Militant Ginger

My Top Picks for Personal Growth: A Bookshelf

2012-01-25T09:34:00.000-08:00

I've spent the last year reading a lot of books on personal growth and success. These are the ones I've found most useful; which include last year's picks, and some timeless classics I read a great many years ago.

The Gingermobile?

2012-01-21T19:29:00.000-08:00

The ongoing search for the ultimate Gingermobile is in its final furlong.

Beneath this snow is a '78 Cadillac

On the one hand, I might have found it. In fact, it might be sitting in my driveway right at this moment (albeit covered in snow.)

In December of last year, I was given a 1978 Cadillac Eldorado Biarritz Custom Classic and it ticks pretty much every box that my prior "Gingermobile" front runner had (that was a 1978 Lincoln Contential Mark V.)

This is a truly stunning car - and features almost everything I am looking for in an automobile.

It's a luxury car - in it's day, as expensive as a contemporary Bentley or Rolls Royce. It's got four full seats - and they're beautiful two-tone leather. It has a gurgling 7-liter V8 engine and two long, low doors with windows ample enough to clamber in an out of - much like the General Lee (another inspiration for the Gingermobile.)

But today, while idly sorting through the classifieds on Craigslist, I saw something else that caught my attention; and captured my imagination. An Avenger.

The stunning Avenger kit car

A kit car, modeled after the stunning Ford GT40, it remains one of the most truly stunning vehicles on the road - and one of the most affordable.

The model I saw today was just $3,500 with registration and inspection; but easily looks like a car that costs a hundred times that.

One of the most exciting things about an Avenger is the opportunity to totally customize it - from a paint job in keeping with the Gingermobile ethos (red, or maybe two-tone red and cream like the Hirondel) to a roaring V8 engine.

One model I've read about generated 720bhp. The one on sale today had a much more reasonable 90bhp flat four.

From a Gingermobile perspective, it ticked some of the essential boxes - including having a manual transmission and being a real head-turner.

It also delivered a practical 25mpg or more - as opposed to the 3.5mpg of a Lincoln Mark V. The mechanics - mostly VW Beetle derived - are also simple and straightforward enough for me to handle on my own.

The Locomotive remains the de facto Gingermobile

Yet I have some hesitations. Firstly, it's got only two seats (although an enormous boot) which means I'd have to keep The Locomotive on staff for ferrying the Militants about.

Secondly, a poised and nimble sports car is about as far from the rough and ready aesthetic of the General Lee or The Bandit as it's possible to get.

Only time will tell which direction I end up going it. Getting the title for the Cadillac is turning into a bit of an administrative nightmare, so it will be a while before even that beast hits the highway - and by then, who knows what fate will have in store for us.

But one thing is for sure. This is the year the new Gingermobile is crowned. Stay tuned!

The SOPA Opera

2012-01-18T20:09:00.000-08:00

Today has been a dark day for the Internet.

All across the Internet, website have been shutting down in "protest" to the Stop Online Piracy Act, which is in congress at the moment. It threatens to give a powerful minority unprecedented control over the Internet in North America; shutting down website and blocking links that they believe lead to pirated copyright material.

As you might expect, the Internet is ablaze with protest - but from my perspective it actually rings a little hollow.

You see, Internet piracy is a real issue. I mean it's a REALLY, SERIOUS issue. I will agree with protestors that SOPA is not the effective way to stop it, but in all this protest we've kind of forgotten the issue at hand:

The Internet has given people the unprecedented power to steal other people's stuff.

The Internet has given people the unprecedented power to profit off other people's stuff.

And in all this effort to protest SOPA we kind of ignored all that. We got so caught up in being high and mighty about censorship and Internet control that we completely ignored the fact that SOPA is about a very legitimate issue that impacts any and all of us who attempt to profit from stuff we create on the Internet.

Be it movies and music on bittorrent, or whole episodes of shows uploaded to YouTube, it's meant that copyrighted material that people have invested time and dollars into is available FREE for anybody to take and do with what they will.

And that ruins it for all of us.

So check out some ALTERNATIVE voices about SOPA today; so you don't just buy into the bullshit the pro OR anti camp are selling you:

The Exchange Coffee House

Renaissance Babes

Frank Turner - Wessex Boy (Official HD Video)

2012-01-15T04:00:00.000-08:00

Considering I've spent the majority of my life traveling in the opposite direction of where I started out, I've never been able to relate much to those oh-so-sincere pop songs about how much your love your home town, or those tunes about going back to your roots (although I do love the Bon Jovi / Jennifer Nettles collaboration Who Says You Can't Go Home?)

That all changed when I heard that the song I've posted below was being played on Radio 1 - a folksy, acoustic number about being a "Wessex Boy" from my home city, Winchester!

It's a very cute song, and I like the video - filmed, of course, in the heart of the cathedral city. A big shout out to the talented Frank Turner for immortalizing the place of my birth into such a lovely song.

The Regression of the American Auto

2012-01-14T13:11:00.000-08:00

Behold! One of the most beautiful trucks on the market! The intimidating 2010 Chevrolet Silverado half-ton pick-up! Pulling in a hefty 15 miles per gallon.

Compare it to this beauty - the 1937 Chevrolet half-ton. It could haul over 1,000 lbs averaging...

Wait, is this right?

20.7 mpg?

How does that work?

Over seven decades of automotive development and today's pick up trucks are actually LESS fuel efficient?

Monster Trucks!

2012-01-09T19:25:00.000-08:00

Mini Militant recently became obsessed with monster trucks - so I took him to the Sun National Bank Center in glamorous Trenton, New Jersey, to see The Grave Digge r and the Advanced Autoparts Grinder in action. He lasted about 45 minutes before it all became too scary!

They are pretty amazing machines - and LOUD! Earplugs will be an essential next time.

Racist Idiots aren't Criminals

2012-01-08T07:31:00.000-08:00

Stan Collymore

Britain has some rare distinctions.

It's the most burgled country in Europe. It's got the highest rate of violent assault in Europe. In fact, outside of gun crime, it's got a worse record for crime than even the "wild west" of the United States.

Why? Perhaps it's because instead of pounding the beat, cuffing crooks and keeping our pensioners safe from assault, Britain's cops are more focused on 'essential' duties like policing micro blogging site Twitter.

Read: Newcastle Man Arrested Over Racist Tweets.

"Just after midnight police received a complaint of racist comments that had been made on Twitter. Officers are carrying out inquiries."

These inquiries led to a 21-year-old man being arrested for "a Section Five racial public order offence and a Section Five public order offence" after sending two 140 character messages on Twitter.

Now, in all seriousness, I have to ask - are you kidding me?

There is SO much wrong with this story that it just makes me want to vomit. It's indicative of everything that's wrong with British society. Let me explain why.

First off, I'm not defending the racist idiot who sent the twitter messages. I have no tolerance for abuse of any kind. In addition to being a racist Twit (ha, see what I did there?) he was also an idiot for broadcasting his small-mindedness to millions of Twitter members, and having it attached to his real name and identity.

In my opinion, he received instant justice in the form of thousands of abusive tweets sent back in response and Twitter (who are a private company, and can do what they want) deleting his account under their Terms of Service agreement.

What I fail to see, however, is how what he wrote was a criminal offense.

Perhaps this is because I live in America now and have all sorts of fanciful notions about concepts like "Freedom of Speech" - something that isn't a protected right in Europe.

I deplore what this Geordie idiot wrote, but would rather have to listen to him say it than live in a country in which you can be arrested and charged for expressing yourself (even if what your 'expression' is disgusting, racist drivel.)

Secondly, and more importantly, I dislike how the police singled out this 21-year-old to press criminal charges against when Twitter remains replete with racism. I just did a search for the two racist terms contained within the offending Tweets to Stan Collymore and here are some of the results that appeared:

I fail to understand why the guy in Newcastle was handcuffed and charged with two criminal offenses while literally hundreds of other people commit the same offenses on Twitter every single day. If there was a "Twitter crimes" division of the Metropolitan Police, it would be one of the largest at Scotland Yard!

Actually I take that back. I understand perfectly why this racist idiot was singled out - because his Tweets made national headlines and were targeted towards an absurdly rich footballer. The multitude of people who commit exactly the same offense every single day are not worthy of police investigation because the people they target are not rich or famous.

(I apologize for my confusion there - it's because, like "freedom of speech" I had some daft notion that "equal protection under the law" was a protected right in Britain. Not so!)

While we're on the subject, one of the reasons I've always taken a rather politically incorrect stance on accusations of racism is because I find the politics of "racialism" to be rampantly hypocritical. I think it's disgusting to target somebody with a racist slur, but I don't see how it's any different to being targeted with an equally offensive slur about your weight, or looks, or (you probably saw this coming) hair color.

Somebody calling Stan Collymore a rude word gets them locked up - yet where were the police when I had people posting on pictures of my newborn son back in 2008 telling me I "should get him euthanized because he's ginger"?

That is, to my mind, a thousand times more disgusting and offensive than what was Tweeted to Stan Collymore; yet "gingers" aren't protected by British law so the police response to that would likely have been: "suck it up."

(Mind you, if you're getting racist abuse on Twitter, but you're not a footballer earning 23,000 GBP a day, their response is probably going to be the same.)

The irony is, of course, that ginger-baiting is a popular trend on social media - as I wrote about here.

Stan Collymore earns in a day more than most people in Britain earn in an entire year. If the price of that are a couple of racist tweets, you could argue that it's worth it. After all, there are thousands of British people who get similar abuse thrown at them every single day - because of their skin color, sexuality, hair color, weight... None of them get the same level of police response.

Until they do, (or, if you believe in freedom of speech, don't) I think the arrest of Stan Collymore's abuser is utterly absurd: a complete waste of police resources and indicative of everything that's wrong and hypocritical with British society.

A Year in Ginger

2012-01-05T11:53:00.000-08:00

A post full of history requires a historic picture, courtesy of my friend Frank

Perhaps the best part of keeping a blog is that you keep a record of your life you can return to at any time. It prompted me to look back through 2011 and think about all the adventures I'd had. Here are some of the highlights:

In January, I became an American citizen. It was the final chapter in a decade-long journey to America; and a really significant and momentous occasion for me.

In February, I was given the incredible opportunity to travel to Spain with the crew of CNBC's Wine Portfolio TV show. I toured the vineyards of La Rioja, made a lot of new friends and learned a new appreciation for wine and wine culture.

In April, my best friend visited from England and we had a great time doing all the touristy things one never seems to get around to living in a country. In addition to a great trip to Washington D.C., we also visited Eastern State Penitentiary in Philadelphia; which has to be seen to be believed.

Attending Rutgers Day was a great opportunity to salve our homesickness for rural Winchester. Rutgers is one of the largest colleges in America, and their agricultural school is a great place to explore for small people like Mini Militant.

In June, I headed to Philly Comic Con and got to shake the hand of non-other than "good ol' boy" Jonathan Schneider. In addition to getting the autograph of one of the Dukes of Hazzard, I also made friends with lots of lovely costumed ladies (my favorite was the lovely Lara Croft.)

July was the highlight of my year, of course - the arrival the Micro Militant. This little ginger rogue has already won us over with his big blue eyes and crooked smile. His big brother adores him, and we're very happy as a Militant Quartet.

In September, a villainous t-shirt vendor did the unthinkable and stole a picture of me as a cute ginger kid to use in their marketing campaign! I teamed up with another redhead who's often got her online identity stolen and managed to deliver justice.

October delivered one of the strangest things I'd ever seen - a furious snow-storm in the midst of an Indian summer. I don't know what that says about global warming, but it says a lot about getting into training for shoveling The Locomotive out of the snow.

In November, after years living in America, I finally got myself to a gun range and blasted some holes in inanimate objects with .45 handguns and a pump action 12 gauge. It was all very manly and American and I enjoyed it immensely (although I'll still stick to swords and bows for home defense.)

And finally, in December, I took delivery of a 1978 Cadillac Eldorado Biarritz Custom Classic somebody had literally given me. Whether it winds up being the next Gingermobile still remains to be seen; but it's definitely an exciting project to start the new year with.

There's no denying it. 2011 was a very good year; but I still think 2012 promises to beat it. Stay tuned to Militant Ginger to find out how.

Why The World Will Not End in 2012

2011-12-31T21:52:00.000-08:00

For the sake of those people who are fearful of this year's predicted apocalypse, here's a breakdown of why the world WILL NOT end in 2012.

This will not happen in 2012. Jury is still out on 2013.

You can blame the CIA for this 2012 nonsense.

No, I'm not joking.

It was former CIA agent Michael D. Coe (who once tried to topple Chairman Mao) who first shared the theory the world was going to end on December 21st, 2012.

As one of the foremost experts on the civilization of the ancient Mayans, he translated their calendar and noted it "ended" on December 21st 2012.

The Mayans kept time through periods called b'ak'tun, which lasted about 400 years each and, according to Coe, on the completion of the 13th b'ak'tun:

"...there is a suggestion Armageddon would overtake the degenerate peoples of the world and all creation. Thus our present universe would be annihilated in December 2012 when the Great Cycle of the Long Count reaches completion."

The interesting thing about this theory, however, is that it's based on no Mayan writings whatsoever.

Michael D. Coe based his entire theory exclusively on the fact that the calendar he was studying ended on that date. He had no other corroborating evidence. The Mayans didn't prophosize that the world was going to end then. They didn't anticipate some oncoming Apocalypse. They simply didn't have any more entries in their calendar after December.

Now, obviously I'm no archeologist, and my background in ancient civilizations is limited [limited to a joint honors degree in history from a Cambridge-founded university, he whispers smugly - Editorial Bear] But the fact that a calendar ends doesn't mean civilization is going to.

Look at it this way. If aliens picked up a 2012 year planner and saw it "ended" on December 31st, they wouldn't assume that we humans believed civilization was going to end then. They might simply assume that this is the date upon which people go out to buy a new calendar.

Likewise, the fact that the "long count" of the Mayan Calendar ended on the 13th b'ak'tun didn't mean that they believed history would. In fact E. Wyllys Andrews V (V as in 5th) from Tulane University pointed out, entirely logically, that:

"The Maya knew there was a cycle before this one, and that implies they were comfortable with the idea of another one after this one ended."

From a purely practical point of view, the best way to interpret the Mayan calendar ending on December 21st, 2012 is to remember that this was a date FAR in the future at the time the calendar continued to be maintained. They probably weren't worried about having to deal with the transition following the end of the calendar because that eventuality was hundreds of years in their future.

(And if you want an example of this kind of tunnel vision, just look at the last proclaimed "apocalypse" which people believed in. Then it was Y2K, or the "millenium bug." Software designers throughout the eighties and nineties - even though the turn of the century was less than a decade away - were too short-sighted to build in a date matrix that included more than two characters. It didn't mean the world was going to end on December 31st, 1999 - just that we needed a software upgrade.)

Most of what we know about Mayan civilization dates back to the 16th century, when Europeans first landed on the shores of South America. There's not much in the way of Mayan history following that because the Spanish explorers raped, pillaged and murdered the entire civilization.

This is perhaps why they never had a chance to address the fact that their calendar inconveniently "ended." If they'd remained alive for the proceeding 500 years, it's likely they would have got around to knocking up a new one (and none of us would be having to listen to this 2012 drivel.)

The fact is; the 2012 "end of the world conspiracy" is based on nothing more than an administrative oversight by the Mayans; and there's no evidence ANYWHERE to suggest otherwise.

In fact, most of of these end of the world theories - like the theory Earth would be hit by solar flares, or a rogue planet - can be neatly shot down by astronomers, who can demonstrate inarguable evidence that such events cannot occur. In fact, just today the National Air and Space Administration (NASA) debunked some of the more pervasive myths about the 2012 apocalypse.

Even the creepily symmetrical date of the so-called apocolypse - 12/21/2012 - is fake. Michael D. Coe calculated the end of the 13th b'ak'tun would occur in December 2012, but he never said the exact date; and chances are he'd have got it wrong even if he did. Somebody else simply rounded up the date because the 21st was neatly repetitive and ominous.

It's all spin, you see.

Perhaps the clearest proof that the world is not set to end in 2012 is the fact that there have been dozens of dire predictions similar to the 2012 myth (some even within our own lifetime) and none of them have ever come true. Why should this one?

History has shown us countless times that doom-predictors aren't prophets; they're just attention seekers - and those that believe in the 2012 apocalypse are no different.

Goodbye 2011

2011-12-31T19:34:00.000-08:00

Tonight, many of my Facebook friends updated their profiles with messages about how they were glad to see the back of 2011 - and couldn't wait for the New Year and all it would bring.

Personally, I thought 2011 was a great year. From a personal perspective, it was perhaps the best year of my life.

It saw me grow as an individual in countless ways; and it was the first time in my life that I really started to believe that I'd got a handle on things. So I'm not glad to see 2011 go - to quote The Chairman, it was "a very good year."

But everything I've learned this year has set me up for an even better 2012. I'm on the right track now - steaming ahead but with a lot of momentum left to build. I've become a better person than I ever was; but realizing that has also made me realize I've got an awful lot of work left to do.

But I'm excited by the challenge; and even more excited by the proposition of meeting it head on. 2011, in my estimation, was the best year of my life. 2012 will be as well.

I'm not much of one for resolutions, although I've made some. Mummy Militant is going hardcore vegetarian in the New Year for health reasons, and I might join her in an effort to get my body fat percentage down to single digits. I've also made some specific plans about how to improve my professional and financial future - although I won't bore you with those details.

In slightly vaguer terms, I have put down ten resolutions I hope to live by in the coming year. They're areas in my life in which I've often been found wanting; so I'm hoping to address them, and beat them, in the coming twelve months.

I've also made another list - one I don't feel comfortable sharing here. It's unofficially called: "The Militant Ginger List of Wildly Unrational Ambitions" and includes things that a more conservative mind might think would be "unachievable."

But this year has taught me two imperitive facts. Firstly, that nothing the human mind can conceive is unachievable. Secondly, that those who write down their New Year's Resolutions have been scientifically recorded as being 11 times more likely to actually stick to them.

Are you ready to be a better "you" in 2012? I know I am.

Happy New Year.

Militant Ginger's New Year's Resolutions

I will do at least one thing every day that sows a seed for a future fortune.
I will now strive to be the best that I can be.
I will no longer let other people keep me back from achieving my ambitions.
I will strive to always be scrupulously honest.
I will make sure I do everything that I promised I would do.
I will do one thing every day that pushes me outside my comfort zone.
I will no longer settle for personal mediocrity.
I will say nothing of anybody behind their back that I wouldn’t say to their face.
When things don’t work out, I will change my plan of attack and try again.
I will define my ambitions and work to turn each one of them into reality.

Will there be a new Simon Templar in 2012?

2011-12-29T19:40:00.000-08:00

When I was 18, my father gave me a copy of The Saint In New York - which might well have been a move he's subsequently regretted. That book - and the myriad Saint books that I thereafter collected from second hand book shops, jumble sales and thrift stores - had more of an influence on my life than anything other than my parents themselves.

Simon Templar - the brighter buccaneer - helped define my attitude towards right and wrong, my cheery attitude, my taste in beer and cocktails and even the ridiculous cars I drive. He even inspired me on my quest to seek fortune, fame and love in The Big Apple. He is, perhaps, the single most important reason why I set my sights on New York and have subsequently made my life here.

There's a great irony to that. During my sabbatical in England, back in the city in which I was born, I was lucky enough to make acquittance with the man closest to Simon Templar himself - chairman of The Saint Club, acclaimed author and consummate gentleman (complete with furled umbrella and secret, buccaneering dreams) Ian Dickerson.

The irony was the he lived not twenty miles from where I was born, in the beautiful town of Romsey. I'd traveled half way around the globe to seek my Saintly destiny, and the key to it was a half hour's drive from my front door (in Ian's defense, Romsey is a lot more pituresque than the Bronx.)

Ian recently published the definitive record of Simon Templar's television career, in The Saint on TV. With a stunning retro cover (inspired by some of Leslie Charteris' most classic books - I own several, including She Was A Lady) it recounts Simon Templar's career on the small screen all the way from the 1940s to the recent, contemporary attempts to relaunch the series.

This book is the definitive resource for information on The Saint on TV. It contains not just interviews with the leading cast and crew behind the various Saint series - from Roger Moore's tenure, Ian Ogilvy's return and Simon Dutton's short-lived reign beneath the halo - but also correspondence with Leslie Charteris himself, and two previously unpublished scripts.

Ian was kind enough to answer a few questions about the book, which I'm honored to published here:

What inspired you to write this book?

Over the years I’ve acquired so much information and so many stories about attempts to get the Saint on TV that I wanted to put them all together in one volume.

Plus I wanted to take the Saint on TV that everyone knows—Messrs Moore, Ogilvy and Dutton—and try and shine a light on how it was made and some of the people who made it. I also wanted to bring people up to date as what’s been going on with the Saint over the last few years, with the false starts and strange rumors.

What was your first memory of The Saint on TV?

The first episode of Return of the Saint, which I watched only because my older brothers were watching it. And then not long after I remember my eldest brother reading out pieces from an early Saint novel and all of us laughing at Leslie’s wonderful storytelling. Which has been your favorite incarnation so far?I am a child of the 70s so it has to be Ian Ogilvy. If it wasn’t for him I might not have found Leslie’s books. And if I hadn’t found Leslie’s books I certainly would be writing books like this.

What is the future of The Saint on the small screen?

We’ve taken our time over getting the Saint back on TV because we want to get it right, we all firmly believe that there is a place for a Charterisian adventurer in the 21st century and we don’t want to let a network or broadcaster divert us from our creative vision. It’s been a tough course, the last chapter of my book illustrates some of the weirder ideas that have been thrown at us (Liz Hurley as Simone Templar anyone?) but we’ve stayed the journey and we seem to be converting financiers and network executives one by one as to the magic of the Saint (all it’s taken is some of Roger’s episodes and several of Leslie’s books).As it stands I’m optimistic we might finally see something in production next year.

Do you think Simon Templar and his exploits are more or less relevant in this day and age?

I think they’re still extremely relevant in today’s world. Whether it’s more or less I don’t know. But if you look at many of the early stories it doesn’t take a great vision to bring them up to date; after all war financiers, crooked politicians and the Ungodly are still as busy as they’ve ever been.

Who would be your ideal small-screen Saint?

Pierce Brosnan around the time he was doing Remington Steele.

Ian's book, The Saint on TV, is available from Hirst Publishing and I certainly recommend picking up a copy. Also, keep your ear to the ground regarding a revival of The Saint's career.

For a number of years Ian and other Saintly aficionados have been working hard to bring Simon Templar back to the small screen - and almost succeeded recently, with a project that had the inspired choice of leading man James Purefoy in the Saintly shoes.

Currently, things are on hold - but eventually they will get moving again; and one thing is clear. Simon Templar's destiny could not be in better hands.

Thanks, Ian - not just for maintaining The Saint's legacy with a clarity of purpose Leslie Charteris would be proud of, but for being kind, patient and understanding with dolts like me. The Saint on TV is inspired - and any future revival of Simon Templar's career promises to be likewise (as long as you're involved.)

Sherlock Holmes: Game of Shadows - does Bond meet Holmes?

2011-12-23T00:04:00.000-08:00

Parallels have already been drawn between Guy Ritchie's epic re imagining of the Sherlock Holmes franchise and the silver screen's most long-standing action hero, James Bond.

This is mostly because the outrageous action sequences and sexy subplots make Robert Downey Jnr's Holmes very different to the deer-stalker-clad detective of movies past.

Yet in the second big-screen outing for Robert Downey Jnr - Sherlock Holmes: Game of Shadows - the parallels go even tighter. One of the most hilarious one-liners of the film sees Holmes faced with the undignified challenge of riding a horse: "They're dangerous at both ends," he quips, "and uncomfortable in the middle."

That's a line most famously spoken by Ian Fleming, creator of James Bond.

It mirrors another similarity between Bond and Holmes - one highlighted by the dramatic conclusion of Game of Shadows, which sees Holmes and his arch nemesis, Professor Moriarty, battle to the death at the Reichenbach Falls.

This was a plot drawn from Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's story The Final Problem, in which he attempted to "kill" the character of Sherlock Holmes because he was sick of writing about him.

"I must save my mind for better things," he wrote to his mother at the time, "even if it means I must bury my pocketbook with him."

Ian Fleming, too, found himself attempting to murder his iconic character on several occasions.

James Bond almost croaked after being stabbed by a poisoned boot at the end of From Russia With Love, sent off to Soviet Vladivostock at the conclusion of You Only Live Twice and was then left rotting in a swamp at the end of The Man With The Golden Gun (although Fleming might be innocent on that last count of attempted fictionacide, since it's popularly believed Martin Amis wrote thebook.)

In any event, there's a definite similarity in the hatred both Sir Arthur Conan Doyle and Ian Fleming had for their creations - despite them making them both rich and famous.

I like to think Game of Shadows writers Kieran Mulroney and Michele Mulroney knew this when they penned the script - and threw in that line as a nod to Bond aficionados like myself.

Cadillac Man

2011-12-22T23:27:00.000-08:00

Starting up my 1978 Cadillac Eldorado Biarritz Custom Classic

2011-12-18T10:56:00.000-08:00

One of my readers, the venerable Siger, had watched my new 1978 Cadillac Eldorado Biarritz Custom Classic spectacularly failing to start. Here's proof that this weekend's labors were not entirely wasted:

Busy Day

2011-12-17T19:08:00.000-08:00

I have become the proud owner of a 1978 Cadillac Eldorado Biarritz Custom Classic. It is quite the most ridiculous car I have ever owned (and I've owned some prize picks.) But it's beautiful.

Unfortunately, when I got it didn't run - which, looking on the bright side, was for the best because it didn't stop either. Today I spent numerous hours bleeding the brake system and - by George - I think it worked.

So I made a little video about it. Enjoy!

The New Addition to the Militant Ginger Stable

2011-12-12T19:07:00.000-08:00

Some work may be required.

All about ME!

2011-12-11T03:27:00.001-08:00

Hi friends! Sorry about the delay in blogging recently. I've been having a bit of an identity crisis when it comes to Militant Ginger because for too long it's become something of a "blog without portfolio."

There's no I in team, but there are 3 of them in Militant Ginger

At the moment, I am an incredibly prolific (some would say promiscuous) blogger. In addition to my own blogs, which include this one plus the Exchange Coffee House and M for Man!, I maintain over half a dozen other blogs for regional and national businesses - plus my other social media mischief.

It's all taught me something important - that the secret to a successful blog is clarity of purpose.

A blog needs to be about something - something specific. Just like selling a book to a publisher, or an article to an editor, your blog needs to be about something that can be summed up in a single sentence.

So with this bold new understanding of successful blogging to go by, I have decided to define just what Militant Ginger is going to be about - me!

I started this blog as a "personal blog" and that's what it's going to return to being. Or, more specifically, it's going to be a way to update people with things going on in my life (the adorable Micro and Mini Militants) and my career (musings on social media, writing and other adventures) plus news and opinion that's relevant to my interests (stuff about classic cars and ginger hair, but I'll leave the politics to the Exchange Coffee House.)

More importantly than that, I'll use Militant Ginger as a venue to highlight where you can find me elsewhere on the net - when articles, videos or stories come up involving me.

It might sound INCREDIBLY egotistical, but www.MilitantGinger.com is increasingly the face of my business identity as much as my personal identity and I think this approach is going to be the best one to meld them both together.

Anyway. I hope you'll enjoy what you find here - and thanks for being a part of it!

Alec Baldwin Quits Twitter

2011-12-07T08:50:00.001-08:00

Baldwin: Quit Twitter

One of the most prolific celebrity Twitterers, Alec Baldwin, found himself on the receiving end of some unflattering criticism yesterday; after he started criticizing American Airlines for throwing him off a plane (and snarling up airport traffic for over an hour.)

I find it rather ironic that a man who's reaped vast rewards with Twitter as a platform for his political punditry – and even his proposed run for the New York Mayor's Office – could be frightened off the social media platform so easily – especially since the heat he brought was entirely of his own doing.

But then again, isn't that the way of Twitter? In the case of all the celebrities who've dropped off the Twitter rader – including the most-followed man on the Internet, Ashton Kutchner – it's the result of the uncomfortable attention they got for something dumb they said, posted, responded to or retweeted.

It seems like a Twitterer's worst enemy is always himself (or herself.)

Self Checkout

2011-12-02T12:18:00.000-08:00

Need more Militant Ginger? Here I am in a short film by my talented friend Josiah Williams.

Mini Feeds Micro

2011-12-01T18:50:00.000-08:00

Grandmere suggested Micro Militant was old enough to start eating cereal - and Mini Militant was happy to feed him!

Let them eat horse! Should eating horse meat be banned?

2011-12-01T09:36:00.001-08:00

Controversy is rocking butchers across America, as a law banning the eating of horses is set to expire. But what's the big deal about eating horse?

Horse. Great with mashed potatoes?

For the last five years, the preparation and sale of horse meat for human consumption has effectively been banned, because the government refused to allow federal meat inspections which would allowed horse meat into the food chain.

That's all set to change. President Obama has just signed a law which includes a provision to lift that ban – and see horse slaughterhouses open up again in the United States.

Unsurprisingly, there's uproar. Horses are held in high esteem in America – often perceived as one of the great symbols of the Old West. The last U.S. Slaughterhouse that butchered horses closed in 2007 – and animal rights activists have vowed to fight against any reopening.

But my question is this – what's the big deal about eating horses?

In America, we consume millions of tons of cow meat every year, plus untold millions of tons of pork, chicken, bacon, turkey, lamb and venison. Rarer delicacies often enjoyed include alligator (I had some just last month) snake and pretty much anything else that's too slow to escape the gunsights of this nation's avid (and hungry) hunters.

Why should horses be any different?

Well, I have one very good reason in mind: Taste.

I've only eaten horse meat once, in Paris, and it was tough and revolting. Why is this? Because unlike beef, lamb or pork, horses slaughtered for human consumption are never raised for human consumption. They're traditionally the old, injured or sick animals carted off the slaughterhouse because the owner can no longer look after them.

Speaking as somebody who loves a good bit of meat – mouthwatering tenderloin, buttery veal or succulent pork chops – I speak with authority when I say that sick, old animals make shitty eating.

I'm also not keen on the way horses are sometimes transported and handled when they're destined for meat preparation – the live export of horses in Europe is just heartbreakingly cruel; even from the perspective of somebody who has no twang of conscience when it comes to eating other animals (who are generally slaughtered more humanely – not for ethical reasons, but because "stressed" meat doesn't taste as good.)

Horses, on the whole, do not lend themselves to eating.

But in America, you can turn the animal cruelty issue on its head. Unlike in Europe and China, where the export and slaughter of horses is cruel, the opposite is often true in the U.S.. Since the ban on slaughtering horses came into effect, farmers and horse owners have had nowhere to take their old or unfit animals – and that's seen a 60% jump in horse neglect cases and abandonment; which is arguably far more cruel than a quick, clean kill in an abattoir.

Ultimately, I support lifting the ban on the slaughtering of horses because anything else is just hypocritical. It's ridiculous to watch lawmakers claim that eating horse is "cruel" or "wrong" when we happily eat all sorts of other animals. Why the double standard? Aside from an old fashioned romanticism – which I am fully part of, don't get me wrong – there's no logic to not eating horse.

I just won't be ordering it any time soon.

Militant Ginger at the Gun Range

2011-11-27T03:56:00.001-08:00

Hard to believe I've been in America for nearly five years, but this is the first time I've taken to a gun range.

Anniversary of Militant Marriage

2011-11-22T06:05:00.001-08:00

Almost a decade ago, I stood on the sand of Cable Beach and married Mummy Militant.

It's difficult to believe that it was so long ago.

Marriage has been one of the most incredible, difficult and rewarding experiences of my life. Every single day I'm married serves as a reminder that the reason it works - and the reason I'm not a divorce statistic, like 60% of today's marriages are - is because of the wonderful woman I gave my last name to.

I knew literally days after meeting her that I wanted to marry Mummy Militant. She had that spark of beautiful madness and rebellion in her eyes which marked her as one of my own.

From the moment we first kissed, to the adventures we shared in our first few months together, it instantly became obvious that we were as much a romantic duo as Nick and Nora (or Jonathan and Jennifer, if you're of my vintage.)

I'll admit that it has not been easy. In Mexico they're experimenting with "temporary marriages" which you have to renew after the first two years - and if that had been the case with us, I'm pretty sure Mummy Militant would have walked after year two... and three... and four...

But by year five, I think I'd just about got my shit together (which is something I'm hoping to cover in my new blog about how to be a grown up) and that's when things really started to become amazing.

Today, Mummy Militant is my best friend, my confident, my conscience and my muse. She and I work well together because many of the personal qualities I lack - like attention to detail, compassion and drive - she provides our dynamic duo. Likewise, I like to think my buccaneering charm and childish enthusiasm often buoy her up when reality comes closing in.

Marriage is tough - really tough. I often suspect that the human condition is not to be pair-bonded for eternity, since most of us are ego-maniacal and flighty (or is that just me?) Yet Mummy Militant is somebody - the only body - that I could see myself with until the end of my days. Even after years of increasingly sleepless nights and stressful days, I love being around her, and I still think she's the most beautiful girl in the world.

Thank you, Mummy Militant, for all these wonderful years together - and here's to many, many more to come.

M for Man! blog is live

2011-11-21T10:58:00.001-08:00

Fear not, friends! You will no longer be plagued by my new wave of video posts. Instead, they're being directed to my new blog, M for Man!

You can check it out here.

It looks something like this...

M for Man Episode 3: Defining Character

2011-11-20T19:07:00.000-08:00

Mini Militant runs rings round Daddy...

2011-11-20T12:51:00.000-08:00

Hope you're not minding my experimentation with video lately! Normal service (i.e. prose) will resume shortly.

M for Man Episode 2: What is a man?

2011-11-19T21:42:00.000-08:00

M for Man: Episode 1

2011-11-17T19:28:00.000-08:00

Why the Doctor Who Movie is an Awful Idea

2011-11-15T13:49:00.001-08:00

Steven Moffat and the BBC have definitely been guilty of a few missteps with the past season of Doctor Who; but that all pales into insignificance compared to the latest rumors of infamy emerging from Shepherd's Bush.

Matt Smith has every right to look nervous.

L.A.-based BBC Worldwide Productions is apparently planning a big-screen outing for Britain's favorite time traveler - but here's the kicker: It won't have anything to do with the current Doctor Who at all.

"What Russell T. Davies and then Steven Moffat have done was fantastic," explained Harry Potter director David Yates, tipped to head the project. "But we have to put that aside and start from scratch."

"The notion of the time-travelling Time Lord is such a strong one, because you can express story and drama in any dimension or time."

"We're looking at writers now. We're going to spend two to three years to get it right," said Yates. "It needs quite a radical transformation to take it into the bigger arena. We want a British sensibility, but having said that, Steve Kloves wrote the Potter films and captured that British sensibility perfectly, so we are looking at American writers too."

With a release date of late 2012 or 2013, all I can say is this:

DISASTER!

Doctor Who fans finally had the Doctor they deserved, and plot and pacing that the original series (and the more tedious episodes from Russell T. Davies' tenure) lacked Yet this idiot Yates want to throw it all away?

Fifty years of television heritage? Five decades of (essentially) unbroken continuity? A modern vision of something that's been a childhood memory for three generations of kids in Britain and beyond? And he wants to start from scratch?

I'm immediately fearing the worst - the trampling of something precious. It seems inevitable it'll go the same way as it did when Phillip Noyce murdered The Saint, and Frank Miller slaughtered The Spirit.

The first rule of tackling something so beloved by fans is to stay true to the source material (and you'd think Yates would have known that, since he was tediously loyal to J. K. Rowling's books when he directed the last four, lackluster chapters of the Harry Potter saga.)

Doctor Who the movie is going to be a disaster. You have been warned.

Atlas Shrugged: Part 1

2011-11-11T09:22:00.001-08:00

Many have said that Ayn Rand's seminal novel, Atlas Shrugged, could not be filmed. Entrepreneur John Aglialoro challenged that notion; and the result is a movie of astonishing competency.

It took nearly 40 years and countless treatments before Atlas Shrugged: Part 1 became a reality. Much like the bridges, railroads and alloys Rand wrote about, this was largely a result of the vision of one man.

Businessman John Aglialoro, who generated a Forbes-mentioned fortune through heading a fitness equipment company, embarked on a personal crusade to do what dozens of directors and producers had failed to since Ayn Rand's novel first hit the bookshelves.

After facing resistance from every direction - again, mirroring the storyline of the book - he sunk $10 million of his own money into the project and finally bring Rand's novel to the silver screen (in limited release.)

And just like with the book's fictional Reardon Metal, the verdict came in prematurely.

Atlas Shrugged: Part 1 was mocked, maligned and derided by critics for "low budget" effects, it's "unknown" cast and "laudable" source material - without many critics having even sat through a screening.

Which is a shame; because the end result is actually nothing short of impressive.

In making Atlas Shrugged, John Aglialoro and director Paul Johansson faced numerous challenges. Their 1,000+ page source material was unwieldy and dated. Their budget was a fraction of what major Hollywood studios pay with. Plus - perhaps most significantly at all - "polite society" had a popular disdain for Rand's objectivist philosophy, so they could expect little or no industry support in making their movie.

Yet despite all that, it exists.

Aglialoro and Johansson solved their first hurdle by cutting the proposed script into three separate movies. Bringing Rand's dystopian vision into the 21st century ended up being easier than expected - as much of the depression and uncertainty she wrote about exists today.

As for the budget - it stretches impressively far. Despite sometimes looking more like a TV mini series than a Hollywood movie, Johansson is an aggressively talented director and created impressive set-peices regardless. One of the final scenes - in which a train speeds along the John Galt Line and the world's first Reardon Metal Bridge at 300mph - is the equal of any $100 million+ blockbuster.

Likewise, the "unknown" cast is actually fairly recognizable to most TV viewers - including faces fresh from Ugly Betty, House and Buffy the Vampire Slayer. They all do an impressive job; especially given that the biggest failing in Ayn Rand's book was her characterization (most of her protagonists read like people with Aspergers.)

The obstacle they couldn't overcome, however, was the audiences preconceptions about the movie, and the industry's lackluster support of it upon release.

Hollywood rejected the movie, so it saw only limited release in 400 cinemas nationwide. Likewise, critics panned it unfairly; with some truly horrible reviews that really weren't fair.

Those reviews weren't fair because, ultimately, Atlas Shrugged: Part 1 is not a bad movie at all.

It's incredibly fluently filmed; and eminently watchable despite the fact that most of the "action" of the movie is people talking about political and economic things happening off screen (the major reason people claimed Rand's novel was "unfilmable.)

There's such a lot to cram into a single movie, and a plot of such skullduggary and intrigue, that it helps to have read the novel beforehand to really get what's going on - but you don't have to.

Case in point; my wife (who is very liberal) rolled her eyes when I rented it, but still sat down to watch the entire thing; asking me questions throughout about what was going on.

The fact is, the indefinable "thing" that has made Atlas Shrugged perennially popular translates to the silver screen; and resonates with a lot of people. It may not have been realized as effectively as it could have been; but Atlas Shrugged: Part 1 is still a serviceable, well-made film that the cast and crew have every right to be proud of.

Those familiar with the book should probably watch it. Those that aren't should definitely do so.

Gentleman's Emporium – you disappoint!

2011-11-09T09:48:00.000-08:00

As readers of Militant Ginger know, I rock two things: The Victorian Aesthetic and slights against redheads. Now a post combining the two!

Top Hat, Waistcoat and Rifle Coat

Today, I was disappointed to discover that the Gentleman's Emporium – the fine haberdashers who have supplied many of my wardrobe items – have neglected to cater to the ginger nation with their new line of faux mustaches.

These impressive stick-on 'tasches are available in a wide selection of styles and colors – from ash blonde Ambassador to black Oil Can Harry – but none appear to match my hair color, or that of any of my ginger brethren!
This is disappointing, to be sure.

While redheads comprise only a tiny fraction of the population, there is a statistical spike amongst cosplayers and steampunkers (likewise Renn Faire attendees and comic con vistors.)

Similarly, American and Victorian history had a higher-than-the-national-average percentage of redheads in roles of leadership and note (from Thomas Jefferson to Winston Churchill.)

I've accepted that many companies are guilty by omission when it comes to gingers (Nintendo dismissed my complaint that you couldn't make a redheaded Mii) but I had hoped the Gentleman's Emporium would be a bit more evolved in this matter.

After all, I'm a loyal customer of theirs and a fierce ambassador of their brand (where did I get this cool rifle coat, you ask? Let me give you the website.) It's not nice to be unable to add a fine mustache to my collection of nifty Victorian costuming.

(Personally, I think I'd rock a Barbershop mustache.)

Haunted House

2011-11-07T19:37:00.000-08:00

The Haunted House

So I find myself on the horns of a dilemma.

Here I am, the big 21st century skeptic, who believes in nothing that can't be convincingly, categorically proven.

And yet I've become convinced that my house is haunted.

You may scoff - and, in fact, my parents may roll their eyes because I was obsessed with ghost hunting as a kid - but I honestly think it's true.

Let me state my case.

First off, flash back to 2007 - when Militant and Not-Yet-Mummy Militant moved into our humble red brick abode with five suitcases and a bengal leopard cat.

When we moved in, our landlord replaced the carpet - and in bedroom number #2, we found a great, big, red stain across the warped, old wooden floorboards - intersected by gouged cuts an inch deep in the wood.

Being somewhat of a storyteller, I joked that this was where the New Jersey mafia had once chainsawed up an informant - and we all had a good giggle about that...

Except a few weeks later - when I was struck by insomnia in the middle of the night - it suddenly didn't feel so hilarious.

A foul stench suddenly filled the room - which was ironic because I'd just been reading about the Amityville haunted house, where a foul stench was one of the precursors to their poltergeist activity. Then, as Mummy Militant lay slumbering beside me, I saw the lights.

Green. And blue. And red. Hazy, reflected off the walls.

Terrified, I clambered out of bed, paced down the corridor and came face-to-face with the reason for the weird lights...

My wife's stereo, on "demo mode."

Mummy Militant woke up, disturbed the the disturbance, and i explained - somewhat ashen faced - what had been going on. The lights, I admitted, were just from the stereo... But that stench?

A skunk. Being a newcomer to the northeastern United States, I hadn't experienced the burnt-rubber stench of a friendly, neighborhood skunk before (but I got used to it, until the poor little fella fell foul of the same fate that robbed us of our bengal cat.)

Since then...

Well, I'll tell you this. That room - the one with the red stains underneath the carpet - remains icy cold all year round, no matter how much you turn up the central heating. That's why we switched to living in the spare room a few months after moving in.

And stuff goes missing in our house - only to turn up, weeks later, in inexplicable places. The refridgerator. The basement. The trunk of one of our cars.

And then there's the other stuff.

Like the door to the "haunted" room opening and closing on its own.

Like, the door clicking shut, then popping open as if somebody had turned the handle.

Or Mini Militant, who sleeps in the haunted room (don't judge - we don't exactly have a mansion to give him much of a choice in chambers) getting up every night because he's "scared."

Or the fact that the other morning - when Mummy Militant et la famille were all slumbering - somebody human pattered past the open bathroom door when I was showering - but when I emerged, dripping, to see who it was, there was nobody in the room.

It's all stuff that could easily be dismissed as a trick of the light, a gust of wind or the typical behavior of a three-year-old. But when one thing that's easily dismissed is placed against another thing that's easily dismissed and then more... Well, you start seeing a pattern.

A weird, crazy, holy-hell-this-might-just-be-true pattern that gets even a tired old skeptic like me wondering...

Okay, it sounds ridiculous as I type it. I'm not a superstitious chap at all. I don't believe in ghosts.

But they still scare me. ;-)

Snow... in October?

2011-10-29T12:02:00.000-07:00

Al Gore has a lot to answer for. He promised us global warming and instead we've got a snowstorm in October!

Reading Material

2011-10-28T10:39:00.001-07:00

Micro Militant is going to be a horseman. He has already got himself started on the text books.

In Which Militant Ginger is an Idiot and it's All Richard Dawkin's Fault

2011-10-27T16:43:00.000-07:00

One of the greatest digital timewasters of our age is the Internet "meme." This is basically an online version of a Fast Show sketch – the same joke told again and again using the same visual components, with slight variations that make it increasingly hilarious.

An example:

Challenge Accepted uses the same stick-figure face in every meme

Being a somewhat educated sort [you mean wildly pretentious – Editorial Bear] I had assumed that the root of the term "meme" was from the French word "même" - literally "the same". This was a logical translation as each image was "the same" as the others, with the variation being the joke.

Therefore, for as long as I've been aware of Internet memes, I've been pronouncing them "mehms" (to rhyme with "stems", "gems" or "hems.") Worse than that, I've actually been making fun of people who "mispronounce" the word with the (seemingly) ridiculous-sounding pronunciation "meem".

Except today, the fun-making stopped. Because I discovered I was the one who'd been doing the mispronunciation all along.

It turns out "meme" really IS pronounced "meem" - and it's deliberate!

I had no idea, but the word "meme" was coined by no-less than arch-atheist Richard Dawkins, in his 1989 book The Selfish Gene. He wrote:

"We need a name for the new replicator, a noun that conveys the idea of a unit of cultural transmission, or a unit of imitation. 'Mimeme' comes from a suitable Greek root, but I want a monosyllable that sounds a bit like 'gene'. I hope my classicist friends will forgive me, if I abbreviate mimeme to meme. If it is any consolation, it could alternatively be thought of as being related to 'memory', or to the French word même. It should be pronounced to rhyme with 'cream'."

So even though the word IS based off the French one, Dawkins DELIBERATELY SPECIFIED that it should rhyme with "gene" because he wanted to express the parallel between items that are reproduced by imitation rather than reproduced genetically.

Or, more specifically, because he wanted to a pompous twit (which is something he's managed to get down pat.)

Anyway. The result is that I'm the so-called Social Media expert who has been sounding like an idiot for the last five years.

The humiliation. It burns.

Pug Equation

2011-10-23T21:26:00.000-07:00

Up on the Roof

2011-10-23T21:19:00.000-07:00

Last weekend I spent six hours underneath the bonnet (hood) of The Locomotive changing the water pump.Why? Because Pepboys quoted me $480 to do it - and I managed to get the whole task accomplished with a $40 part and a six-pack of Sam Adams.

Since then, my relationship with The Locomotive has changed somewhat. I've decided to give it a little more love. That's why today I did what I should have done two years ago, and refurbished the elegant vinyl roof.I'll post pictures of the completed project tomorrow - but I think this little procedure will make her look ten years younger.

Good Advice on Personal Branding

2011-10-19T20:37:00.000-07:00

Somebody very smart gave me some good advice today.

You get to choose what your online identity is

I've written before about personal branding, and how what you put out into the Internet remains there for perpetuity; to return and bite you on the arse when you least expect it.

Whether it's Facebook, Twitter or a blog, the person-of-smartness I spoke to today reminded me that you should say nothing that you wouldn't say out loud, in public, in real life; even within the supposedly safe, pre-vetted community of your approved list of 'friends.'

One reason for this is professionalism. You could be bitching about something completely unrelated, but somebody you know could think you're talking about something you both work on and you could end up causing drama where none existed.

But, more importantly, bitching and moaning on Facebook or Twitter is bad because it says something about you. I'm a big believer in the Law of Attraction - that you attract what you project - and if you project bitchiness and snot, that's exactly what you'll receive - in abundance.

Being bitchy or snotty can be fun, cathartic and entertaining; but you don't want that to become your personal brand. You don't want to be the person your friends think of as synonymous with stomping their feet or throwing their toys out of the pram at the least provocation.

That kind of behavior might win you a lot of acquaintances who like to watch the entertainment you provide, but it won't win you much respect - or work.

These days, your social media persona has become almost as important as your real life persona - so make sure your online identity is one people want to be friends with; and do business with.

Tintin is nearly here!

2011-10-17T18:41:00.000-07:00

Proving once again that the French are often more civilized than the rest of the world, they get to enjoy The Adventures of Tintin literally months before we yanks do. It opens at the end of October there. We have to wait until Christmas.

I needn't tell you how excited I am about this film - it looks amazing. Not only that, but Tintin is a true ginger. It seems Spielberg's remained true to everything that made the original Tintin books so timeless. I can't wait!

For those of you who speak the lingo, here's the fantastic trailer en Francais.

Rome Sweet Rome - the movie based on an Internet comment

2011-10-14T16:45:00.000-07:00

People joke that Hollywood is scraping the bottom of the barrel for movie ideas. Then they hear news that an online comment is being turned into the latest big budget blockbuster, and the joke suddenly doesn't seem quite so funny any more.

It's Blackhawk Down meets Spartacus. Maybe.

But that's the inspiration behind upcoming sci-fi extravaganza Rome Sweet Rome – the story of detachment of U.S. Marines thrown thousands of years back in time to face off against the armies of Augustus Ceasar.

The inspiration for this incredible idea was a question on an online forum - Could I destroy the entire Roman Empire during the reign of Augustus if I traveled back in time with a modern U.S. Marine infantry battalion or MEU?

Aspiring author James Erwin, writing under the name Prufrock451, decided to answer that question in the form of several chapters of flash fiction.

His short tale of a marine unit stationed in Afghanistan, getting hurled back in time to the heart of the Roman Empire, won instant fans on the forum Reddit.com.

The post's following popularity drew the attention of Madhouse Entertainment; who nabbed the rights and sold it to Warner Brothers for an undisclosed figure. Rome Sweet Rome will hit our cinema screens soon.

As most aspiring authors probably are, I'm a little envious of Erwin's success! But like with all tales of "overnight success", it's worth pointing out that it was proceeded by a lot of hard work.

James Erwin, from Des Moines, is actually a professional writer (read Declarations of Independence.) Years of writing honed solid storytelling skills - which eventually empowered him to make his interpretation of the forum question so instantly compelling.

For writers, the lesson is a simple one: Your big break could come from seizing the most innocuous opportunity; so make sure to put your writing out there as frequently as you can.

Also, be talented.

Overnight success doesn't happen… well, overnight. You have to plant a lot of seeds (as in, put a lot of writing in the public eye) before something eventually blossoms like it did for Erwin.

You also have to be a good writer.

James Erwin deserves every bit of his success. Good luck!

Demand Media Freelancers Feel the Pinch

2011-10-12T13:24:00.000-07:00

In addition to my day job, I write. Incessently. And mostly for money.

We're publishing? Sadly, not any longer...

One great source of income has always been Demand Media. The company behind popular websites like eHow.com and livestrong.com, their modus operendi has always been to create page titles based on popular keywords, then pay freelancers to write the accompanying article.

This type of content flooded search engines. See for yourself - enter "how to" do something and an article from eHow.com invariably pops up as one of the first choices.

Critics called this process "content farming," citing the fact that the how-to articles eHow.com provided were very thin on content; generally written quickly and broadly and paraphrased from superior articles that would then be dislodged by the inferior copy in Google's page rankings.

But for freelance writers, it was an amazing opportunity. You would be paid $15 to write an eHow article; which generally took between twenty minutes and half an hour to punch out. With tens of thousands of article titles up for grabs, it was a very good way to make some quick, consistent pocket money - and Demand Media were consummate professionals to work with; paying what they owed promptly and fairly.

Notice I'm writing all this in the past tense.

Because recently, Google changed their search engine algorithms in order to punish so-called "content farming." For people looking for genuine "how-to" articles on the 'net, it was a boon - as they'd be more likely to find useful information than paraphrased eHow content. However, for the literally thousands of freelancers who earned money from Demand Media, it was a nightmare.

Demand Media went from offering upwards of 20,000 available titles for freelancers to tackle to a fraction of that amount. Today, I logged onto my account and saw I had a choice of three. Only one of them - about agricultural farm machinary - was something I was capable of writing about.

From my point of view, it sucks - I've gone from having an easy source of income which could net me a few hundred dollars a month, to just another empty login address. A lot of other writers share my frustration - but I'm not sure I share their wrath:

"The company has been evasive and dishonest for the last few months, giving no notice of the drastic cut in available work," complained one. "What Demand Mediocre Studios did is absolutely unforgivable," hisses another. "The CEO is a pathological liar and hopefully one day he'll get evicted from his home like so many of us writers are about to experience."

They're idiots.

You see, I agree that the situation sucks, but it's not exactly Demand Media's fault. They had a business model based on a specific set of circumstances - the way Google and other search engines ranked content - and now that's changed, they've been forced to change to adapt to it.

And to their credit, they have. Although it might seem like it to us writers, Demand Media haven't shut up shop. Instead Joanne Bradford, Demand Media's Chief Revenue Officer, explained they were shifting their publishing to "focus on using people who have expertise about the topics they write about."

In short, Google is demanding higher quality content, so Demand Media are changing their game to provide it. More general writers like myself, who have been left out in the cold with this shift, have only ourselves to blame.

Right from the beginning, I always feared Demand Media was too good to be true. The amount of work that was available, the respectable rates of pay you received and the ease of getting published seemed like it was going to turn out to be a scam of some sort.

Instead, it was a great gig for thousands of aspiring writers - and for a number of months, we all did very well out of it. Now, we freelancers need to embrace the same challenge the team at Demand Media did: Accept the new state of affairs, adjust our gameplan to suit and - ideally - thrive in this new environment.

It was fun while it lasted. Thanks, Demand Media - and best of luck to both of us.

Bravest Boy Ever

2011-10-03T19:39:00.000-07:00

At the dentist for the first time.

Has Doctor Who Lost the Plot?

2011-10-03T13:53:00.000-07:00

But his coat this season was EPIC

This Saturday saw the season finale of Doctor Who; and my verdict was "undecided".

From beginning to end, the sixth season of Doctor Who has been a starkly different animal to the one that came before it; and not in a good way.

Perhaps it's understandable. Last year, after all, there was a lot riding on the BBC's flagship TV series.

The creative reins had been passed from Russell T. Davies - the man who'd reinvigorated the franchise - to talented writer Steven Moffat.

Similarly, the much-loved David Tennant (a ubiquitous presence on the BBC) was handing the keys of the TARDIS to the young and untested Matt Smith.

The word on the street was that it would be a disaster. How could you improve upon the near-perfection of David Tennant's tenure in the TARDIS?

But we were all in for a shock. Matt Smith was nothing short of magnificent - the best doctor by far since Tom Baker. Likewise, Steven Moffat created a season-long arc that culminated beautifully in a truly epic finale.

So following that was going to be a challenge.

But from the season opener of Season 6 - in which the Doctor was gunned down on the banks of Lake Silencio, and evil aliens threatened the Apollo moon landings - something seemed off. That disconnect only worsened as the season progressed.

And I dug the cowboy hat, too...

It was The Telegraph's Neil McCormick who perhaps summed it up best, in his article Doctor Who: they're making it up as they go along.

He writes: "Stephen Moffat likes to convey the impression that there is a grand plan. But if there is, he clearly hasn’t shared it with anyone else, including his actors."

I can't really argue with him.

My disillusionment with Doctor Who came with the mid-season opener, Let's Kill Hitler.

So many gaping, epic plot strings - like River Song's origins, how she learned to fly the TARDIS, where she learned the Doctor's name - were wrapped up so irreverently quickly that Neil McCormick's words sprang immediately to mind - they really were making this up as they went along.

Making matters worse was the way the Doctor Who crew jiggered episodes about to fit them into the new 6 + 6 season arc (six episodes in spring, six in autumn.)

The episodes Night Terrors and The God Complex were classic Doctor Who at their best; but because they were originally intended to be broadcast earlier in the season, they dragged Rory and Amy out of the current, high-octane plot line (in which they were searching through time and space for their kidnapped, infant daughter) and instead had them once again acting as a carefree, childless couple.

One moment, the TARDIS crew were stuck deep in the emotional gravitas of an epic story arc - the next they were frolicking about possessed hotels without a care in the world.

Mummy Militant was immensely irritated by the way Amy and Rory irreverently dealt with the kidnapping of their daughter. Yes, they ultimately knew that she'd grow up to be the ass-kicking archeologist River Song; but as my wife pointed out, that still didn't mean they wouldn't have torn time and space apart in search of their kidnapped infant.

It just wasn't believable human behavior; and that damaged the credibility of every dramatic scene they were in.

My complaint was a little more narrative driven. Two episodes in particular, The God Complex and The Girl Who Waited, kicked off with the Doctor throwing his two friends into life-or-death situations through mind-numbingly inane acts of carelessness.

In one, they venture to a plague-world and lost Amy because she pressed the wrong button on the elevator (lazy writing which undermined the emotional impact of this otherwise powerfully-written episode.)

In the next episode, the Doctor and pals simply arrived on what turned out to be a lethal prison ship; making you wonder exactly what the Doc was entering into his SatNav when he set course on the TARDIS.

Steven Moffat has actually fallen into one of the flaws of the previous, low-budget incarnation of Doctor Who - when the Doctor and his assistants would seem to be mindlessly blundering from one life-threatening situation to the next without any clear direction in mind.

Until now, the new series of Doctor Who has always avoided that; with the Doctor having at least some reason for visiting each destination (even if it was just to visit the dogs with no noses.)

One of the strength of the last season of Doctor Who was that the plot was driven through complex characterization.

This time around, Steven Moffat seemed to be more interested in ticking off boxes in his "loose threads" list. The result meant that none of the episodes really hit their target; and none of the loose threads were tied up entirely satisfactorily.

We can only hope that next season is a little better.

Sunday Morning

2011-10-02T18:44:00.001-07:00

Forget Mexican drug cartels - how Homeland Security is protecting us against Canadian sheep

2011-09-22T09:49:00.000-07:00

Down in the south, there's a war going on. The border between Mexico and the United States has become a battleground, as illegal immigrants and drug cartels cross into American territory with impunity; bringing with them crime, violence and misery.

This is what the Mexico/US border looks like

But don't expect Homeland Security to do anything about it. They have bigger fish to fry; as I discovered this week.

Epic jacket was epic

Following the demise of my ankle-length leather duster (bought for the princely sum of $69 dollars from the Burlington Coat Factory) I ordered a replacement winter coat from Canada - an RAF greatcoat modeled after the one worn by Captain Jack Harkness, on Torchwood.

.38 Webley sold separately

Today was the day it was meant to arrive in the post - but no such luck. Instead I received a report that my jacket was "detained at customs" because agents were concerned it was manufactured from that most dangerous and illegal of all contraband - wool.

Now, admittedly, I have a bad track record with border security (I've been detained, deported, have goods lost, stolen, broken and confiscated) but of all the flimsy excuses I'd ever heard for stopping a shipment, the chance that it contained wool must rank amongst the most ridiculous.

Is this America's greatest enemy?

I mean, is there some great woolen conspiracy I'm unaware of? Are American wool manufacturers finding themselves swamped by cheap wool from Canadian sweat(er)-shops? Have enterprising French-Canadian drug barons figured out a way to lace cardigans and jumpers with cocaine to sneak across the border into Vermont?

I couldn't tell you - but I can tell you that I'm narked.

I mean, the United States is essentially in a de facto state of war along the Mexican border and Homeland Security is concerning themselves with my coat? Because it's made out of wool?

I mean, I don't claim to be an expert, but I'm pretty sure thousands of sheep in Vermont trot gaily too and fro across thousands of miles of undefended Canadian border each and every day - and none of them get stopped and frisked by men with guns (or maybe they do. Perhaps those are considered Black sheep Ops.)

Anyway. As a result I have to wait an extra week for my beautiful new coat; and hundreds of criminals down south will be able to use my sartorial distraction to continue smuggling drugs and people into America with impunity.

Way to go, American border control! Another victory to your name!

No sperm please, you're ginger...

2011-09-17T06:37:00.000-07:00

Danish sperm bank Cryos, the largest depository of donated sperm in the world, is turning down gingers.

"There are too many redheads in relation to demand," admits Ole Schou, Cryos's director. "The only reliable demand for sperm from redheaded donors from Ireland, where it sells like hot cakes."

"I do not think you chose a redhead, unless the partner - for example, the sterile male - has red hair, or because the lone woman has a preference for redheads. And that's perhaps not so many, especially in the latter case."

This is not good news. For a start, it's a fairly blatant demonstration of how redheads continue to be deemed somehow "less desirable" than people with more traditional hair colors. Secondly, and more importantly, it puts a serious dampener on my planned Militant Ginger Mail Order Sperm Company.

Cryos supply bespoke sperm to over 65 countries worldwide. That raises a question I've always had about sperm donation and test tube babies: What does it say about our society when creating test tube babies is a billion dollar industry, yet at any given time there are 120,000 children up for adoption in the United States alone?

And another issue, particular to Britain and other European countries. Given the number of children up for adoption, is it appropriate that fertility treatment is offered by the National Health Service, and other taxpayer funded health care funds?

How do you feel about the issue?

Change.org are tedious, futile bores

2011-09-15T08:08:00.000-07:00

Sign a petition. Change nothing.

For some reason, I'm signed up to receive emails from change.org - the self proclaimed "online destination for social change." I've always found their emails tediously self-righteous; like the one today complaining about social media site Facebook:

"Dear Roland," wrote Shelby and the change.org team. "Facebook says that hate speech and incitements to violence are banned and will be removed from their site."

"So why are they maintaining a page called "throwing bricks at sluts" that includes a photo gallery of portraits asking "Bang or Brick"?"

"Change.org member John Raines is going straight to the top. He started a petition on Change.org telling Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg to take down these pages and take a stronger stand."

Hey, while he's at it why doesn't Raines ask Zuckerburg to purge Facebook of all offensive pages. Let's start with the pages that celebrate "hating gingers." They are literally hundreds of them.

Pages and pages of groups exist for the common interest of "hating gingers"

I mean, these pages are offensive, right? I'm certainly offended by them.

But what about taking it a step further. How about taking down other pages that cause offense. What about the dozens of pages which feature Christians arguing that homosexuality is a Biblical sin? Those are homophobic, right?

Hundreds of pages like this exist

How about pages supporting a "free Palestine"? Those are antisemitic, right? I mean, many of them are created by Jewish people, but there are plenty of people in Israel and America who feel that anything less than unconditional, unilateral support of Israeli policy in Gaza is inherently "antisemitic."

Millions have "liked" pages supporting a Palestinian state

While we're at it, let's see if we can combine ginger-baiting with antisemitism. How about this page?

Yep, this page exists

My point is this: Facebook is populated by user-created content - and a significant proportion of those "users" are assholes. Hundreds of thousands of patently offensive pages exist, while millions more could be considered offensive by some political and religious groups.

That's the price of freedom of speech; something Facebook seems much more willing to tolerate than change.org.

I'm not exactly sure what change.org intended to achieve by fighting for the removal of two specific pages, regarding one specific issue, while thousands of more troubling pages remain. I suspect they're trying to get Facebook to start censoring users contents; which is all well and good until you start questioning who gets to censor what.

I'd rather live in a world in which pages proclaim "ginger jews r EVIL!!!" than one in which our Facebook content comes filtered through a tedious committee of airy liberals like the crew from change.org.

Offensive speech, even online, isn't fought by censoring it. That just validates it and draws attention to it. Instead, you have to combat it with reason, or simply ignore it. Starved of attention, anything dies.

Change.org should really turn their efforts to more worthwhile endeavors. Emails like the one I got this morning undermine the few occasions in which they do try and do something right.

Translation Issues

2011-09-14T07:13:00.001-07:00

While we're on the subject of clothing, here's one sartorial translation issue I identified:

Beware the Bossy Fashionistas

2011-09-13T22:24:00.000-07:00

Style, or something not-quite-like it

Ever since I started going to the gym five days a week and wearing tailored shirts, I've occasionally flicked through the pages of Men's Health magazine. It's certainly beats Maxim, although there aren't nearly so many pretty girls in it.

Recently, they published the grandly-titled "Fall 2011 Guide to Style" which I eagerly devoured, since I consider myself somewhat of a stylish guy already, but am always ready to improve my game.

Except I didn't. In fact, I was monstrously disappointed in what I read.

It wasn't just that it was badly written ("Don't try to dazzle," they tell us in Step 9, then later interview infamous seduction artist Neil Strauss, author of The Game, and recommend men "wear something that stands out" and have an "audacious wardrobe.") It was more than they threw out their shockingly poor advice with an overwhelmingly undeserved authority.

Which is, I'm concerned to say, something I've also noticed elsewhere from so-called "authorities" on gentleman's styling.

It was through a very stylish friend from work that I got into reading men's style blogs - but once I got passed the brilliant ones he recommended (The Impossible Cool for example, and awesome Philadelphia shirtmaker Commonwealth Proper) I started to stumble across some truly ropey ones.

The one thing they all shared in common - aside from some remarkably sketchy ideas about style - was that they didn't so much advise men how to dress well, but laid down increasingly inconceivable rules they had to adhere to; with the implication that any deviation was unacceptable.

That's rather the antithesis of what I define as "style", actually. Style isn't being a slave to convention and conformity; it's about finding a look that's right for you. It's about living within the expectations of accepted fashion (matching shoes with your belt and wallet, for example) and then making those conventions your own by defying conformity in every other framing detail.

Style is something you discover yourself; not something that can be written down like the recipe for chicken soup, or an equation. Yet countless bloggers try; despite many of them being hidiously underqualified to do so; or just obnoxiously opinionated.

Nowhere was this more annoying - or transparent - than on style blogs that had a retail element. Take Mr Porter, for example, who reprinted the list of Gentleman's "essentials" as deemed by Mr Anton Torsten, an art collector from Stockholm.

Swedish men do not have an international reputation for style.

In Torsten's defense, he was compiling a list of essential items for the man who worked a job which required him to wear a suit every day - but even with that in mind, this list is bunk.

(And in Mr Porter's defense for reprinting this list - they're in the business of selling suits, so of course they want to encourage people who don't know any better to sweep half a dozen off their shelves.)

I mean, if Torsten himself does have three blue suits and three grey suits in his wardrobe, I'd go banco that they're crammed between half a dozen other suits, two tuxedos and enough sports jackets to stock Men's Warehouse on Black Friday. His is a wholesale list, not an essential one. I bet he's never lived by it himself.

The fact is, for those of us out there who truly require an "essential" wardrobe, less is infinitely more.

For example, the conceit of Torsten's list is that men are expected to wear a suit every day. He's right in that dry cleaning suits is expensive and damages them, so you want to have a collection to "cycle" through the weeks to keep them as fresh and wear-free as possible.

The truth is, though, that you don't need six suits to do so. Two or three will do.

Since most men slip their jacket off the moment they sit at their desk, having a different jacket for every day of the week is damned ridiculous. It spends most of its life in the office doing what it does in the wardrobe - hang from a hanger. It doesn't need to be washed as frequently as the pants.

So instead of abiding by Torsten's requirements, men should rather buy two or three suits each with two or three matching pairs of trousers. That way they can "cycle" the trousers and wear the jacket one day to the next.

(And since we're on the subject, I think it's probably acceptable to wear a pair of trousers more than once during the week, as well.)

As for the color and quantity... Blue and grey aren't exactly versatile. I think just one blue and one charcoal suit, with two matching pairs of trousers, is more than enough to get most working men through the week.

That leaves instead room for one "essential" Torsten omitted - a black suit and two matching trousers - while still halving the "essential" list of clothing.

Why a black suit? Well, if we're talking essentials what's more essential than that? If you're only going to own three suits, you require a black one - for funerals and, if you absolutely have to, roughing it as formal wear.

Likewise, I have objections to Torsten's demand for six white shirts and six blue shirts (although the tip about keeping a spare at work is a good one.)

If you're going to go for essentials - the absolutely bare essentials - you want six white shirts. Not only does it go with everything, but it also reflects one American fashion concept that doesn't translate to the other side of the Atlantic. The notion that "workers wear blue, bosses wear white."

The term "blue collar" worker and "white collar" are quite literal class distinctions here; so pick your shirt color and make the choice about how you want others (consciously or unconsciously) to view you.

Next, shoes. Torsten demands five pairs of black and chestnut shoes. This is because Torsten is the male equivalent of Carrie Bradshaw. At the most, an "essential" gentleman needs one pair of black shoes and one pair of brown shoes and they need to fastidiously polish and maintain them. That way, they'll last for years.

10 pairs of socks is a reasonable number (given how infrequently I do my laundry), but why Torsten suggested they be in navy blue is beyond me. Navy blue doesn't go with brown. It doesn't go with grey. It certainly doesn't go with black. He selected an "essential" sock color that automatically clashed with half of his "essential" wardrobe suggestions.

An "essential" choice would be black. Black socks go with everything, more or less. What's more, if you buy ten identical pairs you never need to worry when the tumble dryer eats one of them. You'll always have a pair.

The three scarves, 10 handkerchiefs and 10 ties also seem far too excessive to be considered "essential." I wore a suit every day for work for four years and managed to make do with a single plain, black woolen scarf I picked up from a stall on Fifth Avenue after 9/11 (and I still wear it to this day.) Scarves don't exactly get a lot of wear and tear, so it's not "essential" to have spares.

Similarly, your pocket handkerchief should match your shirt - white, as I've suggested above - and is not for wiping your snotty nose on. Therefore I see no reason why you'd ever need to own more than one.

As for ties? You could extend your collection to one for every day of the week and still have more than you'd reasonably ever need to wear. Just make sure one is black, for that aforementioned funeral.

My modest adjustments have neatly trimmed 3 suits, 6 shirts, 3 pairs of shoes, 2 scarves, 9 handkerchiefs and 4 ties from the equation (saving any man hundreds of dollars on his "essential" wardrobe) and personally, I think you'd still be amply equipped - if not more so - to deal with any sartorial situation you might get faced with.

That, my friends, is the essence of an "essential" wardrobe - not Torsten's bloated indulgence.

Which just goes to show that not all fashion gurus pass muster on the Internet; and with that in mind, they'd be wise to stop laying down the law about what men "should" and shouldn't wear.

TV confirms it: Redheads are evil

2011-09-08T20:13:00.000-07:00

American Horror Story: Ginger slander?

Us gingers have had a lot to deal with in the reputation department. I blame Judas.

He was supposedly a redhead; and the reason why ginger have been burned at the stake, tortured for being in league with the devil and generally persecuted ever since.

You kill just one heavenly savior and just look what the consequences are!

And now, to add insult to injury, a new TV show is hit to set the screen this fall - the plot of which hinges around a creepy coalition of evil gingers.

American Horror Story features ill-fated ginger twins, a sinister redheaded maid with an evil agenda and a sexy auburn seductress who leads men to their demise. And this plethora of evil gingers is not a coincidence.

"That's a plot point," creators Ryan Murphy and Brad Falchuk revealed. "I'm glad you noticed that."

The Glee alumni explains: "It's all about something that happened to our lead character as a child that involves redheads."

And although Murphy and Falchuk claim "We love gingers," there's one more travesty being committed. Beautiful star Alexandra Breckenridge - who plays the eponymous redhead siren - isn't even a real ginger: She dyes it.

Not only do they besmirch our name - they don't even have the decency to put real gingers on screen to do so.

Captain America kicks Superman's Ass

2011-09-06T19:51:00.000-07:00

Captain America: Awesome

Better late than never, I finally managed to catch Captain America at the cinema this weekend - and it was awesome.

A truly magnificent superhero movie, it illustrated yet again the fluency Marvel Studios have managed to demonstrate when bringing some of America's most beloved comic book characters to life.

Post-movie libations sparked a conversation about the relative merits of my favorite hero, Captain America, and the other famous red, white and blue-tighted comic book star: Superman.

Both arriving on newstands during the 1940s, they represent starkly different approaches to creating "America's superhero."

Who is better? Well, as far as I'm concerned, that's an easy question to answer: Captain America.

You see, I've never been much of a fan of Superman; and every narrative failing the Man of Steel has is reflected in a strength from the Captain America back story.

Superman sucks for the same reason he's a superhero - he's indestructible.

He can fly. He can shoot lasers out of his eyes. He can withstand anything less devastating than a direct hit from an ICBM. Given that adventure stories live and breath on peril, danger and risk, the Superman stories are automatically lame because our caped hero is rarely in any believable danger.

Captain America, on the other hand, is just a guy; albeit one enhanced by a experimental "super serum" that has given him the strength and agility of a world-class athlete. Even with his enhanced abilities, he can still bruise, bleed and break in a manner which makes his heroic exploits truly heroic.

The next thing that separates Superman and Captain America is motivation.

Captain America was a true American hero even more he donned his helmet and tights. A scrawny kid from Brooklyn, young Steve Rogers longed to join up to help defend his country against the Nazis; but was turned down as medically unfit for duty.

Eventually, scientist Abraham Erskine took pity on him and offered him the chance to test his experimental "super serum" - which transformed him into the magnificent physical specimen that we know of as "Ol' Cap." This means Steve has a real reason for doing what he does - not just his because of his patriotism, but also because he's a formerly weak man who appreciates and respects the strength he's been given.

This is REALLY how Superman would be

Superman, on the other hand? What a joke.

Superman crash landed on Earth and discovered his was the most powerful being on the planet. He could fly, bend iron bars, shoot lasers from his eyes and freeze the ocean with just the power of his "icy breath."

So what does he do? Become a tireless force for good; hiding self-deprecatingly behind the mantle of mild-mannered reporter Clark Kent.

But we ALL know that in "real life" (the two most ironic words to use when writing about comics) Superman would not be all that superheroic.

Power corrupts; and even Mother Teresa would start pushing her weight around if she realized she was the single most powerful force on the planet.

Superman, if we're honest with ourselves, wouldn't be defending Metropolis against villains and natural disasters. He'd be a cruel, alien overlord; crushing the entire human race into submission simply because he could.

Nobody as disproportionately powerful as Superman would be able to resist the temptation to abuse his strength. That level of willpower would be beyond even "the man of tomorrow."

So from a comic book perspective, it's clear to see why Captain America kicks Superman's ass.

This was the heated debate which we entered into after watching Captain America at the cinema; but it naturally devolved to one more pressing question:

If Superman and Captain America inhabited the same comic book universe (Superman is from DC comics, whereas Captain America is owned by Marvel) who would really win a battle between them?

Well, sadly the answer to that is simple: Superman would crush Steve Rogers like a bug.

That's why he sucks as a superhero.

New York Renaissance Faire 2011

2011-09-04T15:40:00.000-07:00

It's become something of a tradition, but here we are back again at the New York Renaissance Faire. This time there were four Militant in attendance - and a great time was had by all.

Ginger Infamy

2011-09-01T11:51:00.000-07:00

Apparently Forever Amber isn't the only ginger blogger whose been the recent victim of Internet ginger identity theft. I discovered today a successful online web business selling "ginger" merchandise had been using a very familiar looking photo as it's avatar - ME!

Find them on Twitter

This shot from my school days was presumably purloined from my Facebook page (well done on those security settings, Mr Zuckerberg) and it now being used to hawk fifteen dollar tees and promote witty phrases like the ones below.

Obviously I've reached out to Ginger Problems to resolve the issue. I don't mind my likeness being used commercially - just not without my permission.

Meanwhile, in England...

2011-08-31T10:32:00.000-07:00

Meanwhile, in England...

Mummy Love

2011-08-26T20:53:00.000-07:00

Relying On Ritual: Why Coffee, Beer & Martinis are Better in America

2011-08-26T20:28:00.000-07:00

It's a common perception that Americans aren't big on ritual. After all, this is the country that abandoned family dinnertime in favor of the TV dinner, then abandoned even that it favor of the drive-thru (and a plethora of meal options you could eat while walking down the street - hot pockets, anybody?)

But when it comes to things that count, Americans don't compromise. That's why there are certain things in this country that are generally infinitely superior to their equivalents in England.

Martini Cocktails

Considering the Martini Cocktail was invented in the Savoy Hotel, you'd think this would be something we Brits would have nailed; but we haven't.

In all my years in England, I only managed to get a decent Martini cocktail in three places - the Dorchester Hotel, the Hotel du Vin and some place on Park End Road, Oxford (my brother will have to help me out here.) Anywhere else, I was generally greeted with a blank look or a glass of lukewarm vermouth.

In America, however, you can go to the ropiest dive bar in the worst part of town and still be served a sublime Martini Cocktail.

American bartenders are just fluent in Martinis - and any of them can fix you a world class one in a few seconds. And what's so special about Martinis? The ritual.

A British Martini is an aberration. In America, they're elegant in their simplicity:

Get an ice-cold cocktail glass from the freezer.
Swill vermouth around the glass, then pour it out.
Shake gin or vodka over ice and pour it in.
Garnish with olives or lemon.

Job done.

Coffee

The reason American coffee is so good follows the same pattern. There's a ritual to making coffee that Americans embrace, but the Brits spurn.

That's why most Brits at home use that disgusting instant coffee stuff; saving making 'real' coffee for breakfast or after dinner.

In America, serving instant coffee is as alien a concept as gun control and atheism. Fresh ground beans, coffee filters and a peculator are household essentials.

There's more effort involved, but it's that same thing as with the Martini Cocktail - a ritual. One no American will compromise on.

Beer

And this ritualistic approach is why I firmly believe American beer is superior to British beer.

Even if the beer is inferior - which it increasingly commonly isn't - there's a standard ritual to serving it that makes the pourmasters of Guiness look like amateurs.

For a start, beer in America is served practically ice-cold; barely above freezing. Secondly, it's normally poured into a frosty, chilled pint glass or tankard pulled straight from the freezer.

Those two details are that subtle nod towards ritual that makes every pint in America an occasion; whereas the closest we come in the UK is the cynical marketing ploy of having a shamrock poured into the head of your stout.

(The French and Belgians are also very good at ritual- next time you have a beer in France, watch them 'cleanse the chalice' with a squirt of water from a specially-designed spray tap behind the bar.)

Ritual

We Brits often think we're so evolved; but like with the English language itself, there are facets of English culture and character that the Americans took, ran with and made their own; and now do far better than we do - despite being a nation that prides ourselves on that sort of thing.

What do you think? Do I have a point?

The Militant Ginger family

2011-08-22T09:31:00.001-07:00

Mummy Militant, Mini Militant, Militant Ginger & Micro Militant

Mustang Sally

2011-08-21T08:08:00.000-07:00

While I'm still here bitching about what the next Gingermobile will be, my colleague and friend Tim has completely shamed me by getting his hands dirty on a real restoration project of his own.

He's just bought a beautiful '66 Ford Mustang and started a blog about stripping her down. By the time he's finished, she'll be factory-fresh.

I'm completely jealous - not just of his awesome auto, but also his great-looking blog. It's only a couple of days old and already a must-read for petrol-heads. Go and check it out and cheer Tim on!

My friend Tim - definitely earning his man badge

New Camera

2011-08-20T15:58:00.000-07:00

Mummy Militant said we needed a new camera and acquiesced to my choice of make and model. Therefore I'm dutifully recording every moment of the Double Ms as they grow up; and inflicting it on my readers!

The camera is a Canon Powershot - you should check it out. The quality of the shots is amazing considering the price.

Anyway. Without further ado, ma famille;

Micro Militant, doing what he does best

Mini Militant insisted on wearing his Hawaiian shirt today

He's a little ham

Operation Gingermobile: Homing In

2011-08-19T07:24:00.000-07:00

I know you guys haven't heard about it in a while, but the search for the eponymous Gingermobile continues.

The original Gingermobile - my 1985 Firebird Trans Am

To get you guys back up to speed, here's the situation. A couple of years ago, I sold my much-loved classic Pontiac Trans Am and have since then been looking for a suitable steed to replace it. My requirements were pretty stiff:

Essential:

Two door, hard top coupe
British, French, Swedish or American built
Built before 1990
Four full seats
Large boot/trunk

Preferable:

Manual transmission
Pop-up headlights
V8 engine
Fastback design

Then comes the tricky bit – the aesthetics. I'm halfway between a cowboy and an English gentleman, and those are two distinctive styles that aren't easy to combine. You see, I wanted a car with the rough-and-ready muscle and grunt of the General Lee from the Dukes of Hazzard, but also wanted a car with the effortless class, style and refinement of James Bond's Bentley or Simon Templar's Hirondel.

I want a car that does this...

...but can also pull off this.

Finally, I wanted a car that was practical enough to be an everyday-driver, and one I could realistically afford within the next couple of years.

And, finally, I think I have a winner.

Although I'd originally written it off as a gas-guzzling monstrosity, my eyes kept returning to the 1970s-era Lincoln Mark cars.

The Lincoln Mark V - to this day, still the least fuel-efficient vehicle ever tested by Car & Driver

These enormous grand tourers had the distinction of being some of the biggest and most opulent production cars ever produced; and originally weighed in with a price-tag similar to a Rolls Royce or Bentley.

Each model was finished by a famous contemporary designer – Givenchy and Cartier were two of the better known – and came with every luxury feature under the sun; from ice-cold AC to a moon-roof and powered, lumber-support velour or leather seats.

In that respect, a 1970s-era Lincoln perfectly meets the objectives of being a car worthy of James Bond or Simon Templar. In fact, James Bond drove a fictional "Mark IV" Bentley in some books, and a "Continental" in others, so the parallel between that and a Lincoln Continental Mark IV is rather satisfying.

The beautiful 1979 Lincoln Mark IV Cartier edition

Available with all these sexy options

But for the good ol' boy inside of me, the mid-70s Lincolns also didn't disappoint. Long, low and sleek, they came equipped with some of Ford's biggest V8 engines; easily pushing out 300 horses and being a good match for The General Lee.

Likewise, they had long, low doors with frameless windows; which were perfectly for jumping in and out of. As classically American as they come, the old Lincolns were car-chase worthy; as well as being ideal for purring down the boulevards in.

Red paint and pop-up headlights. A 1976 Lincoln Mark IV

Obviously, they don't tick all the boxes. Although a Lincoln Mark IV comes with pop-up headlights and that purring V8, they're available only as automatics (but with all that torque, it's acceptable) and fastbacks were as rare then as they are now.

A '76 Mark IV with that classic grand touring profile

That being said, it wouldn't be beyond the realms of possibility to install a manual transmission (Fords of that era are like Lego – you can swap and switch parts with relative impunity.) Likewise, the sleek swoop of the Mark IV and Mark V almost gives the car a fastback profile even without a hatchback rear.

It's not a fastback, but it's still sleek and sporty

Considering decent models are trading for about $5,000 at the moment, I anticipate it will be a while before I manage to get my hands on a Gingermobile – but when I do, a Lincoln Mark IV is looking like the likeliest contender.

Big Brother

2011-08-17T18:13:00.000-07:00

I think as a parent you instinctively try to give your kid the same kind of experience as you had growing up; and it's kind of disconcerting when you realize you can't.

For Mini Militant, this means growing up in suburban New Jersey rather than the countryside of Hampshire, and being surrounded by roads and parks rather than sheep and German Shepherds.

But there are more significant differences as well. For example, Mini Militant is now a big brother. That's something I've never been, and it's pretty weird to think that Mini's whole outlook on life will be colored by that.

In that respect, I understand Micro Militant's situation a lot more - just as I was, he's the little ginger kid with the big brother. I wonder how that's going to pan out for him. I'll admit that I hero-worshiped my older brother growing up - he with the Bon Jovi hair and the tassly leather jacket that smelled of cigarettes and sweat - and still look up to him this day. We're starkly different people with different experiences and different values, but there's so much about him I respect and admire and love.

It's weird to think that Mini Militant will be that figure for Micro Militant; and in that respect, there's an aspect to his life that I've already no way of understanding. It's just further proof of probably the most surprising but inevitable part of becoming a parent is the realization that your kids are individuals in their own right - and not just extensions of yourself.

Writing for the American vs. the British market

2011-08-16T05:27:00.000-07:00

From day one of my first writing job in America, I got warned that the head of the department was wary of me because I was British. This wasn't a concern that I'd switch coffee for tea in the break room, or force my colleagues to wear tweed. He was worried that a fresh-off-the-boat Brit wouldn't be able to handle writing "American."

And I like to think I proved him wrong - but it wasn't easy. George Bernard Shaw once claimed that America and Britain were two nations "divided by a common language" and he's not wrong. British English and American English are remarkably dissimilar in a lot of ways.

As I explained here, I actually think American English is a lot more consistent and logical that archaic British English, but the differences go far deeper than just spelling. What exactly do I mean? Well, look at the example I've produced below. It perhaps illustrates the most significant difference between the way Americans and Brits communicate using the written word:

What differences do you notice between British English and American English?

Kanye weighs in...

2011-08-09T06:22:00.000-07:00

For the benefit of my father, the Kanye West internet meme is explained here.

Friday Not-So-Funny Social Criticism

2011-08-05T11:17:00.000-07:00

Meanwhile, in England...

National IPA Day

2011-08-04T08:24:00.000-07:00

August 4th isn't just President Obama's birthday (happy 50th, Barry!) It's also been chosen by a grassroots movement of beer lovers to be National I.P.A. Day.

India Pale Ale tends to be a rich amber

I.P.A., in case you were wondering, is a style of pale ale originally brewed in England during the 18th century, intended to be shipped overseas to the Indian colonies.

Because of the rigors of months of sea shipping, the beer needed to be very strong in alcohol, to preserve it, and rich in hops to maintain its flavor.

This light, but strong and flavorful beer soon found such favor in Britain that it never actually made it to its intended destination!

There are many India Pale Ales produced in England, but as I outlined in my controversial post Why American Beer is Superior to British Beer, its a style of brewing the yanks have truly made their own.

American I.P.A.s are brewed to appeal to an American palette - which requires a lighter, fizzier, more vibrant style of beer (closer to a lager than a bitter.) It's much easier and more enjoyable to drink.

In addition, because American beers tend to be served significantly colder (often only just above freezing) the amount of hops in the brew tend to be significantly higher so the flavor can penetrate the chill.

It gives brewers the opportunity to really create their own distinctive flavors and taste - from dry varieties like Dogfish Head 60 Minute IPA, to fresher, sweeter and more rounded ales like my personal favorite, Samuel Adams Latitude 48.

One popular brand is Stones Ruination IPA, so called because it "ruins" your palette for other beers. While this is true for Ruination, it's also pretty much the best way to describe anybody's experience of drinking American IPA. Once you've acquired a taste for this hoppy variety, any other beer seems kind of limp by comparison.

So happy (or hoppy) IPA Day! If you can, make sure you lift a glass of India Pale Ale in celebration!

Busy life, new blog, the usual suspects

2011-08-04T06:24:00.000-07:00

Hello gang! I am so sorry for my extended absence. Life Chez Ginger has been a bit crazy with the arrival of Micro Militant and my continued quest to become the world's first redheaded billionaire.

One thing I've been pondering during my absence is this blog.

As I enter my fifth year of blogging, I realize that Militant Ginger - despite being fairly popular - is a blog lacking a clearly defined purpose.

It's my personal blog, a pro-redhead rant site, a location for book and movie reviews and a place to find my political ramblings. If my recent education in social media has taught me anything, it's that Militant Ginger is the antithesis of what a successful blog should be - focused.

Which is why I've decided to break off at least part of my blogging onto a sister site - The Exchange Coffee House. This is where I'll exclusively post my political rants; and attempt to generate more content from other rant-worthy pundits. Please go and check it out if you're interested.

In the mean time, I'm going to post more personal pictures and stories here, plus up the ante on the ginger nonsense that inspired this blog in the first place. You might see a facelift in the next few days; but all the content will remain in place and hopefully Militant Ginger will be better - and more focused - than ever.

Thanks for your patience - and check back soon!

Mini Militant meets Micro Militant

2011-07-22T10:42:00.000-07:00

The first family reunion!

The Next Militant Ginger

2011-07-20T10:36:00.000-07:00

Astonishingly, the newly minted Micro Militant is more than just ginger in spirit - it turns out he has (for the time being, anyway) a full head of red hair! He popped out this morning at 10am and latched straight on for his first meal.

Waiting for M

2011-07-19T16:42:00.000-07:00

Hello fellow Militants!

I'm afraid things here at Militant Ginger central are a little slow at the moment. I'm sitting in a hospital room with Mummy Militant, awaiting the arrival of Micro Militant. So far s/he takes after Mummy by being resolutely late!

Normal service - if there ever was anything approaching that - will resume shortly.

How the Murdoch outrage exposed Britain's hypocrisy

2011-07-16T20:06:00.000-07:00

I'm lucky I don't live in England any more.

Because if I did, I swear I would have gone postal over the last two weeks of self-righteous social media inanity fueled by the allegations against Rupert Murdoch.

Don't get me wrong - I think it was disgusting and repellent how News of the World reporters hacked into the phone accounts of dead and missing people.

But I also think it's kind of disgusting and repellent for an entire nation to blithely ignore the fact that this despicable behavior had made the News of the World their Sunday Tabloid du choix.

From the Tweets and Facebook posts I've read from England, you might be led to believe that nobody read the News of the World at all.

Yet if everybody who claimed this week that they never read Britain's most popular paper were telling the truth, it wouldn't have been Britain's most popular paper in the first place!

What really annoyed me about the whole Rupert Murdoch scandal was how it lead to the demise of the BSkyB deal he'd been orchestrating.

Not that I was particularly supportive of the merger: I worked in Britain's commercial radio business for a number of years, and heard a lot of well-constructed arguments about why selling Murdoch a majority share in the company would have been a bad idea.

Yet it took the News of the World scandal to finally stop the previously inevitable merger going through - all at the self-satisfied behest of a twittering nation and a cock-crowing parliament.

Well, they should hold their applause.

For a start, the News of the World scandal and the merger were effectively unrelated; so to use one as justification for ending the other is absurd. Secondly, the reason I'd always been receptive to the BskyB merger was because it would never have created the gigantic, politicized media monopoly critics claimed it would - largely because a gigantic, politicized media monopoly already exists in the U.K. - the BBC.

The BSkyB merger would have actually done the opposite of what critics claimed - and finally created legitimate media competition where none previously existed.

If fact the only difference between Murdoch's enterprise and the BBC - aside from the deliciously beneficial edge of corporate competition - was the fact that you could CHOOSE to watch and support BSkyB, while the BBC remains an essentially mandated government service (as anybody whose got rid of the TV - and endured threatening phone calls and letters as a result - will attest to.)

This is why I think criticism of the BSkyB deal was always so hypocritical. Every complaint I heard was always commenced by ignoring the billion-dollar elephant in the corner of the room - the BBC. You can't rationally discuss the commercial media circus in Britain without acknowledging how enormously skewed it is by the very existence of the BBC.

And that leads me onto the last thing that annoyed the hell out of me about the Rupert Murdoch scandal: the totally unjustifiable level of smug, self satisfaction behind those who championed the demise of the News of the World and the torpedoing of the BskyB deal.

Last week, it honestly seemed like democracy had been temporarily suspended, and instead of being run by a representative parliament, the United Kingdom turned over its sovereignty to a self-appointed committee of tedious Guardian readers who together decided "what was best for all of us." Which, in this case, was skuttling the BSkyB merger.

For all of Rupert Murdoch's character flaws, I'll say this for him: At least he's honest about being a money-grubbing crook and despicable human being. As last week revealed, his fiercest critics tend to be every bit as cynical and self-serving as he is - but under a disgustingly transparent veil of unjustified self-righteousness.

They're inconsistent, hypocritical and partisan - and sadly, becoming more and more representative of the idiots running Britain into the ground.

Absent without Ginger

2011-07-16T19:56:00.000-07:00

Hello my fellow Militants! Long time no see!

As loyal readers (Hi, Dad) might have noticed, I haven't updated this blog for over two weeks. I feel thoroughly rotten about that, but I have been so astonishingly, mind-numbingly busy that I simply haven't had a chance to.

Last week alone, I worked a 50-hour week at the office, did 20 hours of writing for one client and then 10 more for another.

This is on top of Mummy Militant being 9-months pregnant with the latest addition to the Militant brood - and I've got two new independent business ideas I'm working on.

It all sounds far more exciting than it actually is!

Regardless, I'm back now with a couple of blog posts I hope you'll think are worth the wait. Have you yelled at an opinionated ginger today?

The Three Musketeers go Steampunk

2011-06-30T05:58:00.000-07:00

If you're wondering what that sound is, it's Alexander Dumas spinning in his grave. It appears Hollywood has finally got their chops around a modern reinterpretation of the immortal tale of The Three Musketeers and, frankly, it's going to be awesome.

Check out this trailer:

Budding Artist

2011-06-27T19:56:00.000-07:00

Mini Militant is named after his grandfather - and shares his talent with a paintbrush!

Will Barney Frank and Ron Paul legalize pot?

2011-06-23T12:36:00.001-07:00

Barney Frank might be the guy who bankrupted America, but it looks like he's finally doing something good for a change.

He's teamed up with Ron Paul – the maverick libertarian who I'm rather a fan of – to finally end the federal ban on marijuana.

I've written extensively about the circumstances that led to cannabis being banned in the United States in Jacques magazine and how this ridiculous state of affairs has led to pot being America's biggest cash crop. I think making it illegal is the worst and most inefficient form of social behavioral policing – an attitude prohibition had already warned us didn't work (and marijuana statistics prove it still doesn't.)

I am strongly of the belief that everybody in America should have the freedom to make their own choices about what they do and don't do with their bodies and money. Legalizing pot actually recognizes this essential American liberty – respecting the free will of the nation's citizens, instead of trying to police them (ineffectively, I might add.)

Yet it's not even smoking grass that makes me want to legalize it. I don't smoke marijuana myself, but do I think hemp has magnificent potential to produce food, fiber and even biofuel far more effectively than wood, switchgrass or corn. It's quite literally a wonder-crop. Thomas Jefferson – who grew acres of the stuff – once advised: "Hemp is of first necessity to the wealth & protection of the country." The Frank/Paul resolution could be the first of of the many small steps it takes towards reenergizing this country's economy.

Besides, cannabis critics needn't be concerned that this is some kind of pot free-for-all. Frank and Paul are proposing not the blanket legalization of marijuana, but simply allowing individual states to dictate their own rules regarding pot.

This actually ends one of the most mind-numbingly stupid things about America's ridiculous pot-embargo – that several states (California being an example) have legalized pot through the state legislature, but state-licenzed pot growers and sellers can still get raided by federal authorities. It's an absolutely absurd, untenable situation and not helped by presidents like Obama tacitly condoning it by warning: "Legalization is not in my vocabulary."

If the bill passes, states will be able to set their own rules on who can grow it, who can buy it and – more importantly – how it gets taxed and regulated. For many cash-strapped states, including my own, this has the potential to end their deficits practically overnight.

There are billions and billions of dollars to be made legalizing pot – and at the moment all that untaxed profit is being channeled towards criminals instead (most of the Mexican drug cartels, for example, use marijuana sales as the bread-and-butter of their operations.)

Sadly, the bill is a long-shot. It has a single Republican supporter and the Democrats are far from unified in support of the measure. What's worse, President Obama will be forced to call his bluff on the bill if it did pass – and he's already threatened to veto it.

But Rome wasn't built in a day – and Barney Frank and Ron Paul planted a seed with this bill that shall somebody blossom into something magnificent.

Why is Edith Zimmerman getting a hard time for hanging out with Captain America?

2011-06-22T09:54:00.001-07:00

There are three reasons why I'm a fan of movie star Chris Evans.

First, he's playing Captain America this summer – who is one of my favorite superheroes.
Second, since I got into lifting weights, his is the program I've been following. You can't blame me: the guy got positively ripped to play ol' Cap.
Third, he shares the name with my redheaded nemesis – the radio presenter everybody in England used to say I looked like. These days, whenever anybody compares me to Chris Evans, I can whip up a picture of the Hollywood hunk and say, with a wink, "Gee, thanks – although I don't see the resemblance myself!"

Anyway. Evans is on my radar, which is why I was interested to read the interview with him in the July edition of GQ magazine.

Chris Evans apparently drinks liter-sized steins of Sam Adams. This makes him awesome.

American Marvel, by Edith Zimmerman, was far from the typical puff piece. Instead, it followed our hapless author as she inadvertently went on a drunken date with the 30-year-old movie star (instead of interviewing him.)

I enjoyed the article. It was fluently written, entertaining and told us a lot more about the movie star than you'd learn in a conventional interview in the lobby of some luxury hotel.

Unfortunately, it seems my appreciation of the article isn't the consensus. On Twitter and beyond, a lot of people are criticizing Zimmerman for what she wrote:

"bask in the idiocy of Edith Zimmerman and her blog-core writing style" wrote @insuhyoon
"If this were 1999, Edith Zimmerman would have been fired for this behavior. Astonishing lack of professionalism" wrote @drmabuse
"Oh geez. Edith Zimmerman's article on Chris Evans for #GQ is an embarrassment" opinions @Samantahhh

Personally, I think they can all go and stick it.

Aside from being a wildly entertaining writer, Edith Zimmerman is also pretty darn cute.

It's pretty obvious that 99% of this criticism is fueled by jealousy and the rest by a startlingly unrealistic expectation of what modern journalism is supposed to be.

[How come its always the least successful writers who have the most dictatorial opinion about how articles 'should' be written? - Editorial Bear]

You get the impression that most of these critics feel they'd have written a far better piece on Evans if they'd been given the opportunity to interview him (neatly ignoring the fact that Edith Zimmerman no doubt worked her ass off to be "given" that opportunity in the first place.)

But they'd be dead wrong. Zimmerman's two objectives were to write a profile of Chris Evans that didn't just repeat the same old trite we can read anywhere, and to do so in an entertaining style. She achieved both of these with aplomb - and I'm confident none of her critics could have come close.

Where else would you have been able to read about drinking beer, bumming smokes and crashing out in the house of a Hollywood A-lister? How many other interviews include being introduced to the subject's mother, or crawling out of their living room window?

As the Captain America blockbuster hits mega screens across America, you'll find no shortage of interviews with Chris Evans – many written by jealous hacks like the ones criticizing the GQ article. However, I guarantee that none of those articles will ever be as revealing as Edith Zimmerman's alcohol-fueled adventures playing Captain America's squiffy sidekick.

You go, girl. I'll be looking forward to reading more from you soon.

Philly Comic Con

2011-06-18T18:29:00.000-07:00

Can you believe another year has flown by? It seems like only yesterday that Mini Militant and I were at the Philadelphia Comic Con 2010.

This year, Mini Militant stayed home and I ventured off with my friend Sunny. That streamlined much of the process - especially the beer-drinking part. Here were some highlights:

John Schneider, a.k.a. Bo Duke and Superman's Dad, was in attendance. He was an incredibly nice guy - down to earth, warm, friendly and every bit the Good Ol' Boy you'd hope he'd be.

Whoever said geeks weren't sexy was a lunatic. Philly Comic Con was a melting pot of amazing female figures dressed as all the most outrageous comic-book character you could think of. These two lovely ladies are fine examples (and show that going to con in costume is an awesome idea, as you're often asked to be included in pictures because of your outfit.)

"There needs to be fan-fiction written about you and I," she said, as she thrust her thigh into my palm. Not that I was complaining. Hands down one of the most magnificent people at the con.

Cookie Monster is out of rehab and has been living cookie-free for three months now. He posed for this picture so I could show Mini Militant (who worships Cookie) that Sesame Street's Charlie Sheen was going straight.

Liberate Thyself

2011-06-15T12:57:00.000-07:00

As conservatives start looking towards the 2012 election, the word "liberty" gets used a lot. But people forget that true liberty is taken, not given – and trying to "liberate" America from the ballot box is like trying to liberate Paris while still stuck in a German POW camp.

First, Americans have to liberate themselves.

As I wrote a few days ago, both the Republican and Democratic party work hard to create a culture of dependency. The first step towards "liberty" is to escape those shackles; and that's done at an individual level – not at a tea party rally. The first step towards collective liberty is individual freedom, and freedom means not being dependent on others.

To be free, you have to objectively examine your own life and identify areas in which you are dependent on others. For most Americans, these are most frequently work, wealth and health; but can extend to less tangible areas like happiness and satisfaction.

Work:

If there's one obvious area of dependence, it's our job. We are dependent on our jobs to pay our rent, supply our health care and give us our sense of purpose and identity. We might think that we're in an equitable relationship – receiving payment for services rendered – but far too often our jobs are little more than indentured servitude.

Think about it: Americans are working longer and longer hours than ever before – plus taking work home, even on vacation, thanks to smartphones and Blackberries.

Yet we're not receiving any more money for this increased workload. In fact, wages haven't gone up since 2000 (even though the cost of living has.) Americans put up with the increased pressure because they're scared of losing their jobs. Too many of us have become utterly dependent on our work.

The first step to liberty – to true liberty – is to stop being dependent on work. That doesn't mean to quit your job (but it doesn't mean not to, either.) It means to reexamine how you approach your employment and put yourself on a level footing with those who sign your paycheck.

Stop thinking of yourself as an employee – somebody who is lucky to have a job - and start thinking of yourself as an independent contractor instead: Somebody your employer lucky to have working with (not for) them. Cultivate the skills, experience and contacts you need to be a desirable talent; and make your job anxious to keep you, instead of being anxious to keep your job.

Or, even better, start planting the seeds of true financial independence. Find clients and side jobs so you have more than one source of income. Act like you're a business, not a worker. True independence is having the confidence to walk away from your current job and know you'll still be able to pay your rent. That is liberty worth fighting for.

Wealth:

For decades, they've been selling us on the American Dream – a big house, shiny car and all the gadgets a credit card can buy. The price of this dream, however, is slavery. If there's one dependency almost all Americans have, it's debt.

Whether we're talking credit card payments or a mortgage, most Americans are leveraged to the hilt. The bank might not literally own your ass; but it does own your car, your house, your TV and anything else you bought on credit.

All these shiny things Americans were desperate to own actually ended up owning them. How many thousands of dollars do you pour into interest payments each year?

True independence is not driving a car, or living in a house, or watching a TV that belongs to somebody else. Real freedom comes from buying a crappy car in cash, knowing that the car loan company can't repossess it. True liberty comes from knowing the bank can't foreclose on your house when the rate of your adjustable mortgage shoots up 300%.

Sadly, in modern America, there's only so much financial freedom many of us can aspire to. If it wasn't for mortgages or loans, many of us might never own a house, or even a car.

That being said, real liberty starts by not being enslaved by your possessions or your debts. Liberate yourself by living debt free whenever you can, however you can.

It might mean you don't have the latest shiny gadget, or biggest TV, or smartest car – but it also means that what meager possessions you do have you own outright. Nothing you buy with the somebody else's money ever truly belongs to you.

Health:

Health care costs in America are absurd, and millions of Americans are working jobs they hate simply because they cannot cover themselves or their families except through an employee-sponsored plan. This is perhaps the greatest indenture in America today – and one that's not within the power of most of us to solve. Liberty will only be achieved when Americans have access to truly affordable, truly portable health insurance.

But, in the mean time, there are things you can do to make yourself less enslaved by the shackles of the "free market" health care monopoly. You won't be able to cure yourself of cancer or diabetes, but the health benefits of regular exercise or losing weight are incredible.

When I moved to America, I was suffering from chronic acid reflux. I spent hundreds of dollars on over-the-counter medication, which would treat the problem - but never cure it. When I went on my diet and shed 30lbs, though, something amazing happened: My acid reflux stopped, and I've been pill-free ever since.

Same thing with my bad back and high blood pressure. What lifestyle changes can you make to improve your health? Make them, and keep your money instead of handing it over to drug companies that would keep you dependent on their pills and potions for the rest of your life.

Happiness & Satisfaction

Millions of Americans are miserable because they won't take responsibility for their emotions. They allow their mood – happy or sad, satisfied or needy – to be defined by the behavior of other people. They make expectations of how other people should act and then get huffy when those people fail to meet those expectations.

This is absurd, and true emotional slavery. If your mood is dependent on another person acting a certain way (and often without them even being told about how you want them to act in the first place) then your chances for lasting happiness are nilch.

The only actions and behavior you can control are your own; and emotional freedom comes from accepting that you have no power over the behavior of other people. Therefore, you shouldn't let your mood be dependent on what they do. Only when their actions directly influence your life should you grant them any power over your emotions at all; and even then, only grudgingly.

That's an excellent personal philosophy, and it's also true in the political sphere.

Think of all the ways in which people make themselves miserable because of the way other people behave; even though such behavior doesn't effect them.

Some real life examples from the headlines? Same sex couples wanting to get married, religious parents wanting to homeschool their kids – even fetish groups hosting a private party in a reserved hotel.

It seems even though these are decisions being made by adults which have no impact on anybody else, everybody expects and demands their say in them.

Perhaps the truest form of liberty is to untangle yourself from matters which don't concern you.

If two men you'll never meet want to get married in a state you don't even live in; let them.

As long as they're not abusing them, let parents raise their own kids exactly how they see fit.

As long as they're all consenting adults, and it's done behind closed doors, let hotels host invitiation-only, "naughty" parties all year round.

Give strangers power over your emotions, and you give strangers power over you. Deny them that power and you become that much more free as a result.

Liberate thyself

The desire for American liberty is an honorable one; steeped in the same spirit which founded this great country over two centuries ago.

However, nobody can aspire to that freedom until they become free themselves. One of the reasons the tea party movement has become so popular in America is because so many people identify that they're shackled and enslaved; but how much of that can they blame on the government, and how much should they accept responsibility for themselves?

If you're in debt or on welfare, or working a job you hate to pay the bills, or enraged at gay marriage, perhaps you're the one who needs to change – not America.

This is the land of opportunity and there are a million opportunities to free yourself from whatever is holding you back. That's not the job of the government, nor is it the job of anybody else. Take responsibility for yourself and you become master of your own destiny.

You have to remember that eternal truth – freedom is taken, not given.

No mayor, or congressman, or senator or president will ever truly grant you 'freedom' - you have to do that for yourself.

Then, only when you've throw off all the chains of personal dependence and become a truly free individual, can you come together with other individuals to achieve what liberties you couldn't on your own.

Mummy Militant Month on Militant Ginger, Part The Second

2011-06-13T02:39:00.000-07:00

Antoine de Saint-Exupery wrote:

"Love does not consist of looking at each other, but looking together in the same direction."

I kind of feel that's why Mummy Militant and I work so well together.

Because for all our differences, there's one significant similarity we both share – uniqueness.

Okay, "uniqueness" might just be another word for "eccentricity," but you get my drift.

Mummy Militant's father describes her as "a horse of a different color" because she's always stood out from the rest of the herd.

It's not just in the way she dresses, or the music she listens to, or the books she reads. It's also in the way she acts. Mummy Militant is radically unique because she refuses to behave the way society pressures her to.

Now, I've always been a bit like that too – but unlike Mummy Militant, I can't take any credit for it.

I became the willfully eccentric individual I am today because I never fit in growing up. The combination of ginger hair and Britain's retarded attitude towards it meant that I was always the kid who stood out; and since I was never going to be part of the crowd, I never felt the pressure to fit in with it.

I know I complain about growing up ginger a lot, but perhaps it was the greatest gift I could ever have had. If I'd been born with boring old brown or black hair, perhaps I'd have ended up getting enveloped into the cult of mediocrity which seems to personify so much of British society.

But, as I said, I can't take any credit for being eccentric. It just happened to me.

Mummy Militant, on the other hand, could have fitted in with the crowd effortlessly if she'd chosen to. You look at pictures of her from high school and college and you'll see a startlingly beautiful young lady who would have made a top-tier Long Island princess if she'd chosen to. But she didn't.

Instead, she chose to take her own path in everything that she did. She dressed differently. She spoke differently. Perhaps, most noticeably of all, she behaved differently. She still does today.

She walked the difficult path of not-quite-fitting-in, even when an easier option was available to her. That shows such an incredible inner strength and personal vision that I'm quite frankly in awe of; even after eight years together.

Mummy Militant is as willfully eccentric as I am; and we're both on the outside of conformity looking in.

That's the "looking together in the same direction" that Saint-Exupery spoke of, and the reason why we work so well together. We're both on the same wavelength (and it's not the station most people are tuned into.)

But Mummy Militant's uniqueness extends far beyond mine. She humbles me every day in the steps she'll take off the beaten path.

The most notable examples of her eccentricity show themselves what she does for others.

Mummy Militant would, quite literally, give a stranger the shirt off her back. I think one of the reasons she's never quite fitted in – and why regular, mundane people sometimes treat her with suspicion – is because she's willing to perform acts of kindness and charity that make us feel bad about ourselves.

But that, from my perspective, is just more of a reason to love her.

Democrats and Republicans seek to make slaves of us all

2011-06-10T17:50:00.000-07:00

This picture represents my pretensions of rebellion

The other day, I received my Voter Registration Form in the mail.

This is a somewhat momentous event – because, as a newly minted American, it'll be the first time I'm allowed to register to vote!

One of the questions asked was which party you want to register as – Democrat, Republican or Independent.

It's a surprisingly tough choice.

I know many of my friends would think I'd sign up as a Democrat. After all, I'm pro-gay marriage, reluctantly tolerant of abortion, against the death penalty and believe in a 'fair' progressive tax system.

But I'm no Democrat.

Because the fundamental founding concept of the Democratic party – as envisioned by the federalist founding fathers like Alexander Hamilton and John Adams – is collectivism: Governing for the "greater good."

And while I understand the sentiment behind that concept, I don't hold to it. The Democrats, I believe, govern with the intention of creating more and more dependence on said government.

Why? Because more dependence on the government creates more loyalty from their voters. This is why some of the groups that support the democrats most passionately – like trade unions – are also the groups that benefit most directly from their policies. The democrats basically buy votes with the taxpayer's own money - and ultimately threaten to make us all slaves to the government.

But before Republicans start patting themselves on the back, I really don't see them as being very much different.

Instinctively, I'd like to register as a Republican because the values to which that party are supposed to stand match the things I truly love about America.

Founding fathers Thomas Jefferson and James Madison (author of the Declaration of Independence and Constitution respectively) were the spiritual fathers of the Republican party and their overriding political philosophy was one of individualism – the single characteristic that has made this nation great (and I aspire to the most.)

But the modern Republican party is a far cry from the party of Jefferson and Madison.

One the one hand, you have the social conservatives it panders to. For a party that claims to represent "freedom," it certainly does a grand job supporting policies which restrict people's personal, political and religious freedoms.

Hey, I appreciate you guys fighting for the right to let me own a gun – but how about letting me buy a beer on Sunday morning, smoke a joint, marry another guy or see some naked breasts on television? (Not that I'd want to - sounds like that would be a busy weekend!)

But the worst are the people on the other hand. The ones who organize the hypocrisy and graft that fuels the Republican political machine.My biggest criticism of the Republican party is that they are just as eager to turn American voters into dependent slaves as the Democrats – they just use a different means to do it.

Using the bugbear of socialism (a concept very few Republicans genuinely seem to understand) and championing some twisted vision of a "free market" (ditto) they sell their core demographic on buying into an "American Dream" that renders them little more than indentured servants.

I'm experiencing this twisted work ethic myself, right now. I'm writing this at 9pm on a Friday, still at my office computer waiting to present some work.

Americans work longer and longer hours, for less and less pay. Jobs are less secure than they ever were. Wages haven't gone up since 2000, while the cost of living has increased in real terms by more than 10%. Things are worse for the American worker than they've been for a half century, but they're willing to put up with it all for fear of losing their next pay check.

The real chains of Republican indentured servitude, however, come in the form of the broken health care system they vehemently defend from any "improvement."

Americans are de facto slaves to traditional employment because such a system is the only way millions of them have access to affordable family healthcare. I would have continued freelancing myself, were it not for the fact that freelancing meant buying family healthcare that cost more than my monthly rent.

And the Republican party encourage the tightening of these chains.

They are eager to make Americans as dependent as the Democrats are. This is why they allow healthcare benefits to be stripped (corporations like Wal-Mart and McDonalds can 'opt out' of requirements Mom & Pop stores have to abide by.) This is why they've shoveled people's retirements from safe and steady pension programs onto the 401k roulette table. Every single day, the Republicans encourage an environment which takes more and more money out of the pockets of hard-working Americans and into their own election coffers (through corporate donations.)

The Republicans and the Democrats both want to enslave the American people.

Why? Because they see that as the only route towards political dominance – and we, like obedient bipartisan sheep, eagerly trot ourselves off into their grazing paddocks by registering to be part of one form of slavery or the other.

I shouldn't be this way.

I realize now – in a way I never have done before – that the so-called "American Dream" isn't the big house, or the shiny car, or the three happy kids we get told it is in the TV commercials.

The "American Dream" is the same one our founding fathers had – independence.

A different type of independence, certainly. Economic freedom, rather than political. But no less real, and no less worth standing up and fighting for.

The real "American Dream" is to not be the pawn of some praetorian government, nor the chattel of some domineering corporation. It's to make your own destiny, be your own paymaster and make your own destiny.

That's the freedom I aspire to – and the independence I believe our founding fathers sought in this great land of ours.

Until they recognize the power of that dream, or my capacity to make it real, both political parties are unworthy of my support.

Bootleg Boys hits the Kindle

2011-06-09T18:47:00.000-07:00

Adventure Eddy might not have had any new adventures recently (well, not that you've read of, anyway) but he's still alive and well.

In fact, everybody's favorite ginger recently hit the Kindle. You can pick up his second adventure, Bootleg Boys, for less than a dollar.

And here's the good news (or the bad, depending on your perspective.) The response has been so positive it looks like the next chapter in the long-overdue Adventure Eddy saga will be hitting the stands at an accelerated rate.

Thanks for your support!

Bootleg Boys by Roland Hulme is available for Kindle from Amazon.com

Mummy Militant Month on Militant Ginger, Part The First

2011-06-08T18:09:00.001-07:00

If anybody has been keeping up with the news, the word "Weiner" should be on their lips.

Because New York Representative Anthony Weiner is currently in the spotlight for his "inappropriate" behavior online with several wanton women. He's sent saucy pics and salacious messages to a number of ladies and now the scandal's in the open, this Weiner is getting roasted.

Weiner's saga, though, should be a lesson to many of us. Here is a man not guilty of any actual infidelity (that we currently know of, watch this space) but just caught being a weiner (no pun intended) online. The angle most people are focusing on is: How could he do this to his wife?

And I mean, seriously. How could he? He's married to perhaps the hottest Democratic woman in politics (which is admittedly a small field) Huma Abedin.

Tall, tanned, educated and enlightened, she easily eclipses any of the woman Weiner had an online dalliance with. Why was he munching on 99c burgers, if you'll excuse the clumsy metaphor, when there was prime rib waiting for him at home?

Well, I don't know the answer to that question - but I do know this: There are literally thousands of men who have Huma Abedin's waiting for them at home and they don't give them the love and appreciation they deserve.

They might not be sending crotch-shots of themselves to random porn stars (as Weiner did), but there are American men in all fifty states who are married to amazing, beautiful, brilliant women and simply take them for granted.

If the Anthony Weiner scandal taught me anything, it's that I might be one of them.

Because as soon as I saw Huma Abedin's imposing profile in pictures, it made me think of my own Mummy Militant; who shares her olive skin, luxurious black hair and photogenic features. After nearly eight years of marriage, I was suddenly aware that maybe I take her for granted; and that's unforgivable.

Mummy Militant with a pony. Because we all love ponies.

I might not be sending bulging crotch-shots of myself to anybody, but perhaps I am guilty of coming home each night and treating Mummy Militant more like a roommate than a life-partner, and more like a partner-in-crime than somebody who is bearing the second of my children (and the nearly eighth year of my collective bullshit.)

So for the next four weeks, I've decided to dedicate a post a week to the woman who inspires, indulges, teaches and tolerates me - Mummy Militant.

Because for all my sins, and after all these years, I still think she's amazing. There is still not one single day in which I don't come home, gaze into those big brown eyes and think: "Wow."

A fairy-tale romance - if fairy tales included skullduggery, handcuffs, deportation, pirates, sports cars, dachshunds, Pontiac Firebirds and rum.

I don't think a week has gone past in the last eight years in which she hasn't done something that's totally knocked my socks off - constantly challenging any and all limitations I foolishly imagined she might have.

She's incredible. She's amazing. And, quite frankly, I'd be one hell of a Weiner if I didn't spend a few days this month acknowledging that fact.

Happy Blogversary!

2011-06-03T08:33:00.000-07:00

Today marks two incredibly special events in my life.

The first? It's officially the fifth anniversary of Militant Ginger! June 3, 2006 was when I started blogging for the first time. 1,712 blog posts later, we're still here!

Read the first ever Militant Ginger blog post here!

Secondly, it's four years to the day since I moved back to America! Come a long way since waiting tables and selling pharma.

Read my post about arriving in America here!

So much has happened in the past half-decade - and I know so many more exciting things are on their way. What will I remember from this June 3, when I look back on it in five year's time?

Something amazing, I hope.