 

Is it just me or does the internet hate men?

I keep seeing blog posts and Facebook shares that serve no other purpose than to berate the male demographic. 

Yes, I get it. Men can be bastards, but guess what internet, so can women. 

Men are supposedly known for being the most sexist and vulgar sex, but my guess is, most of the comments that appear online are females being sexist about males.

Many of these posts are cleverly structured to make them sound like pep-talks for the everyday female, but it is still sexism. If men were on, what seems like a mission to berate every aspect of female life, then there would be hell to pay. Men wouldn't get away with it! 

The most annoying posts, in my opinion, are saying that "men will break your heart," (and the alike) and I'm sitting here thinking that WOMEN DO THAT TOO! 

Women fuck up, women fuck others when they shouldn't and as I have already stated, women are just (or more) as sexist as men. 

without some pretentious prick telling them that they're wrong?

I seriously don't understand the big deal.

"Oh, you like motorcars. . . cool."  - Is that so difficult? No one is asking you to engage in a conversation about the subject. No one is asking for your opinion. So why do you feel the need to berate the people around you just because you disagree?

As far as I'm concerned you could be fascinated with Moustached Midget Wrestling if that is what you enjoy, and I would have no right to tell you that what you enjoy is wrong.

So I ask you this (and by "you" I mean everyone who has to pick apart someone because of what they enjoy): Keep your opinion to yourself. No one wants it.

If you think that rock is music is full of long-haired hippies, great. No one cares, especially not the people who enjoy rock music.

If you think football is full of talentless arseholes, wonderful. No one cares, especially not the people who enjoy football.

(Are you seeing a theme here? I sure hope so, I really don't want to list every single past-time)

In closing, shut up. No one cares.

Thanks,