Talk is Cheap, but Silence is Golden


Why must we talk at breakfast, lunch and dinner with our families?

Who stated this had to happen?

Where did it all start?

Who can we blame?

Well, no offence, but this is the American’s doing. Yep, Americans and their drama serials, soaps and sitcoms, where the happy, stereotypical American family is portrayed as sitting around the dinner table and communicating to one another about their day.

Now, before you start sending in your hate mail allow me to state that the Americans have done a lot for us over the years. However, I do not think sitting around the table and talking to your family about your day and incorporating this ideology into a TV show and basically telling the entire world ‘you are not a good family if you don’t do this’ would be one of the many good things they have done for the world. No, not at all. In my view, it is a very, very bad thing.

Now, I will admit that at the moment not having a partner to share my life with can perhaps be a bit lonely. I wake up alone. I go to bed alone. I go to work alone. I go to university alone. I have breakfast for one, lunch for one, dinner for one and wine for seven.

I’m joking about that last part…or am I?

But at the end of the day the benefit (if you could call this a benefit) is that I don’t need to talk to anyone and I can enjoy a blissful silence with myself and my food. The day my food starts talking to me is not only a day I can officially wait for, but the day I send myself to a nice little place with rubber rooms and men in white suits.

When I ever eat with my family, it’s a completely different story. All three meals of the day if I happen to be present for them go something like this. ‘Chew, bla, bla, bla, chew, bla, bla, bla, chew, bla, bla, bla, bla, bla, bla, bla, bla, chew’, and it just gradually gets worse from there.

As you can probably tell by now, I’m not exactly known for my socialising skills, especially when they happen to involve a dinner table. The issue I have, and I don’t know if anyone else has this problem, is that I like to taste my food. I like to enjoy my food. I like to be satisfied with my food. And I cannot eat, nor enjoy, nor be satisfied with my food when I am engaged in a conversation.

Maybe I’m a few tiles short of a roof, but I can’t seem to concentrate on doing two things at once when I am engaged in filling my body with the necessary requirements to keep me self alive for an extra few hours.

I guess anyone reading this might be looking for a point or a punch line to this whole post…I just don’t see the point why we as a species have been taught that we simply must fill our eating experiences with dialogue.

In documentary’s, I am yet to see one where two lions are gorging down the carcass of a zebra and one lion turns the other and says ‘so honey, how was your day?’ Of course, to the human ears it might sound a bit more like ‘roar, grrr, arr, roar, roar, meow’, but still, they don’t do that either.

Now, I am not saying that everyone should just shut up and eat. I can allow for some minor conversation. But I don’t see why the beginning, the middle and the end of the dinner and everything in-between must be flooded with continued conversation.

Can we not allow for a bit of silence? A bit like what Uma Thurman insinuated to John Travolta in Pulp Fiction – you know when you have found the perfect person to spend your life with when you can simply sit back and enjoy an uncomfortable silence with them.

So why that ideology cannot be spread by American television rather than this talk at the table every morning, noon and night garbage is beyond me.

If anyone reads this wishes to make a comment and say whether they like conversing a lot at dinner or believe that a little bit of silence every once in a while is golden, I would be quite appreciative to know what the people of the world think.

Thank you for reading,

Naughty Nefarious, signing off!

Freedom of Speech? No Mate, the Dissolution of it…


It’s amazing how in the past one could get away with saying more than what one can say today. We have technology like none that ever was before. We live in a society where rights are been equalised more and more each decade, kind of. And society, culture and communication is continuously changing right before our very eyes. So, with that said, why is it that the freedoms regarding speech that we once knew have changed quite radically over the past few years?

The issue I have found is that every time someone says something that another person does not like and a court case is brought about to resolve the dispute, certain freedoms begin to be pulled back and rules safeguarding people from certain things expressed verbally are entrenched into society. A good example of this is located within the link found at the conclusion of this paragraph. In this instance, two journalists working for the ABC mentioned the name of the woman who was the victim of a sexual assault, which is a blatant disregard of the law. So, because of two bad apples (who were subsequently fired), the law cracked down harder on those who use freedom of speech to say what they wish.
Although this article is a few years old now, the information inside reigns true to this very day, and there is a great quote from Nicholas Pullen which perfectly summarises my fears for the future in regards to free speech.

Adjunctively, there are the rules that journalists are forced to comply with. This however is only the beginning of my next argument, which revolves around blogging. Those who blog are now being visualised as stereotypical journalists; they communicate to large audiences and motivate those who read their posts and provide to them arguments which can alter and change their opinions. This in itself is what journalists have the potential of achieving, hence, the reason behind why government agencies are considering the crack down on web based content. At the moment, the law is still yet to catch up with technology, which alone is quite ridiculous, but when it does, what will bloggers be prevented from expressing online?

There was a time when you could walk up to a person and say what you wanted without them becoming so unbelievably taxed at your commentary. You could walk up to a woman and simply say ‘you look very beautiful today’ without any ulterior motive, agenda or bias. Now, if you say such a thing you are likely to be accused of being a sexual deviant and a few seconds later find a pair of hands around your neck.
Worse still, you can gently tap a woman on the shoulder as a gesture of motivation when she is about to, I don’t know, provide a verbal presentation to a large audience, and in the same second find yourself accused of sexual harassment!

There was once a time when you could say to a person ‘I think you’re an idiot’ and a few seconds later laugh it off, but today, you could say the exact same thing and suddenly find yourself being hauled into court with the person who you were just laughing and talking to a few seconds earlier, who is now suing you for damages done to his/her name.

You could in the past say to a person ‘I hate your rotten guts’, and today say the exact same thing and be accused of being a psychopathic murdering scumbag.

When do privacy laws that relegate freedom of speech obsolete become ludicrously unnecessary?

The major problem is that the complainant holds a large majority of the power, whilst the defendant, a.k.a, the accused, has very little. There are so many legal avenues against free speech, whilst there are few protecting it, truth and the public’s right to know being the primary excuses often utilised, and you would imagine in a society that promotes it there would be many more avenues for its protection.
To ensure prosecution of the defendant, all that needs to be proven is that damage was indeed caused by what was said or done, which is very easily provable in the eyes of the plaintiff, leaving the defense with little leeway, because even if they did not necessarily mean to maliciously cause harm, the plaintiff is immediately seen as the victim for they are the party expressing how they were violated.

I guess on one hand, free speech is a liberty that people very much enjoy. But the right to privacy and other such laws that protect people from this freedom are just as important. A person who has never had their privacy invaded may not completely understand the importance of such a law, and upon this happening, their ideals in regards to the freedoms they once trusted may be considerably tarnished. My point is that yes, we do need protection to ensure that our private lives are not explored; to ensure we are not violated verbally or literally by others; to ensure our reputations are not destroyed by slanderous material; to protect our families and the ones we love so dearly – but at what cost? We may turn around one day and find the entire conception on free speech to be entirely extinct.

Just because we live in a society that allows free speech, does not mean that we allowed to speak freely; quite the conundrum.

I’ve a Problem…


(May contain some sexual references)

…I talk before I think. I’ve had this for quite a while. Now, I’m not in need of any antidote, but I can’t seem to get a handle on it either. I see a person, or a situation, and I can’t help but open my mouth and say the first thing that comes to mind – without even processing it properly. Hell, half the time I think ‘wow, what a cool line!’ only to think ‘you stupid bastard!’ a couple seconds later.

This may be one of the reasons why I don’t really talk much to people I hardly know. I however make up for this when communing with people I have known for a while because in part I am sure they are somewhat used to what I am bound to say during a conversation. Additionally, I seem to only ever have a difficulty keeping my mouth shut about issues that should not be brought to life with people I have only just met. There is a certain feature, either physical or internal, or a view, value or trait of theirs that I feel the need to comment upon which inevitably leads to a very unhealthy relationship.

Now, it ain’t that I believe my opinion is absolutely awesome and needs to be expressed. I know it is! (Okay, joking, but seriously, back to topic) It is that I suddenly feel the need to speak my mind. I have come to realise that when I don’t mention something which I find to be quite pertinent, it begins to become a bit of a burden, and like a fat cat in a corner continuously being fed with no exercise to help the little tyke out, what I have not yet expressed begins to weigh quite heavily on me. Sooner or later when I feel I am going to burst with the info I find that I either have to express it immediately, or find some other avenue which can help me vent out whatever I wish to explain. This can be anything from feelings to resentment to just general observations, and my other ways which can relieve myself of such a burden can either be from writing down whatever is affecting me and transpiring it into either a story or piece of poetry, or going out and using the ol’ punchin’ bag.

I have been taught in the past, especially in university, to generally assume the abilities of those around you. Assume they are intelligent, strong willed and capable of understanding what you wish to express. If you find evidence to disprove this theory, well, then you can assume them to be stupid, incompetent arseholes, but only then, and not before. With that in mind, I do believe it is this theory that has caused me to believe that I can say what I want and kind of get away with it when I am talking to new people for the first time because I believe on some level they will understand me.

Of course, the other factor once more is interpretation, which seems to make an entrance in an awful lot of my posts, now, don’t it? I say something and the other person believes I am conveying something else but according to certain communicative models, during a good transaction of dialogue, what is being expressed by the sender is being received by the other in the exact same manner. However, I fear the message is quite frequently being screwed up. I guess this could be due to cultural background, upbringing, personal experience and so on, with people judging what is being said on those prior ideals.

For instance, recently this young lady introduced herself to me. I was courteous, well, I think I was, and I guess an alright kind of host. She wanted to have some assistance of sorts navigating the area because she was new to these parts. I suddenly ask her not far into our meeting why she would choose me over other guys because I do not know her and that I am certain to have remembered her if we had met because she is quite attractive.

At these words the young lady in question flees for her life and I have not seen her since. Actually, come to think of it nobody has. Oh my… Actually, that was a joke, I’m sure she’s fine. Seriously though, what exactly did I say that was wrong? Yes, perhaps I should not have blurted out what I did eventually blurt out, but I don’t see the harm in it. If I had said ‘I find you absolutely ravishing – let’s make wild animalistic love on the floor right now like a couple angry lions on deep fried crack’ then yeah, I guess I could see that as being perhaps a little disturbing. But I was paying her a harmless comment that had no innuendo or nefarious motive applied to it. What I said was not some kind of code in regards to me wanting, you know, THAT! Just because I choose to go by the name Nefarious in these posts, does not naturally mean I am so.

See, that is exactly what I mean by issues in communication and interpretation. I say one thing, where I explain how I do not know the woman, although she seems to be somewhat insinuating that I do by pairing up with me to help her around town, before paying her a non-threatening, non-sexualised comment, and suddenly, she runs, like an old limerick once said, over the hills and far away.

So yeah, maybe I do have an issue. Either I need to learn to shut the hell up, or I should get myself a girlfriend – then I can say all the things I want and not care if they are interpreted as deviant sexual comments because if she is dating me, then wouldn’t this young lady in question be willing to accept such commentary, regardless if it is meant to be sexualised or not?

I mean, I can understand the tower of Babel coming down and God having everyone speak a different language and all that, I mean, if you believe that interpretation of events, but what I don’t understand is how I’m speaking English, and the other person is speaking English, and we are both talking English, and have both been taught to speak English, yet one of us is obviously not getting the message because I say one thing (in English btw), and the other person hears something else. I mean, did I stutter? Or, in society today, does stating ‘you’re attractive’ naturally mean ‘I wanna have sex with you?’

Funnily enough, if I really am attracted to a person it usually takes me a while to talk to her – or I simply never do period. Perhaps I should apply my ideas of communication in general to this line of thought – then I’ll be onto something. Right? Probably not, but who knows. Like I said in a previous post, I have a rule where I don’t ask out women I either work or study with, and if I ever do so, I leave it to the very last second when I am about to leave or quit. Then, technically I am not breaking my rules, and I am additionally not annoying the young lady in question, which is my goal in not asking them out during my time there – to not annoy them. But that’s just my opinion.

I don’t think I’m annoying. I don’t think I’m a sex crazed loon either, but these seem to be the interpretations that are coming through with those who I communicate to…

…hmmmm, ponder about this subject I will.

Naughty Nefarious signing off