So Apple has censored the German Bildzeitung's app which includes Bild's famous naked girl (Bild, for those of you who don't know, is a famous German tabloid, and apparently they always feature a "page-three girl" on page 1. If you have the app, you can shake your iphone and the girl undresses! (how exciting! *not*)
As this obviously involves naked breasts, Apple has decided that it is unsafe to have on an iphone, which is a clean and family-friendly toy. That was, as I understand it, after the banned the page-three girl from the normal Bild-app, which, I suppose, lets you read the paper on your iphone.

a link to the article in Spiegel-online
, german only, but I'm sure you'll find something if you google.

Now, I don't have an iphone nor have I ever read even a single page of a Bild-paper. But I call censorship when I see it, and this is censorhip, and it sucks. Sure, it's only the naked girl, but what if next time, Apple doesn't like something that Bild writes? Will they ban that as well? And what is it about the naked girl anyway? It
always shocks me how afraid US-americans are of breasts. So afraid that livejournal would likely delete this post if I were to use an icon showing a nipple with it. (since I am posting via email, I cannot even choose an icon, so no danger there). Are BREASTS really so scary that we have to value the protection of our kids not to be
exposed to OMG!BREASTS higher than freedom of speech?

I don't think so.

(and let's not get into the whole "why do your kids have an iphone unsupervised and why were they allowed to get that app?")

Personally, I'm hoping for a legal showdown. It's not completely unlikely that German courts could force Apple to accept Bild's app on the iPhone, and that seems to me the kind of sign that The World According to Apple desperately needs right now. I for one, am not going to buy an iPhone anytime soon, that much is sure.

On the other hand //beginning of sarcasm//, this kind of censorship could be a really good thing. I own a LG tv, for example. I never watch tv, because the programs over here are so bad. What if LG could ban the programs they don't like from my TV? Tell [insert network of your choice) to stop producing [insert really bad show of your
choice], or it will be forever banned from LG tvs! Other companies could have similar deals, so you could choose your program by buying the right tv! no more zapping, no more changing channels, buy the right TV and be sure never to have to endure anymore news about Twilight on your tv, ever again! Of course, if you wanted one TV for
the kids to watch Disney channel on and one where you can watch Queer as Folk, you'd probably have to buy two tvs, but whose counting? (also, I doubt there'd be any more Queer as Folk, so good riddance, one less show to steal your precious time).
And it would work the other way around as well: cancel the CEO's favourite show? On no, network, don't do it, or we will ban you from our hardware! Kill of the favourite character? I don't think so, you don't wanna get banned, network!

See what I mean? Censorship can be brilliant!

You could do the same thing with practically everything, like books, for example. Imagine if would ban all the really crappy books from their store - book-buying would be so easy! I mean, if all the bad books are banned, logically all that remains are good books!

Of course, amazon would never do that.

Or, wait, they already did!

The one thing I know for certain is, that if I were king of the world, the world would be a lot different, and it certainly wouldn't be the world according to Apple, or Google, or Microsoft (though I'm beginning to think that Microsoft is the least evil of potential world rules, and how did that happen?). So, let's not give Apple and Co. the chance to become king. Trust me, my world would be a lot more fun with
a lot less censorship.

In the meantime,Google is being invested by the European Commission due to possible infractions of anti-trust laws. According to Microsoft and Co., Google supposedly discriminates them in their search algorithm.

I'm amused.

One last random suggestion: If all this censorhip talk hurts your brain, why don't you send your toys on a trip to Prague, completely uncensored. Unless your toys are naked, of course.
oceana: (Default)
( May. 5th, 2009 01:05 am)
Sometimes I want to run around naked in public, screaming "look, I can be naked and you can look at my nakedness and we are not going to hell!!!"

(well, I am, but that's because of all the gay porn I read)

This midnight rant (midnight rants are always a bit shorter than normal rants, plus, it's already 1 a.m.) was brought to you by Oceana's general fedupness (totally a word) with prudishness in general, and in the US in particular. (sorry, but it's true)
The story of Christian the Lion that has been linked all over makes me incredibly angry.

There is no such thing as a pet lion. Life is not a Disney movie. Animals have a RIGHT to be animals and not pets that, and I'm quoting from an article here, spent [their] days lounging in furniture shops.

Good for those two guys to rescue the lion cub, but keeping him with them, making him a PET just for a little wile, is cruel beyond believe. So they helped reintegrate him into the wild when they couldn't handle him anymore (and we'll get to that later), but they should have been the very first thing to do. Teach that lion cub to be a LION. A lion is not a fucking pet, for God's sake, and I need to repeat this , because it makes me MAD.

About the reintroducing into the wild - I don't believe one word of it. I do think it's possible that a lion who was reintroduced would recognize them, but I don't believe that the female lion would let herself be touched by them as well, unless she, too, was a deeply traumatized animal, as traumatized as this poor lion Christian was after growing up with humans. What makes me doubt the truth of this story is that the other man is with them, Adamson, I suppose, who supposedly helped them reintegrate. Yes, maybe they are living in the wild, but let's not kid ourselves - that lion is only able to survive their because it's a lion - any physically weaker animal wouldn't have survived the abuse it had suffered from the humans before.

Oh, and the fact that it's "on tv" isn't such a good argument for it being true either. Just saying.

But what really makes me mad is this: the story, the decisions of these boys to raise the cub, took place in the 70. The world was a different place back then. Our understanding for wild animals was different then. And that's why it makes me so incredibly angry that it is presented today as a sob story, oh, look at the cute lion, he hasn't forgotten his "owners", his "friends". IT'S A FUCKING WILD ANIMAL! GIVE IT THE RESPECT AND DIGNITY IT DESERVES!!!!

Today, this story should at least be told from a different perspective. I mean, after the Harry Potter books and movies, parents in the UK suddenly bought their kids owls, because the kids wanted the as a pet (owl=wild animal=no pet), and that was only a few years ago. I doubt they are going to buy their kids lions now, but the owl story shows that out countries still have a lot to learn when it comes to protecting the wild. And I say "our countries" because I don't want to point at any country in particular. Just saying that you wouldn't even be allowed to buy an owl, let alone a lion over here. Anyway, the story about Christian the lion teaches exactly the wrong thing in that regard. it teaches us that life is a Disney movie and that animals are worth our time and money if they are cute and give us a kiss in return. Oh, and that it's totally okay to keep a lion as a pet if your appartment were big enough, I guess.

It could have been a good story. It could have been a moving story. If they had at least made the effort to make people think a little, instead of just showing the Disney version.

Lots of love for poor Christian, no love for the humans,
oceana: (Default)
( Jul. 1st, 2008 11:48 pm)
I'd just like to remind the internet that the world does not revolve around the United States of America.

As this is a fact, I'd like to remind the US- American part of the internet further that it should not presume to know everything about my country, any other European country, or Europe as a whole simply because they know things about the USA. Europe, as I believe should be obvious, is NOT the US.

And trust me, the frequent occurrence of bare, female breasts on TV and the lack of freely available guns are not the only differences between the US and Europe.

Thank you. I feel better now that we've cleared that up.
oceana: (Default)
( Apr. 7th, 2008 10:08 am)
1) See this face? This is my WTF-face. More precisely, my
*stares outside*
You've got to be kidding me, weather.

Moving on.

2) When I inform a newsletter of a fandom that I am not very active in
about two recs I've made in said fandom, and I fail to give precise
links, because they were right up there on the top of the page and I
have no idea about the newsletters linking policy, I understand that
someone would say "thank you for informing us about the recs, but
maybe next time could you give precise links?".

Yes, I could. Sorry I didn't.

However, when I'm told that you have oh-so-kindly included the recs,
but will not do so next time because I failed to comply with your
community rules (it's not in your community rules, btw), I don't think
there will be a next time. I don't really care much if your readers
know about my recs, I was just being nice.

3) I revived my laptop yesterday, or rather, I killed all the data to
"recover" it (why anyone would think "recovery cd" was an appropriate
name for a program that basically kills everything I just don't know).

But it's working again. I may have lost a few bookmarks and a few
fics, but I had backups of mostly everything. And I have a working
laptop again, yay!
On the other hand, now the red opera-"o"s symbolizing a saved html
file have disappeared. Any ideas how to change that?
I hate AUs where a canon male character is a woman.

I don't mean temporary sex changes, in fact, I love temporary sex changes. So much fun. Such easy slash plot devices. So very good if done correctly, with all the angst and fear that would be involved (though sadly hardly ever written like that.) No, I mean whole universes where Daniel is a woman, or most recently, Cameron is a woman. I think the last one is the most disappointing for me, because I worship [ profile] synecdochic as an author, and it's even worse when there's a new story of one of your favourite authors appearing on your flist, a story you really want to read, and then you can't because it contains one of your biggest squicks.

I just don't understand the need for this kind of AU. What's the idea, what are people trying to explore? Is it the question what would have been if Cameron/Jack/Daniel whever had been a woman? What wouls have been different? As far as we know, not a damn thing, except that it would have been easier for them to have sex with each other. Unless there's some social criticism in there saying that they wouldn't have been able to have the career they had as a woman, in that case (though I've never read that), in which case I'd just point and laugh and and then gone off to have sex with Sam, who is way sexier than those mutated turned-into-female-thing versions of my favourite men. Oh, you mean they would have been different if they were women?

I agree. They wouldn't have had a penis. Other than that, I don't think we can grasp how they would have been different, because the whole question of why we became who we are is complicated enough without adding the sex issue into it. Especially if the character you are working with has already become who they are. I've never seen it done convincingly. Actually, most people don't even try, they just write a twisted female version of the male characters I love, a woman who swears and is a bit macho and likes to wear leather. All the stereotypes that go into this kind of writing are too much to handle for my brain. It hates it.

And then there is the thing where I like men. I really really like men. I like them for being male. I like to look at them, to touch them, to see them move and be silly little show-offs when they point their guns at things. I like them losing their confidence a little when they see a beautiful woman. All those stereotypes that I can't handle when they are turned into a woman? I like them when they are men. I've nailed the problem, haven't I? I'm a sexist. I don't like the same things in men and women.

Which is not true for several reasons: 1) I would like the same characteristics in men and women, if they were the same. But they aren't. If someone is a woman, their characteristics, they stereotypes they fulfill, will be female. You cannot change that. You may associate some of them with men, but they are not, because that person is a woman. If Jack likes to point his gun at things, that a male thing. If Sam likes to point her gun at things, that's a female thing.
See what I did there? Men and women aren't all that different. Except that they are male and female. And that's what my brain can't handle (and sees not point in ding so): if a character is a man (like Daniel, or Cameron), and is turned into a woman, is put into an AU where he has always been a woman, the things he does should be female things. Except they are not, because DANIEL IS A MAN. Even if he is not.
*brain explodes*
I don't have the feeling I'm making this very clear, but it isn't. (it's a female thing... *g*)

2) The characteristic treats most often given to a man as a woman are the worst male stereotypes. Swearing. Reluctance to clean things. General bad behaviour. Promiscous sexual behaviour. All the things we do NOT like (at least I don't) in the real men we like. And then, at the same time, "typical" female characteristics are introduced, clothes are often emphasized, like someone wearing a skirt, while at the same time, care is taken to show that the turned character is not a "typical" woman (yes, I'm trying to imply that there is no "typical" woman, you don't have to remind me.) This leads to these characters being strange, hybrid creatures, creatures that I would not ever find attractive if I were to meet them in real life, for the simple reason that they are too contructed. Too unreal. I like men. I like women,. I don't think I like mixtures. And that's maybe the worst thing for me personally, that these writers take away my chance to be attractedl, to fall in love a with my characters a little bit more, as it should be after reading a good fanfic.

Before any of those crazy, purple wearing feminists jump me, let me get into the whole sexual equality issue. Well, not the whole one, obviously, just a part of it. Yes, I'm sure by cutting off Daniel/Cameron/Jack's penis you are making a big statement about gender equality, but what about Sam? Why doesn't she ever get turned into a man? (if she does, please sent links). Or, come to think of it, since there are a couple of (bad) slash fics in a number of fandoms where everyone is a man, why aren't there any where everyone is a woman? Oh, right, because then we'd ahve to write femslash, and we aren't too big on the femslash here in happy slasher's land. Femslash, in our subculture ruled by women (sorry guys, but you really are the minority here), is almost rare. Not that I'm unhappy that Sam doesn't get turned into a man more often, I like her just the way she is.

One more thing where I feel as if I have to defend myself before I unleash this Wednesday morning rant into the public: I said that men and women aren't that different. I did NOT however say that they are the same. I'm a woman. I like being a woman. No, I don't think there should be anything I can't do because I'm a woman, and I'm lucky to live in a society where being a woman is actually an advantage. But when I here a feminist say that women should have the same rights as men because there are "the same", I want to scream and yell and hit things.

I am NOT the same as a man. I am a WOMAN. I LIKE being a woman. I can have children, I have breasts, my skin is soft like silk, and when I get down on my knees for a man, it's a whole different dynamic then if I were a man. I thank you very much for not taking this away from me by pretending that I'm the same as a man. I am NOT A MAN.

Yes, all those things I used to show how I am different are sexual things. Breasts, skin, let's not forget the good old vagina (here, finally, I have managed to scare off the last of my few, male readers). Some of you will think that this, in itself, is a discrimination. That I'm reducing women to sexual beings by pointing out there those are the only differences. But isn't that the wole point? That the only thing in which we are, or should be, truly different, are the things that come right from our sex, that I have breast and you, man, don't? In everything else, we are not that different. Except, Sam likes to point her gun at things, she is a woman, if Jack does it, he is a man. And I thank you not to change that.

Caveat commentor: This is a spontaneous, Wednesday morning rant that most likely made me late for work. Even more likely, some of the things in here are exaggerated and simplified for the sake of the argument. I went from not liking Cameron as a woman to gender equality issues in about fifteen minutes, you gotta love fandom, but yeah, it's fifteen minutes. If it had been Thursday, I would probably have seen things a bit differently, and on Sundays I never like men much and I would have never started this rant. Please keep this in mind before you startyelling at me.
Moody, you say?
Hell, sure. I'm allowed to. I'm a woman after all. ;-)
oceana: (Default)
( Aug. 5th, 2007 03:24 pm)
I'm this close to unfriending people. And not the ones that have a different opinion from mine, but the ones that keep being insanely unreasonable about this whole thing drive me crazy. Can people please behave like adults again?

[ profile] metafandom "mysteriously" links only to posts that are in favor of THE BIG MOVE that's not going to happen unless you are twelve years old and throwing a fit or you like twelve-years olds, without or without fits, way too much. What annoys me most is that these are the same people who will cry blue murder when someone writes fiction which goes against their rules. I'm thinking of one remarkable Supernatural wank here.

I already stated my opinion on the strikethrough (two! TWO! journals. With GRAPHIC content that raised hairs on my neck, and trust me, nothing but incest usually does. Yes, let's call it a strikethrough. Right.)

But I'm getting so annoyed when I read my flist that I feel I need to say something else.

We all know that all the sites that everyone is so excited about moving to will have and implement the same policies LJ is implementing now. There is no sign that they will be any clearer on what exactly is against their policy.

Has repeatedly given us more icons when we cried fro them.
Is continuously improving its features, even if the result isn't always 100%.
Has brought us features like scrapbook, photobucket support, youtube embedding and phone posts. Can also be used via email and SMS.
Has accepted and yes, I dare say supported, fandom for all these years, and still accepts lots of content that is WAY off mainstream even for fandom.
Has a support team that answers questions within a very reasonable amount of time.
Has a DIVERSE and active community of people, who do not always agree, but at least you can be outspoken for anything without getting shunned (try that on journalfen...)
Is remarkably reliable and has next to no downtime for such a big community, and if they do, the compensate paid users.
Tries. Real hard. Okay, so sometimes they fail, and yes, they should start hiring professionals, but they try.

Other places:
I can't generally say much about them, because I haven't spent much time there, but here's a few facts:
Journalfen, run by fen who like to wank, apparently refused to delete someone's real identity from a comment. Not knowing details about this I don't want to discuss if it was right or wrong, just stating that it makes me feel a queasy about the service. I also remember the total unreasonable behavior of the people who (claimed to ) run the site when some Narnia archive got a C&D. LJ's management was nothing against that.
Conveniently doesn't allow invite codes or the creation of new free accounts anymore when fandom threatens to migrate. I'm sure they made quite a lot of money on fen these last days.
No change in the navigation in the last years, tons of dead links, yep, someone really seems to care about its users.

Hasn't once changed the layout, which is not very user friendly, in the four years I've had my account there.
Has promised 1000 icons, then deleted more than 300 that I had saved over there because apparently I wasn't active enough. Not that I know why they deleted them, it's not as if they had given me a warning or a reason. Not even when I asked.
From the one time I tried to contact them (see above), I got the feeling that they have no customer support whatsoever.

Is too new for me to say anything good or bad about them, but it doesn't support Opera. You firefox people could probably care less, but even if I were willing to leave LJ, which I'm not, I sure as hell won't change my browser.

In the unlikely case (I hope) that you are as annoyed by me speaking up for lj as I am by people running around like screaming squirrels crying "Migrate me! Migrate me!", feel free to unfriend.

Oh, and [ profile] metafandom? Please don't link. It would ruin your censorship.
Dear writer,

it's bad enough that you are using the term "the elder man" to describe one of the characters in your fic.

It's even worse that you are using it in a scene where someone has fingers in places of said "elder man" that I cannot mention without putting this under a cut-tag (I'm prude, sue me).

But if all this happens when you are writing Jensen/Jared porn, and the "elder man" in question is Jensen Ackles, then that's just wrong. Incredibly, undescribably wrong. WRONG.

Usually it's the pictures in my head that I need to scrub away after reading bad porn, but this has offended my whole sense of language and writing and just everything so much that I'm almost afraid to read any other porn today, for fear this might happen again. Or that I could start thinking about innocent other characters as "the elder man" when I'm reading porn.

You RUINED my Saturday porn reading!

No love
Apparently the cold has us all locked inside and in front of our computers, where we have nothing better to do than to rant. And the rant du jour seems to be incest fic, once again.

In Which I Write An Essay About Not Writing An Essay

I, too, was tempted to write yet another essay about incest fic, which I did, actually, quite a good one too, if I may say so. The more I think about it, the more interesting (at least to me) my conclusions become. But after following the recent discussions, I don't feel like posting it anymore, for one simple reason: 90% of fandom seems to be unable to have a reasonable discussion about any fannish subject, especially a delicate one like incest fic. I don't mean people flaming the writer, no, I mean the simple process of reading an essay, understanding it and reacting to the arguments made within. Look at any discussion in fandom and you will find, as I myself have often experienced, that the replies of the author often begin with "As I said before...".

I'm tired of this. It's one thing that people can't properly voice their own arguments. I'm a lawyer, I expect to be better at that than others. It's another, more annoying thing, if people bring up something that is an argument, but that is completely beside the point. Many fannish discussions read to me like this:

Me: "Cows can be black and white."
Commenter:"If I want my dogs to be yellow then I can damn well MAKE them yellow."
Me: *bangs head against the wall*

The sad thing, and also the reason why it is an agonizing process to try to follow these discussions, is that people often react to that kind of statement. Which means that an essay that was supposed to be about the color of cows, ends up being a controversy about dog food. Of course, if we'd actually talk about cows and dogs, people would be able to make the distinction, but take any more intelligent subject and they are not. Which is not to say that cows and dogs are not intelligent, oh no, I would never say that. (see how I barely avoided having the first comment to this be something like "but cows are very intelligent!"?)

What annoys me most, however, is that people are not even able to understand a text in the first place. Write certain key words, like incest, rape, slash=feminism or Rodney's nipples in any context, and you can be sure to get the same results from the same people, no matter what the rest of your text says. Which proves that

a) some people don't even bother to read your opinion (but react to the keyword and then are rude enough to comment and expect their opinion about Rodney's nipples to be read, even though they didn't care to read yours)


b) some people try to read the rest of your arguments, but are unable to understand them (and then, maybe not even realizing that they didn't understand them, comment on the keywords anyway).

Option a) makes me angry, option b) makes me just sad. Unfortunately, it's hard to tell them apart, and so my participation in fannish discussions often ends in frustration and many *bangs head against wall* comments. But don't get frustrated, you are not alone with your insufficient reading comprehension skills. Many highschool kids today can barely follow a comic book.

I admit that as a lawyer, I feel sort of responsible when people don't understand my arguments. After all, I'm getting paid to put legal facts into words that laymen can understand. If I'm not able to write an argument on a fannish subject in a way that other fans can understand, I'm doing something wrong. Or so I thought for a long time, which was even more frustrating. But that's not it at all. It all depends on the audience. As a lawyer, I can't choose my audience, but as a fan, I can. And I will, because unlike in real life, no one here pays me for talking to the stupid people. So I choose not to have discussions with people who are too stupid to understand me anymore, or with people who are so rude that they ignore what I'm saying. Yes, I referred to people as stupid. Get over it.

I will still happily participate in any intelligent discussion, with people who are intelligent enough to understand me (and I, hopefully, am intelligent enough to understand them). But it also means that I will ignore all the "My Dog is YELLOW" people, whose "arguments" don't even deservce to be called arguments. An argument, by definition, is a statement in support of another statement. Meaning: if you read an essay and want to respond to it, your statement should respond to something the author of the essay said (preferably in said essay, which seems to be yet another problem for some people). A statement about dogs, no matter how true, cannot be an argument in a discussion about cows. It's that simple.

Two arguments I'd especially like to never EVER see again (oh, I wish!) are the following:

1) Fiction is not reality.
This can be found in any fannish discussion. I think there is a Secret Club somewhere, whose members detect fannish discussion only to insert a "Fiction is not reality" comment in one of its many incarnations, and then wait to see what happens. And lo and behold, someone always falls for it.

I'm not quite sure what the "Fiction is not reality" is supposed to say, since it is, as shown above, rarely if ever used as a real argument. Most often it appears in a context that makes me think that whoever wrote it wants to say something like that: "Fanfiction is not reality, therefore everything is allowed, especially as it is based on fictional characters."

This is wrong for many reasons. While I can whole-heartedly agree with the statement "Fiction is not reality.", I cannot agree with the implied "fanfiction is not reality."

See, many fans forget that - unlike writers of original fiction, whose only limit is their imagination, - fanfic writers have a reality. TV, books, comics, whatever you base your fanfic on is your reality. Fanfiction is therefore a special kind of fiction, one that is based on imagined events while at the same time making claims about its "source reality." It is a mixture between fiction and non-fiction. With the source reality also being fiction and thus being a lot more flexible than real events, fanfic has much more possibilities than "real" non-fiction, but they are not endless.

In other words: if you state in your fanfic that Dean is driving a white Ferrari, and has always done so, your are wrong. (Yes, fanfic writers can be wrong, and people are allowed to say it!) On the other hand, if you want to write a fanfic in which Dean's car mysteriously turns into a white Ferrari (car-changing demon, perhaps, or crossover with Miami Vice), the fiction part of fanfic allows you to do so. You don't even have to explain yourself to your readers, though in my experience readers appreciate some kind of explanation for blatant changes in canon (=your reality).

2) The other "argument", my favourite one, without which no fannish discussion is complete, is the wonderful

If you don't like it, you don't have to read it!!!

Apart from the fact that this is not an argument (see above) and therefore has no right to be in the discussion (and you can tell that it doesn't feel welcome by the way it stands there, all alone or in groups, accompanied by the heated exchange of progressively irrelevant reactions), apart from that, it is true.

Completely true.

If I don't like a fic, I don't have to read it.

Well, let me tell you something: If I don't like a fic, I may not HAVE to read it, but I can still do so if I want. And you know what? I can then tell you or anyone else that I don't like it. I can even say why I didn't like it. This is even more true for a whole genre of fiction, but really, it goes for your individual fic, too.

As long as you can throw out your fics into the public where anyone can see or read them, people are allowed to react to them. You don't get to tell people that they were not supposed to read your fic. If you are allowed to write and publish your fics, I am certainly allowed to have an opinion about them and to WRITE about that opinion, on the internet, in public, where everyone can read it. Even you.

If you don't like my opinion?

Oh, you don't have to read it.

Thank you, and good night.
oceana: (Default)
( May. 25th, 2006 12:43 pm)
Okay, first let me say this: I really appreciate that people are creating fiction archives and are maintaining them, fixing them, improving them etc. I couldn't do it, so I'm glad others can.

Then let me ask you this: if you have an archive, is it really so hard to keep the links to the stories the same, for, say a period of more than three months?

If it is really really hard, impossible to do, I apologize for what I am going to say, but since I know about 100 archives whose links work for years, I will be a bitch and assume that it cannot be that hard to do. So if the fucking NCIS fiction archive changes its links about 10 times a year, I have every right to complain, don't I?

I keep a recs page, and yes, it may not be the best recs page of all times, but I have almost 500 recs up there, 72 of which are NCIS recs. Now, I'm sure there are other NCIS recs sites, but right now I can't think of any with an equal amount of NCIS recs. It's not like I do nothing for this fandom, so I think I deserve the right to be a bit bitchy about this. And one thing I can tell you for sure: it's damn hard to keep a good recs page if you have to update all your links every other months, because they change all the time.

But that's it, no more NCIS fiction archive linking for me unless it's absolutely necessary. And if it wasn't the only NCIS specific archive out there, I would pull my fics as well, cause really, what's the point ofhaving them there if nobody can find them?

//Thursday morning rant

If you need me, I'll be at [ profile] oceanas_recs changing about 50 links.
*goes off, bitching to herself some more*
oceana: (Default)
( Dec. 22nd, 2005 10:33 am)
Let's take a look at some basic, english grammar, shall we?

1) To lie, lied, lied = to make an untrue statement with intent to deceive
(for those of you who didn't finish highschool: the first one is the infinitive (lie), the second the simple past (lied), the last the past participle (lied).
The present participle is lying.

That leaves us with the following examples:
He lied about his age.
He had lied to him before.
I know he was lying about his age.

2) To lie, lay, lain = to be or to stay at rest in a horizontal position
Present participle: lying

He lies on the bed.
He lay perfectly still, hoping that the tiger wouldn't eat him.
If he had lain perfectly still, he'd still be alive today.
He is lying on the bed when he sees the tiger approach him.

3) (and here is where it really gets tricky) To lay, laid, laid = to put or set down; to place for rest or sleep;
Present participle: laying

Now I lay me down to sleep. (I'm not even sure if this is correct, but I assume that it would have to be 'me" rather than the reflexive 'myself' because 'lay' stands necessarily with an object, so the reference to the subject isn't really reflective. But who knows?)
I laid the money on the table and left.
He has laid the money on the table.

Notice how this is the act of putting is something down. The object that is placed somewhere is passive in your sentence. You can lay yourself down but you canNOT order someone to "Lay down on the bed!"
So the more dominant of you (generic you, meaning writers in general, not anyone specific on my flist) should write
"Lie down on the bed, bitch!"
"Lay her down on the bed, slave!"

And if you absolutely have to include spanking (I don't mind spanking from time to time), please, please , don't write "Whack - whack - whack", especially not in direct speech, because it makes me think that the character is saying "Whack - whack - whack!". Or - to put it in spanking terms -it hurts my brain, not my bottom.

As you all know, I'm not a native speaker. I make my fair share of mistakes. Let's not even mention the typos. The correct use of the comma in the english language will forever remain a mystery to me, but I try my best. The whole lie, lay, lie etc. thing is something I learned in highschool (well, not the spanking thing, obviously.) It is really not that hard to remember and there are thousands of websites and essays dedicated to this little problem. So if you know that you tend to use it incorrectly, look it up. Ask. Get a beta.

Next we learn why words like "definately" and "competant" do not exist, and why you maybe should have take those latin classes after all.

This was your morning rant, brought to you be the letter 'B' and [ profile] oceana_, as a shameless excuse to use the pretty Skinner icon that I snatched from [ profile] literati.
oceana: (Default)
( Sep. 6th, 2005 08:44 am)
Don't get me wrong, I'm all about the crediting and the commenting and the generally being nice to the people who make the wonderful icons I use.

But if someone thinks he can order me to be nice, I'd rather use somebody else's icons, no matter how pretty the others are. Is it just me or is there an amazing number of icon posts lately that go like this:

- You HAVE TO credit me!
- You have to comment, otherwise you cannot take an icon.
- Do not ask me stupid questions.
- Blanks are not bases you idiots.
- You have to stand on your head for 30 minutes and praise my icon making skills, you maggots, or I shall not share the pretties.

I comment, I credit, I try to be nice. But I do not appreciate being ordered to do so.

Now let's see what else this day of not-sitting/walking funnily brings.
(*rubs sore coccyx* Ouch.)
Here I was, sitting in my little appartment, innocently realizing that I was a) all alone, and b) my parents don't have access to this computer (and never will have).

So, I had the fabulous idea to download porn. If you feel like you have to be warned about NC-17 content, get the hell away from my lj. )

Yup, that was it, my first gay porn. Quite an experience. Not a very exciting one though.
What is it with the pulling out? Do people really want to see that? And doesn't it take the fun out of things? It sure looked like it.
Also, foreplay. Ever heard of it?

Let me tell you, even bad slash stories are are sexier than that. I don't think I'll be downloading that kinf of thing again.
One fun fact about downloading gay porn though? My download rates spiked up like crazy. Emule gives you credits: the more you share, the faster you can download yourself. And once I started the porn downloads, no one wanted my music anymore.
So I guess there are people who like that kind of stuff.

The world is a strange place.
oceana: (Default)
( Aug. 11th, 2004 10:00 pm)
I was going to write about last weeks Atlantis, but then I stumbled upon this post about virgins who write sex, and [ profile] nostalgia_lj's reaction to it (with many interesting comments).
And - after bitching a little at a not-so-innocent bystander, I'd like to make a little announcement.

is not the same for everyone. People feel different things than other people when they have sex. People like different things than other people when they have sex. People feel different things at different times when they have sex. And yes, even to one person the sex can feel that way on Mondays and another way on Tuesdays! Shock!
You cannot say: Sex always feels like this.
You cannot say: first times always hurt. Anal sex always sucks. Every man comes like crazy when he gets a blow-job (so not true that last one).
You cannot say ALWAYS when it comes to sex. Just as you can't say NEVER.

Well, there are a few exceptions of course:
Assholes are NEVER self-lubricating.
Prostrates are NEVER lickable. (Unless you are cut open and bleeding to death)
And most of all: Penises are NEVER spongy and they are not getting soaked. (yes, I said that before, and I'll say it again. Not spongy. Not soaked. Never.)

Thank you, that is all. I feel better now that I've let off some steam. Maybe I can write that Atlantis post now.

[ profile] carolyn_claire has just provided me with the useful information that penises can indeed be spongy. The "Spongy body of a penis" is the anatomical term for the parts of the penis that are filled with blood during an erection. Latin term:
Corpus spongiosum penis
(I'm not kidding.)
My insufficient knowledge of anatomical expressions lead to that mistake, I hope you'll forgive me.
I was thinking of this definition:
1 : resembling a sponge : a) : soft and full of cavities (spongy ice) b) : elastic, porous, and absorbent
2) a) : not firm or solid b) : being in the form of a metallic sponge (spongy iron)
3) : moist and soft like a sponge full of water (a spongy moor)

I think we can agree that a penis isn't spongy in the way that it can soak up water or is porous and absorbent. ;-)
oceana: (Default)
( May. 5th, 2004 09:51 pm)
"He sucked him until he was thoroughly wet and soaked."

I've read this phrase about a thousand times, in every fandom, with every pairing. Whenever there's no lube, someone gets sucked until he is soaked and slick enough to fuck without it.
Let me tell you something:

Dicks can't get soaked.

Here's what Merriam-Webster says:

Main Entry: soak
Pronunciation: 'sOk
Function: verb
Etymology: Middle English soken, from Old English socian; akin to Old English sucan to suck
intransitive senses
1 : to lie immersed in liquid (as water) : become saturated by or as if by immersion
2 a : to enter or pass through something by or as if by pores or interstices : PERMEATE b : to penetrate or affect the mind or feelings -- usually used with in or into
3 : to drink alcoholic beverages intemperately
transitive senses
1 : to permeate so as to wet, soften, or fill thoroughly
2 : to place in a surrounding element (as liquid) to wet or permeate thoroughly

All of these imply that the spit actually goes INTO the dick.
THAT is not possible. I don't think anyone wants it to be possible either.
I accept that a dick can get soaking wet, because that doesn't mean that the water is IN it, just that it is very wet.

But unless you are blowing SpongeBob, a dick cannot get soaked.
oceana: (Default)
( Apr. 12th, 2004 02:43 am)
Function: adverb
Synonyms EXPRESSLY 1, categorically, explicitly, specifically
Synonyms EASILY 2, absolutely, doubtless, doubtlessly, positively, unequivocally, unquestionably

I'm in a bad mood.

One of my favourite communities is [ profile] stargate_icons.
I can't make icons, so I rely on other people, and some very pretty icons are posted there. I'm very very grateful to all the people who takes the time to make icons and share them with people like me.

But why, I ask myself, do slashers have to post warnings about slashy icons, and shippers don't have to do the same? It's not a community rule, at least I don't think so, but slashers seem to do it out of courtesy for the shippers and others who don't want to be reminded of the pure, sweet love between Jack and Daniel. (I'm allowed to write silly things like that, I'm in bad mood.) Shippers don't do us the same favour.

And really, I hate nothing more than to open an icon post and run right into Jack and Sam sucking face, with hearts and flowers on top. Moving, cause they really want to torture me.
I like Sam, really, but I don't need to be reminded of these things. It's okay to find shippy pics when I read LJ or forums, because I'm the last person to tell anyone which ship they should prefer, or that they are not allowed to show it.

What I hate is that slashers apparently see the need to give warnings about slash, whereas no one (and that often goes for fiction as well) seems to find it necessary to give the same warnings about het.
And Jack/Sam exists onscreen to the same amount as Jack/Daniel. Which is not at all. The interest they have shown in each other is canon, but their "relationship" is not.
So shipping Jack/Sam isn't all that different from shipping Jack/Daniel, or Jack/Teal'c or whoever you want to put together. And if people expect slash warnings, I think I have the right to get het warnings. Especially in icons.

And on days where I am in a bad mood, these things piss me off so much that I rant about them here, usually I'm more forgiving and tolerant. But not today. Bad mood day. So I need to let off some steam.
Which I did, so I think I'll go watch "Beast of Burden" now.
Maybe that will make me feel a bit better.

I'll post my thoughts about Death Knell some time this week, when I'm in a better mood. Because I like this show, I really do, so it might not be a good idea to write an episode review in my current mood.


RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Powered by Dreamwidth Studios

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags