Counting the calories... I never was much good at maths.

Well, McDonald’s have done it again. Not only are they responsible for a large number of people feeling bad for being stout/fat/obese, whatever your name for it is (just for this post I’m skipping over the fact that people have free will, and whatever goes down their gullets is their own choice, and it’s no good blaming someone else for your health problems, then expecting the public to fork out for a gastric band surgery you lazy bastards!). Now McDonald’s have found a way to make people feel bad before they’ve even eaten anything.

The golden arches are now going to be showing how many calories are in each of their foodstuffs. The first thing I’m going to say, is that anyone who consistently eats at Maccy-D’s should feel a nagging sense of shame. The second, is that I would think a lot of people who eat McDonald’s food, do not want to know what’s in it. The third is that this blatant advertising of calories is a slap in the face to some of our most vulnerable people. The calorie-counters.

This fragile section of our society have their lives ruled by those little tables printed on the side of everything we consume telling us that “100ml semi-skimmed milk is: 49 kcal.” (Honestly I prefer the missing kid pictures). Lately I have been dipping into this curious mindset, to have to know everything about what you are eating. It’s nothing short of a drug. And not the fun kind that make pretty colours and sleepiness abound from fluffy white clouds. The kind that takes obsession to a higher plane of existence. And means you just can’t have another Jaffa cake, Or even the first one.

Now, this McDonald’s business won’t have any effect on the hardcore CC, as they have memorised the calories of everything they could possibly ever venture within 10 feet of. The people who are going to be most affected are the rookies. The dabblers. The people that were ‘just curious’ to see what they were eating. And this news about the Big Mac could just about turn them insane.

You see, eating just stops becoming fun when you’re thinking to yourself “this pizza just doesn’t taste as good knowing that it’s damn near half of my calorie GDA.”

Does this mean I’m going to stop eating the food I like? No. but, it almost makes being a vegan seem an easier to live with alternative.

Almost.

Capitol Punishment: Is it really this clear cut?

I’ve been hearing a lot of talk lately on the subject of the capitol punishment. The latest was related to the murder of 15 year old Rebecca Aylward by her ex-boyfriend Joshua Davies. Following Davies’ sentencing to life imprisonment, the victim’s mother said that she: “would welcome the return of capitol punishment for the likes of Joshua Davies, who forfeited his human rights.”

You can find more on that story here.

I had a discussion with some of my friends not too long ago on the death penalty, and when we thought it could be a justified course of action. We came to the conclusion that if certain crimes (murder, perhaps rape) could be proven beyond any doubt then it could possibly be acceptable. However, we could not think of many situations which could fit such a criteria.

It is my opinion that this is a subject that requires much in the way of debate and commentary. If only to remind people that it is not something to be taken lightly.

The first of the e-petitions (an online form of petitioning which allow public prompting of parliamentary discussion) were recently published by the government. Among those with the most signatures were several calling for the return of capitol punishment. One of these says, and I quote: “With todays technoligy,ie DNA,there is no lilkliy hood of an innocent person being found guilty. [sic]” Now, atrocious spelling aside, this is a completely naïve view to hold. Yes, technologies such as DNA aid hugely in the conviction of criminals and solving of cases. But this does not mean that it is an exact science. My course at university is a part of the Innocence Project. An organisation that works to exonerate wrongly convicted individuals. One ongoing case, which my university is involved in, is looking into a man convicted of a quadruple murder, with forensic evidence being part of that which led to his sentencing. It is far too complicated to go into on the blog (trust me, it makes an Eastenders plotline look like it was written by  a five year-old) but Panorama conducted an investigation into it, entitled "Fair Cops?" you can find out more about the programme, and the case on this page (be sure to look at the ‘see also’ links).

The point I’m trying to make is that forensic evidence cannot necessarily be trusted 100 percent, especially when life is at stake. This isn’t even taking into account the possibility of human error or forensic misconduct.

Staines' blog: http://order-order.com/

Paul Staines, a right wing blogger that goes by the pseudonym ‘Guido Fawkes’ is a major supporter of the reinstatement of capitol punishment. He claims that politicians are “completely out of sync with the public” and that “all political parties have been out of step on crime, immigration." Presumably he’d just have everyone killed? He says that there is a majority of people, everywhere, in favour of the death penalty. I have to say, I don’t remember being asked. I have to wonder whether “everywhere” is wherever he thought he’d get the most support. Whether his is the vocal majority that drown out the quiet minority, who believe that this needn’t even be considered?

You can find an interview with Mr. Staines, as well as some more information on e-petitions here.

If you want to put across another point, or say anything at all about this post. Feel free to leave a comment below.

Much love, Internet.

As if I could ever understand…

Hello there, Avid Readers. I need an opinion. Or, failing that, a silent void in which to vent my bewilderment.

I’ve been reading the i newspaper pretty much since it came out (on and off, I’m not made of 20p pieces!). I think it’s a pleasantly concise read, with fairly broad subjects, without the majority of ‘celeb’ driven ‘news’ that adorns the pages of the red tops. Not that I don’t dip into the tabloids now and then for a patronising chuckle. I’m digressing. Something I’ve never understood about the i, a paper which, in my opinion, is attractive to younger professionals and their ilk ,as it’s not full of as much waffle as stories from most other broadsheets etc. is what on earth is with the cartoon strip?

First of all, I think a cartoon strip is out of place in the i to begin with, but… que cera. As if… by Sally Ann Lasson has not only failed to make me laugh, or even smile. But it has started to make me doubt in our society’s sense of humour. Maybe it isn’t supposed to be funny? As far as I can tell it’s aimed at middle-aged women, which completely goes against my world view of the i. if it was the Daily Mail I’d understand, but… maybe I’m over thinking it.

Here’s a link to the artists page: https://secure.mrsite.co.uk/usersitesv18/sallyannlasson.com/wwwroot/index.htm

Maybe someone else can find something about it that I’m missing, and explain it to my hurty brain.

Peace out. And much love.