MoneySuperInjunction.com

That website may not yet exist, but if we carry on the path which rich society and gossip is descending down, I give it two years before the website is fully operational. The TV adverts will obviously feature Omid Djalili, where he goes about the World bothering celebrities and telling them that they could have gotten a better deal on their Super Injunction if they had visited MoneySuperInjunction.com first. The website will compare different injunction formulas possible and help the user by suggesting the option that is the best value for money to give them the privacy they want. A service provided completely for free too due to advertising funding.

It has been an odd week or so in which, for once, the UK media has not been able to publish gossip about a footballer and reality TV show having forbidden sex, when everyone else has been talking about it. Twitter was revelling in having 'one up' on the media and the law, so everyone was Tweeting the name 'Ryan Giggs'. 70,000 people broke the law by talking about it. One of which was me, and others included people I follow. It was just a lot of people just figuratively sticking two fingers up at The Sun newspaper and shaking their wrists with pleasure at the law. It was a beautiful, yet confusing moment for British society. If Twitter existed in the 80's, it would have been used in exactly the same way.

I blogged quite a while ago about having Freedom of Speech so long as you keep your mouth shut and remain politically correct at all times, and this follows on from that point and how Twitter has a huge influence upon that. In response to Paul Chambers Tweeting "FUCK! Robin Hood airport is closed. You've got a week and a bit to get your shit together otherwise I'm blowing the airport sky high!", he was arrested and thousands of Twitterer's sent the same message in protest. One anonymous person Tweeted "Footballer Ryan Giggs had an extramarital affair with Big Brother star Imogen Thomas which lasted for 7 months. #superinjunction" and it went relatively unnoticed for a little while, and the user went on, power sick, and started Tweeting nonsense speculation Tweet's about other celebrities. Anyway, the first Tweet was true, and it soon started spreading.

Once it had spread and gained enough momentum, The Sun appealed for the injunction to be overturned, which was rejected. Twitterer's continued to spread the news and made jokes. Ryan Giggs got angry. The media became irritated. Politicians became irritated. Twitterer's continued to revel and because so many people Tweeted the news, it became impossible to impose the law, but it continued. Eventually, Lib Dem MP John Hemming boiled and spilt the news by abusing/using (it depends on your own opinion) his powers within the Houses of Commons. The Speaker had a mini rant, and the media where finally in ecstasy at now being able to report the news. However, the injunction still remains in place, so it is technically illegal to report it even though, in practice, it isn't illegal because it was mentioned in the Houses of Common. Geddit? Yeah, the law is like a cryptic puzzle. No one has an idea where anyone stands.

There was a great piece of TV in the early morning on Daybreak in the week, in which Max Clifford, media guru/obscene profanity (depends on your opinion), was quizzed for his thoughts on the super injunction fiasco. This is the man who gave the media Jade Goody by the way, so we can agree he has an extremely warped sense of righteousness. He stated that this culture was very worrying because it meant his clients [and therefore him] couldn't make any money. He didn't say that directly, but it was as implicit as stating that you didn't know the sex of your future child whilst winking and holding a pink balloon saying 'It's a girl'.

He did also make one point which I think lends this story a deliciously ironic twist: if Ryan Giggs had never put up an injunction, the story would have never come out due to Imogen Thomas agreeing to keep it secret. The intrigue of the injunction is what led to the story actually coming out and making Giggs a target for matrimonial hate. No-one wanted to publish it in the first place. That, for me, just makes the story a lot sweeter to enjoy.

Now, I wander into the debate of whether Super Injunctions are right or wrong, and I am sitting on the fence about it: I cannot decide what my overall opinion is on this humiliating failure. Both sides of the argument, I think, include very good points. The main points against the injunctions are that a) only the very rich can afford to get them; and b) if you're going to be in the public eye and you don't want people to know you have sex with hookers, and then you shouldn't have sex with hookers. There are also points for the use of injunctions that are a) why is it any of our business; and b) it gives the family a chance to recover and stay together if the media don't shout their private news in big black letters on the front of every newspaper. The case of Andrew Marr springs straight into mind.

A few years ago, with a fellow female Journalist, Marr had an affair and thought that maybe a child she had conceived might have been due to their shenanigans. The injunction was put in place and Marr's marriage had time to heal and survive and DNA testing proved the child not to be his. The injunction stopped speculation by the media and didn't tear the family apart, but it does appear hypocritical when he is grilling politicians on their scandalous private lives, when he himself has one and won't share it. That is something which Ian Hislop campaigned for and was his point every time he was interviewed on the news the day the story hit the media. The story illustrates the good and the bad of super injunctions.

On the whole however, I do totally disagree with the use of super injunctions, as both an aspiring Journalist and a member of the naïve public. I know the Conservatives are in power, but it doesn't necessarily mean we have to live in a time when the rich can do whatever they wish because they are rich. Who wants to live in a society as blatantly biased as that? David Cameron was quick to jump on the band wagon and condemn the use of super injunctions. He is a PR genius, so when he is becoming unpopular due to so many U-turns on the NHS reforms for example, by agreeing with the public on matters such as super injunctions, he seems like a good guy.

If this isn't kept under control, where are we going to end up as a society? Will people get injunctions out to keep the results of sporting events quiet, so that no-one can report the results of the football match between Chelsea and West Ham until Match of the Day is on in the evening? Will BBC 3 be able to get injunctions out every time they produce another horrid 'comedy' aimed at youth to prevent people saying how rubbish it was? Is it possible to get a super injunction to prevent parents from telling their children that Santa isn't real?  Could it be possible for a man to get an injunction out to stop ex girlfriends from revealing the length of his penis? Will chocolate manufactures be able to get a super injunction out to stop people from knowing that chocolate may contain nuts? You see, if it gets out of control, it could get dangerous and people with nut allergies could die!

I don't think we'll stop this super injunction society any time soon, and if we could, we wouldn't be allowed to know how. I think maybe we should slap a time limit on how long a super injunction lasts. A judge should say "Sure, you can have an injunction. But, in 6 months time, the news will come out", and Mr Sex-obsessed Actor will say yes as it gives him chance to sort his life out, and all is well in the end. I mean, this might be the only way to save children with nut allergies! Don't be a bastard and let them die!

Thou Shall Not Share Thy Opinion

You have an opinion that you would like to express do you? Well, let us make some checks... Is it remotely racist? Can it be construed as sexist? Are you mocking religion? What about being homophobic? Could it be gingerist? How about insulting fat people or discriminating the disabled? Are you Fascist or Ageist? Is what you are saying stereotyping a group within society, like Gypsy's or Dwarfs or is it a joke about class? Are you promoting genocide or heightism? Does this comment hate on young people? Are you pointing fun at Goths etc? Could this be you thinking you're satirising politics? Is it judging people with a certain taste of music? Are you generalising people with certain jobs like estate agents or lawyers? Do you want to share findings which you have spent years researching and have conclusive proof for what you want to say? Are you just pointing out the bleeding obvious?

If it is any of the above, then I would keep quiet if I were you. I mean, we don't want to start a worldwide scandal here. Mind you, if you really have no choice and you have to express your opinion, then take the following advice: Stand your ground. Or, failing that, run away as soon as someone slightly disagrees with your opinion and apologise until you have completely worn away all twenty eight of your teeth and then resign from your job, no matter what it is. You're an I.T. Technician whole commented on a ginger person standing in the queue in front of you to your friend the next day? Resign! You’re an old lady who said to a tall black man “You’re very tall dear, aren’t you; and surprisingly nice...”? Well run away before he gets offended dammit! How dare you people try and carry out the basic human right of Freedom of Speech. You disgust me! Moving your tongue about like a free spirit; you Hippie! Oh no, now I've done it. I'll have to get a job and resign straight away to prove how deeply sorry I am for any offence I may caused to anyone, ever!

Shall we take a break from the sarcasm and calm down now?

In case you are yet to notice, this blog is trying to make sense of this new trend we have of complaining about someone's opinion and thus taking a metaphorical sledge hammer to Freedom of Speech after being deeply offended by something we heard someone might have said.

In recent weeks, television personalities have been at the front of this worldwide misunderstanding. The BBC had to apologise to China after an innocent joke, made on Qi a little while back, was completely misunderstood by the entire nation and taken as slanderous racism. The little bloke on Top Gear forced the BBC to apologise to Mexico after he called them all lazy and flatulent. Maybe he took it slightly too far in the end, but it was merely exaggerating on a stereotype, which doesn't translate well in other countries. The latter scandal infuriated everyone who didn't particularly care. Steve Coogan is one, as he ranted to The Daily Express about the trio’s casual racism and calling them bullies. Yes, you see, sharing your opinion is no longer considered to be decent honesty; it is now called 'bullying'.

Take another recent example: the sexism scandal of Sky Sport pundits, which resulted in Andy Gray being sacked and Richard Keys resigning. The entire thing was due to them merely expressing the opinion that a female football official would not be able to under the Off-Side Rule. It isn't even as if they said it publically on TV; the pair was just recorded off air saying it. Now, how many blokes do you think sat in pubs watching the game and said exactly the same thing? I wouldn't like to guess how many. I don't think that was a comment to be taken as gospel; I think it was just part of a blokey shenanigan. Mind you, Andy Gray did lose his case when it was revealed he asked a female to help 'tuck him in', but even that was just a bit of banter, and it was off air.

We are nearing a time when you might as well be sacked for thinking. This must be a scary time if you are one of those lunatics that constantly wears a tinfoil hat for fear that the CIA are reading your mind. If even a slightly racist thought crossed their brain waves for more than a nanosecond, they would constantly fear the risk of being prosecuted. Many times I have had the thought to kill people. Could I therefore be charged for Intention to kill or commit GBH? If I had a barely racist thought, that doesn't mean I'm going to don the KKK's white cape and start chasing black people does it!? The world needs to get a grasp of how ridiculous it is becoming in an attempt to remain politically correct at all times.

Twitter is making this even worse as well. Over a year ago, a man called Paul Chambers tweeted "FUCK! Robin Hood airport is closed. You've got a week and a bit to get your shit together otherwise I'm blowing the airport sky high!" That is very unlikely to have been a real threat. I mean, you don't see al-Qaeda making threats on social networking sites. That would ruin the point of them. This was clearly an attempt at humour by the accountant, albeit slightly ill-conceived. This man has been charged of 'sending a menacing electronic communication'. Utter ridiculousness!

Paul Chambers, the bastard who tried to have a sense of humour!

I'm currently a bit peeved at the NHS and how I have been untreated with my dental pain the past few months because of bureaucratic slowness, so if I should tweet: "FUCK! Kent and Canterbury Hospital are irritatingly slow. They have one week to get me an appointment or I'm blowing the hospital sky high!"* am I going to be prosecuted? I probably won't because there is no real menace behind it, and if I know that and you know that, then where is the threat? It's the same thing.

Another example of this is a Conservative councillor being arrested for comments he made on Twitter about a Journalist, saying she should 'be stoned to death'. This has led to the man losing his job as councillor. I think it is a scary thought that normal people can be convicted through comments made on social networking sites. The amount of times I've called Piers Morgan a cunt, or continuously ranted about Jade Goody and applauding her eventual death. I tweeted the other day that I wanted to punch a small child in the face because my toothache was getting unbearable; am I now at risk of being arrested? Well, I hope not. I tweeted a long time ago that I drove through a set of red lights (accidentally, I'm not a dickhead). I didn't get contacted by the DVLA, but why is that any different? That is an actual crime that I committed; not an empty threat about blowing an airport up.

Twitter is also the centre of other scandals, such as comedians pointing out the bleeding obvious to Keith Chegwin. A comedian pointed out to the ageing unfunny man that a lot of the jokes he tweeted were not actually his, and were in fact material by current comedians working the circuit, and he claiming it as his own material. Other comedians then backed up the claims which 'Cheggers' refused to admit to, and carried on tweeting the jokes of people like Milton Jones. It has resulted in a continuous debate on Twitter with many slanderous comments being passed about. All this just because someone noticed that Chegwin tweeted jokes of other people; and it was painfully obvious. It was a friendly comment which ensued into electronic carnage with various top Tweeters abandoning the social networking site.

I mean, both sides of the debate have fair points. Jokes are a comedian’s livelihood. You don't steal famous artworks and claim them as your own handiwork. However, can someone actually claim ownership of a joke? Someone put the words in the right order to cause laughter, but can they actually own it? That's the beauty of jokes; you can share them with the world, and they get passed around and changed.

We just live in silly times where people are easily offended. I don't know the Offside Rule in Football particularly well, but accuse me of not knowing it; I'm not going to get offended. You can call me overweight if you want, I'm not going to get offended. You can make fun of my race and nationality; I'm not going to get offended. You can call me ginger if you want, I won't get offended (Mind you, I'm not ginger, so I'd just be confused...). So the list could carry on. It's an opinion, not fact. You see, the fact seems to be that you have the freedom of speech, but just don't be moronic enough to actually practice your rights.

That is what happens when you let people read The Daily Mail. Their journalists and columnist regularly flex their outrage muscles and think up slanderous opinions about anyone and anything, link it up to some comment about immigration, and BAM! That person's opinion has been turned into fact just because Daily Mail readers are gullible enough to believe anything. Tell them that Princess Diana, The Nations Princess, was actually killed by a giant Octopus brandishing the Eiffel Tower as a weapon, who then got stuck in the tunnel, and was also under the awesome power of an asylum seeker with a vengeance, they'd probably believe you. The Daily Mail has ruined England, and is the source of a virus that is spreading worldwide, which allows people to be told when they are outraged. It's the next pandemic: Offendere Flu. How do we cure this? Well, I'm afraid morons are just going to have to be culled in their millions in a frantic bid to save the uninfected members of the Human Race.**

I have no conclusive end for this blog. I get annoyed by people being offended and big scandals being born from someone sharing their opinions with another, joking about, being misunderstood or just pointing out the bleeding obvious that everyone is also thinking. This needs to come to an end, but I don't actually see a way in which this can resolved. I think it's a scary moment to voice unappreciated opinions. Thank God no-one has heard from Jim Davidson for a while. What? He's making a comeback this year? Oh mercy!

*This is a joke. I am not going to blow up Kent and Canterbury Hospital, or any other hospital. This was an ill-conceived attempt at humour which I deeply regret and hope no-one has been inconvenienced by my comment. No malice was intended.

**This is a joke. When I said I wanted all moronic people culled, I was misquoted and I am deeply apologetic for any offence caused to the community of complete morons...

Fed Up Of That Annoying Monotone Sound? Yeah, I Don't Like Adrian Chiles Either...

I expect even the Amish are aware that there has recently been a small competition called 'The World Cup'. This year it was in South Africa in which the main talk of the World Cup wasn't in anyway football related. It was the new word the whole world learnt: 'Vuvuzela'. Surprisingly, no spell check recognises it as a word... Anyway, most people spent the four weeks complaining about the incredibly irritating sound caused by them and how it meant we could no longer hear the chanting (or booing) from the crowds. For the first few matches there should have been a sign at the bottom of the screen saying 'Do not adjust your sets'. The Vuvuzela, to me, made it sound as if an apocalyptic-sized swarm of angry bees had been set upon South Africa.

I will now join in the millions of English people in criticising the England Football Team. Well, what a ridiculous display that was; a whole nation setting their hopes upon a bunch of over-paid men. Every four years we chant that we will win the World Cup, just like the squad did in 1966. I'm not sure how we developed this naivety towards how rubbish we are. Everyone expected fantastic things from the foot of Wayne Rooney (apparently, he has now just been house trained). Everyone expected great things from the Italian who looked like Postman Pat, Fabio Capello. Everyone even expected us to sail through the group stage with relative ease. How wrong we were.

Every fat man sitting in a pub drinking his third glass of bitter, will claim that they could do a better than the England Team, even though he barely manages to co-ordinate his right hand holding the glass to his open mouth. Well, I feel I should join in on this national pass time. “I reckon me and my ageing family would have done a better job than the England team did against Germany. My blind Nan would obviously be in goal, with the defensive line being covered by all the old female relatives with their handbags and moaning. Midfield would consist of selected Aunts and Uncles and upfront would be my Dad and Grandad, grumbling about their aches and pains. This team, in my idiotic, uncared for, naive, and arrogant opinion, would have done better..."

However, in all honesty, competing in the World Cup was just a waste of money for us Brit's really. We drew 1-1 against the USA, a country who have no interest in our football, but only when it comes to trying to win something. Also, what a ridiculous display by Rob Green in goal; I mean, I know girls who would never let go of a ball that easily... We then drew 0-0 against Algeria and then finally, won 1-0 against Slovenia. This was just about enough for us to get through the Group Stages. However, up until this point, we had done awfully, so I vowed to not watch the game against Germany, and how right I was (even if I was the only person in England to get sunburnt during that game). It was awful as far as I can tell. We lost that 1-4, and yet, everyone made a huge fuss over Lampard's goal being disallowed. What difference would that have made? We still would have lost badly, but not by quite as many goals... How stupid can English people be when it comes to football?

I actually watched a majority of the football games, either the entire way through or at least one half. Nothing exciting really happened, apart from quite a few goals being scored (145) and even more yellow cards given (260). That's only in a space of 64 games. To bring maths into this blog for just a few seconds, that is an average of about 2 goals and 4 yellow cards in each match. Anyway, as I said, I watched a majority of the games but, and this may just only be me that thinks this, a majority of the games were not that entertaining.

The second to last match (the battle for third place between Uruguay and Germany) was possibly my favourite game of the lot. Many goals were scored and it was rather close. I don't see the point of games were teams just pass the ball around to each other. Surely the main purpose of a football match is to score as many goals as possible and stop the other team from scoring more.... This nicely brings me onto the subject of the final match between the Netherlands and Spain. That was possibly one of the most boring matches of the World Cup. Spain eventually scored just before the end of extra time, but by then everyone had stopped caring who won and just wanted the football to finish. I personally think Germany deserved the World Cup more than Spain. Oh well.

I do have one thought: Does the fact that Switzerland was the only country to beat Spain during the World Cup, mean that they are infact the better team?

The World Cup was shown on both the BBC or on ITV. Both had different ways of handling the coverage. The BBC opted for Gary Lineker (a majority of the time), with a row of various pundits such as Alan Shearer and 'Motty', professionally reviewing the match. ITV opted with Adrian Chiles being almost as ignorant as me towards Football, with a team of pundits not as well known as the BBC's. Also, both sides had a South African sat in the middle, occasionally giving their opinions which no-one understood at all. Both Lineker and Chiles would sit their nodding quietly until they thought he'd finished and turned to one of the other pundits and said 'Do you agree?' It was a pointless accessory to the coverage.

ITV also had James Cordon as a key part of their coverage. After every evening football match that ITV showed, he would do a half-hour show, in which he would talk to random celebrities who foolishly put forth their uncared for opinions, in front of a studio audience and the British public. I didn't care much for the show. He then even recorded a World Cup single with Dizzee Rascal, which was a football adaptation of Tears For Fears song - Shout. I didn't care much for the song either. Essentially, I was going to write a concluding joke about James Cordon for this paragraph of the blog, but all I came up with was a big fat nothing...

The worst thing about the World Cup was the adverts. Thanks to them, I was sick of the World Cup before it even started frankly. The nation full of false patriotism became even worse when American brands, such as Mars, began supporting England team on their packaging. Some companies will do absolutely anything to sell their products. Pringles even had Peter Crouch on the front while they imaginatively changed their name to 'Pringooooals'.

Almost every advert included some form of mention of the World Cup. The Nike advert was possibly one of the worse, with them paying numerous footballers lots of money for them to appear in their television advert. Wayne Rooney in a caravan with a beard (however, an attractive prospect) and Ronaldo in The Simpson's were just two examples of the pointless 3 minute advert wasting my time and their money.

The television companies were the best at using the World Cup for fraud. Sony spent a lot of their advertising campaign for their new 3D televisions, saying how YOU, the British public should buy THEIR 3D television in order to watch the World Cup in spectacular 3 dimensions. Carefully forgetting to point out that no coverage of the World Cup in the UK would actually be broadcast in 3D; but that is only a minor problem in their plan - right?

Anyway, feel free to correct me on any information I may have got wrong. I do actually only have limited knowledge of football. I have enough to get through life, but not enough to have a substantial conversation on the topic.

P.S. What is with Football and awarding cutlery as a prize? The World Cup... The Super Bowl...

February: Love Month (Apparently)

The shortest month of the year has been and gone confined to the history books as the second snowy month of 2010. February consists of Pancake Day, a day which everyone eats Pancakes surprisingly. Why only on this day, I don't know. Then February also has 'Valaween' hidden in the middle of it. Just in case you were wondering, I got no late Valentine's Cards, so that is another year of receiving (and sending) none. I look forward to yet another year of having my Facebook Status set to 'Single'.

Snow played yet another big part in this the month of February as it did in January, and yet again every moaned about it. They say we had the coldest winter since 1979 and the news was quick to show us yet more images of our nation suffering. Whether it was of monkeys sitting in the snow in a zoo or a tractor ironically being stuck in the snow after trying to pull a car out of a ditch, we had to be constantly told how much devastation this is causing us Brits. Last year, experts predicted Swine Flu to be the worst thing to affect us this winter, with it potentially killing millions, but instead it was the snow. Who could've seen that coming? Well, you would have thought the people at the Met Office.
Would you believe that it is the job of people at the Met Office to predict the weather so we can prepare ourselves? Yet, every time they seem to fail. A good use of money I think - paying people to do a job wrong. Mind you, if we pay our bankers millions of pounds for losing our money, why shouldn't we pay them to not do their job properly either. It seems our country is full of failures, and yet the Daily Mail still wonder why we have foreigners doing our jobs. Maybe it is because they are more competent - just a guess.
While I am on the subject of competence, let’s go back a few weeks ago (To Valentine's Day infact) when there was a smashing interview between a twatting tit and an unpopular growth. Yes, I am referring to the Piers Morgan/Gordon Brown interview on ITV 1. Now I am sure that you are aware of my dislike of Piers Morgan, so you can imagine my surprise after watching an hour long show with him in it that I 'enjoyed'. Well, maybe 'enjoy' is a bit of an overstatement, but I did think it was very interesting. I believe that Mr Brown came across very well in the interview. Granted, I did spend a majority of the interview just being mesmerised by the skin of Gordon Brown's neck and maybe that is what hypnotised me into liking him.
I think the Scot answered all the questions exactly right, despite Piers Morgan asking him really inappropriate questions which no-one wants to know the answer to. Why should I want to know 'How many girls Gordon Brown slept with while at University’? This was a political interview, not Loose Women! The overall interview was near on 3 hours, so it makes you wonder how awful the other 2 hours of stuff was, but that is the positive of editing I suppose. Alistair Campbell (Incidentally, I met his wife at the beginning of February - Fiona Millar - Thanks Mr Karnavas!) and Gordon Brown must be very happy with the outcome of the interview, and I do truly believe that the interview has actually helped Brown's election chances. However, if I'm 18 before the elections, I will still vote Conservative, but at least he tried.
The Winter Olympics happened in Vancouver, Canada during February as well. It became slightly hard for me to watch after that guy died while practicing for the Luge, so I didn't watch much after the first few days. However, I was pretty addicted to it before that happened and I did become quite the expert in Short Hill Ski Jumping as well as the Speed Skiing. How well did Britain do? Shockingly bad as usual. You would have thought with all the snow we have had, we could have done better. The medal we did though was a gold one.
That medal was one for us by a Miss Amy Williams. She competed in the 'Bob Skelton' which is essentially laying front first on a toboggan while going around a bobsleigh track head-first. It seems like quite scary stuff, and luckily I did actually watch this. A positive of them laying front first is that you can see their rear ends very well. The comment I made while watching her being hurtled around the track by the G-Forces for her winning run was that she had a very nice arse. I am not lying either, it is a VERY nice arse that Amy Williams has.
I think we all know that John Terry would have liked it also. Just in case you are not aware due to being trapped on a desert island with no contact to civilisation, he has been accused of sleeping with his best friend’s girlfriend. Yes, it does seem like something that would be found on the Jeremy Kyle show. John Terry cheated on his own wife with the girlfriend of his former best friend and England Teammate. For some reason, Wayne Bridge has pulled out of the England Football team due to it. I wonder why?
Then of course you have the Cheryl Cole/Ashley Cole saga. What is it with footballers and their ability to 'score away from home' (a nice football based pun for you)? My theory is that they get paid too much to do sod all. They train in the morning and nothing the rest of the day. They have all that money, all that fame and the ball skill (two in one paragraph; look at me go). They have the ability to seduce any woman, so they do, despite how utterly gorgeous their 'WAG's are.
However, you can't talk about failing marriages without mentioning Katie Price, or whatever she is calling herself these days. It was only a few weeks since I wrote a blog about Katie Price's latest gossip and already it seems to be out dated. She and Alex got married in Las Vegas. Then there was talk they were getting divorced. Then talk of him wanting to adopt Peter Andre's children. Then talk that he gets no say in the marriage and that Katie 'wears' the trousers in the house. Then more talk about them getting divorced. Then I am being told that they are happily in love.
I am just confused. I try to use as little brain power as possible when it comes to trying to solve what is happening in modern pop culture because I have better and more important things to waste my time thinking about, like whether I want Cheese or Egg Sandwiches for lunch. However, trying to figure out Katie Price's love life is just confusing. However, this does trigger the question - why do we as a nation care?

Now, I apologise for being a day late in posting this blog 'End of the Month' blog. The reason for this is that I had a mad spasm of a social life. I was actually out and having fun which meant I had no time to write the blog. My weekend consisted of sleeping on a bed with more people than the bed was originally designed for then a sofa, as well as drinking alcohol (I am part of the statistic of underage drinkers, but then who isn't?) and eating far too much cake. However, I would describe the weekend as 'Brilliant', 'Much Needed', 'Extraordinary Fun' and also 'One Of My Best Yet'. If I may be slightly cheesy and ruin this angry persona I seem to have going, Thanks Guys for a great couple of days, and I hope you had a great time Emily.

Anyway, onwards with March. I predict that this month will bring more devastation, more marital conflict, more crap telly, and also the celebration of a year without an unloved celebrity...