YAY!!!
lorisrevival.blogspot.com
Need I say more?!?
WELCOME BACK, LORI!!!
Dani xxx
Wednesday, June 15, 2011
Back in the saddle again...I think?
Hi, everyone, I'm back, for now, anyway! I've been having MAJOR problems with Blogger, hence my silence over the last few weeks. It wouldn't even let me log onto my account to create a new post until this morning! Of course, it probably doesn't help that I don't have a computer, I do all of this from my phone! If Blogger can't keep their shit together I may have to go to WordPress or something because this is getting f'ing ridiculous! I really would hate to do that because Blogger's format is very user friendly for someone who is somewhat tech challenged, like me, but that won't help me if I can't even log in!
Okay, end rant. New post later today or tomorrow...maybe? (fingers crossed)
Dani xxx
Okay, end rant. New post later today or tomorrow...maybe? (fingers crossed)
Dani xxx
Sunday, May 22, 2011
...BREAKING NEWS...
...BREAKING NEWS... SUNDAY, MAY 22, 2011 10:00 AM EST
...URGENT! THE RAPTURE DID NOT HAPPEN! REPEAT...RAPTURE DID NOT HAPPEN!
Reports of people waking up this morning and finding that everything is pretty much as it was yesterday are streaming in from around the globe. We are still seeking independent confirmation of this story, but all reports thus far lead us to believe that absolutely nothing happened!
...PLEASE STAY TUNED FOR FURTHER IRRELEVANT REPORTS OF THIS NON-EVENT! :-D
Dani xxx
...URGENT! THE RAPTURE DID NOT HAPPEN! REPEAT...RAPTURE DID NOT HAPPEN!
Reports of people waking up this morning and finding that everything is pretty much as it was yesterday are streaming in from around the globe. We are still seeking independent confirmation of this story, but all reports thus far lead us to believe that absolutely nothing happened!
...PLEASE STAY TUNED FOR FURTHER IRRELEVANT REPORTS OF THIS NON-EVENT! :-D
Dani xxx
Friday, January 21, 2011
Technical Difficulties
I seem to be having technical difficulties today. I keep getting a 500 error everytime I try to post a comment anywhere, even here on my own blog. I don't know if it's a problem here with my phone, my ISP, or Blogger. I wonder if anyone else is having this problem today?
Dani xxx
Dani xxx
Blah!
I hate winter.
With a passion.
It's cold.
It's snowing...
again!
I don't ski.
I don't skate.
I don't own a snowmobile.
I do own a shovel.
I'll be using it again...
soon.
somebody, make it stop.
Blah!
Now I know why bears hibernate!
Dani xxx
With a passion.
It's cold.
It's snowing...
again!
I don't ski.
I don't skate.
I don't own a snowmobile.
I do own a shovel.
I'll be using it again...
soon.
somebody, make it stop.
Blah!
Now I know why bears hibernate!
Dani xxx
Friday, January 14, 2011
Are you f'ing kidding me?!?
I have, in a couple of past posts, had a short feature that I've called ''Are you f'ing kidding me?!?'' that I've put up when I come across a news story that seems so absurd, so jaw droppingly stupid, that it leaves me in a dumbfounded state of amazement that anyone could be so numb. This particular installment of ''Are you f'ing kidding me?!?'' is SO big that it needs a whole post to address the entire dangerous mind numbing stupidity.
Evidentally, the Canadian Broadcast Standards Council has decided that the song ''Money for nothing'' is offensive because of the use of a certain F word in reference to an unspecified generic glam rocker. What?!? Okay, where to begin? Well, first of all, the CBSC is just a bit late to the dance, seeing as how the song in question came out 25 YEARS AGO!!! Does anyone under 30 even know who Dire Straits is?!? I also think that the CBSC is taking the reference completely out of context, but I'll let you be the judge of that. If they really want to find offensive lyrics they don't need to go all the way back to 25 year old rock classics, just look at Eminem's catalog, or about 98 percent of hip hop. Maybe we should censor ''Baby got back'' because it's offensiue to women with big butts, or perhaps we should censor ''Something in your mouth'' because the lyrics insunate that women look better with an unspecified ''something'' in their mouths?!?
This comes on the heels of a Mark Twain reprint that edits out all of the N words. This is all very, VERY dangerous! What's next? Do we edit ''Snow White and the 7 Dwarves'' because the term Dwarf is offensive to little people?!? Do we censor ''The Rocky Horror Picture Show'' because it's unacceptable to call Dr. Frank N Furter a Transylvanian Transvestite?!? Maybe we should edit the history of the Spanish Inquision because saying that that was an evil thing to do is offensive to Spanish catholics?!? This is as dangerous as rewriting history in Texas school textbooks and putting bathing suits on nude statues!
Are we really now all so thin skined, so PC, that we have to sensitize and sterilize everything and encase it in a thick layer of bubble wrap?!? It's no wonder that no one can have any meaningful discussions about any sensitive subjects. It's begining to look like George Orwell was right, he just got the year wrong.
Dani xxx
Evidentally, the Canadian Broadcast Standards Council has decided that the song ''Money for nothing'' is offensive because of the use of a certain F word in reference to an unspecified generic glam rocker. What?!? Okay, where to begin? Well, first of all, the CBSC is just a bit late to the dance, seeing as how the song in question came out 25 YEARS AGO!!! Does anyone under 30 even know who Dire Straits is?!? I also think that the CBSC is taking the reference completely out of context, but I'll let you be the judge of that. If they really want to find offensive lyrics they don't need to go all the way back to 25 year old rock classics, just look at Eminem's catalog, or about 98 percent of hip hop. Maybe we should censor ''Baby got back'' because it's offensiue to women with big butts, or perhaps we should censor ''Something in your mouth'' because the lyrics insunate that women look better with an unspecified ''something'' in their mouths?!?
This comes on the heels of a Mark Twain reprint that edits out all of the N words. This is all very, VERY dangerous! What's next? Do we edit ''Snow White and the 7 Dwarves'' because the term Dwarf is offensive to little people?!? Do we censor ''The Rocky Horror Picture Show'' because it's unacceptable to call Dr. Frank N Furter a Transylvanian Transvestite?!? Maybe we should edit the history of the Spanish Inquision because saying that that was an evil thing to do is offensive to Spanish catholics?!? This is as dangerous as rewriting history in Texas school textbooks and putting bathing suits on nude statues!
Are we really now all so thin skined, so PC, that we have to sensitize and sterilize everything and encase it in a thick layer of bubble wrap?!? It's no wonder that no one can have any meaningful discussions about any sensitive subjects. It's begining to look like George Orwell was right, he just got the year wrong.
Dani xxx
Thursday, January 13, 2011
Agent provocateur?
PHB is one of a number of fringe sites on both sides of the TG/TS divide that I usually stay well away from. Neither side of this ongoing flame war is ever going to win the arguement and while such things are sometimes an amusing distraction for those of us in the great middle it actually carries little relevance in our daily lives.
That having been said, it's been impossible to miss the latest battle, Sandeen vs Love, that's been burning through cyberspace. On the surface, it appears that Love made some statements that Sandeen found objectionable, to which she responded with a mean spirited four part hit piece that seems to be backfiring on her... or is it?
It makes me wonder, is Sandeen an agent provocateur? Was this, in fact, her intent all along? I would agree with what seems to be the majority opinion of Sandeen, that she's a bit mentally unbalanced, but I don't think that she's a fool. Could all of this have been meant to promote and advance Love and a new generation of TS activists to carry on the fight? Everything that Sandeen has ever said would lead me to say no, but you never can tell. Maybe?
Dani xxx
That having been said, it's been impossible to miss the latest battle, Sandeen vs Love, that's been burning through cyberspace. On the surface, it appears that Love made some statements that Sandeen found objectionable, to which she responded with a mean spirited four part hit piece that seems to be backfiring on her... or is it?
It makes me wonder, is Sandeen an agent provocateur? Was this, in fact, her intent all along? I would agree with what seems to be the majority opinion of Sandeen, that she's a bit mentally unbalanced, but I don't think that she's a fool. Could all of this have been meant to promote and advance Love and a new generation of TS activists to carry on the fight? Everything that Sandeen has ever said would lead me to say no, but you never can tell. Maybe?
Dani xxx
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)