Scandal as BB Bitch Helen wins BB 2014

Well in a massively disappointing final we see one of the worst, maladaptive personality who has been on BB win, Helen. In the meantime any other hopeful failed.  Helen unfortunately had in her corner a cornerstone person support her, Ash.  Ash unlike Helen had shown to be one of the most laid back people around.  Unlike Helen he was low of the gun to scream short or slag any other individual off.  I just can not understand how such a nasty individual can win the final and the grand prize of £100,000 and be chosen by the public. In the circumstances the only reason can be is the public got it wrong, and especially those who were more likely to vote for the winner.  As Emma Willis said to Chris during his interview about HMs speaking their mind "sometimes just keep it to yourself, of share it with the diary room" because Chris chose to use the diary room as his own confessional box, but did it in order to keep his sanity.  His best friend in the house was Ashleigh and she was my hot favourite to win, as was Christopher who showed himself to be a man true to his word in may respects, but too much of him would do your head in.

The thing is trying to find out what the voting statistics were for the program is a near impossible task. In a twist of fate the BB production team had change the way voting in 2014 took place, rather than vote for the winner, voters were asked to vote for the ones they wanted to see evicted. However, Emma in interviewing runner up Ashleigh mentioned there was only 1.2 percent difference in the vote between the two of them, close but still the actual numbers were not revealed.

The final tell tale disappointment was witnessed by a mixed crowd, but were I to put my money on their support for Helen, I'd say she didn't have it.  More were booing her than cheering her. Fortunately, BB always plays the eviction music loud enough to drown out the majority of the crowd.  This is one individual who does not deserve a lottery win, a BB win or any kind of win for the way she has behaved.  However, even Helen said "Ashleigh was the winner" this was what she thought when she was interviewed by Emma.  Helen is aggressive, is nasty and was a bully throughout the entire BB 2014 series.  So how the hell did she get voted as the winner?  Helen believed it was other people in the house who were making it difficult for her to make friends, this is not the thoughts of someone who is sane. Helen needs psychological treatment and a dramatic insight into how other people see her because she did not deserve to win anything and certainly not BB 2014.

BB 2014 a short profile of Helen

Well it's the final week of BB 2014, at bloody last, and as usual the finalists prepare for these last few days. Helen and Ash as usual have their general hubris of being the coolest kids on the block. What they don't know is they are the only ones who feel this. Ash wants to live the dream in LA and he is in the house to have fun, whereas Helen admits to being a bitch. The house is smaller, and the cool kids have a substantially reduced gang. Ash although coming across like a cool dude anyone would like to know has been a substantial support to Helen. When you think about it Helen would not of survived this long without the relationship she fostered with Ash. They provide each other with solace, companionship and tactile comfort. Were Ash not there Helen would fall apart. She is actually a vulnerable woman who has self esteem issues, no matter what happens she is unable to bite her tongue when she says something it is her opinion.  She does not consider the consequences of  hurting another person, the act of biting her own tongue does not come into it. She cannot think for a single moment and not let her opinion be known. She is always in the right, she doesn't believe or understand other housemates have a point of view and opinion, then she doesn't listen to them. Ash humorously said  Helen's three self descriptive words were that of a Pitbull.  As is known, many a true word is said in jest.  In this case it certainly was, Helen says outside of BB she has a close grouping of people, but I'd say if she does have such a grouping it is on an asymmetric level. Because just like the house she will have a power of voice over them, whether it is as an employer, a mother or the leader of a female pack of wolves.

Pitbull seems to kind a word.

BB 2014 and Assholes

There are two personalities in BB 2014, who are so up their own arseholes a song has been written for the both of them. It is Helen and Ash, Helen being one of Satan's hell hounds and Ash thinking just looking good means he has a ticket pass to everything and freely admits to never working in his life. Well wonderful, great news, someone who hasn't had it tough and doesn't understand how cruel the world can be, someone who has never grown up wanting a meal. It makes me wonder if he is a Tory, he certainly must be.  Below is a vid just for Ash and Helen, I'm sure they would do a great duet singing this with the utmost of sincerity.
Tonight in a catch up session of BB 2014 we see both Helen and Ash debate who is deserving of winning the £100k prize money. As though they have the right to elect a winner of the show. Helen has been given a golden ticket to the final and has done from the beginning of the show.  This may have made her more nasty than she already is, but that's probably quite difficult. She has no incite into her behaviour on other house mates, when BB shows her clips of how she has behaved she has always been remorseful. However, she doesn't change. Which gets me to thinking she becomes remorseful because she thinks BB is about to kick her out rather than because of the way she behaves. Her pass has been a two edged sword, BB has been entertaining, but the entertainment is nasty and malevolent. It has been of bullies ganging up and controlling the atmosphere of the house.  This is a very poor judgement of BB to have allowed it to continue, Helen's pass should of been stripped from her many weeks ago.

Fortunately, two sheep have been kicked out this week, both Winston and Mark.  So it means in the final week Helen's nasty gang are weaker, it is only a pity it wasn't Ash and Mark who got kicked out.  However both Winston and Mark are non entities in many respects and should of gone earlier. It was amazing to watch Mark's interview with Emma, she tried to get him to see the effects of being in the bully group and how their power scythed other house mates. Yet he could not understand this or acknowledge it. Just like Helen, Mark just can not see and understand his own behaviour and the consequences of it. He might think he was a peace keeper, but he was not. He is out of the house and good bloody riddance.

Only one more week left, and the small grouping of Ashleigh, Chris and Christopher are on my bets to contain the winner. I hope so, at least they are not the bullies.

Zoe Birkett is kicked out of BB 2014

In a dash to catch up with the Big Brother series for 2014 I have now seen singer and Y listing part celebrity and nobody Zoe Birkett kicked out of BB.  They say the voting was close between Chris, Pav and Zoe, however I am in no doubt Zoe was the right person to get kicked out of BB.  Which has been blamed on a short snippet of conversation she had with Ash.  In this conversation she illustrated her life was so exciting and she had done so much it was good to arrive in a household with a lot of powerful people.  She intimated if she had come into a household where the house mates had worked at a superstore stacking shelves she would of had nothing in common and found them all boring.  In defence during later interviews she said this snippet of video had been taken out of proportion. The conversation she'd had with Ash had lasted a half hour. Further she said she had done all sorts of jobs just to keep a roof over her head, including delivering leaflets.  Unfortunately, Zoe wanted to excuse herself and explain why she said what she said she did not even reflect what she voiced may have been taken differently by the ordinary viewer.

Zoe believes she is an incredibly bubbly person, she is loud and loves other energetic people, but she really is not getting the significance of what she said.  There was no sincere apology and understanding she had got it wrong.  In fact during her stay in the BB household it seemed there just happened to be a band stand singing task. Of course this would of been fantastic for her profiling in the public eye as well. To some extent BB has helped boost her career, depending that is whether her move to America and American's get to see Zoe's profile, in reality they probably will not.  But one thing is for sure she will for the time being be making a bundle of cash from her appearance on BB 2014.  Whether it is for doing private singing at parties or endorsing BB, she will momentarily be in the money.  Except for this one comment which has demeaned her in the eyes of some people.  Someone who is constantly talking and loud has some kind of issue in the background. Her ability to think about the how she may be perceived by other people is certainly at a shallow level.

In Big Brother's Bit on the Side BBOTS the panel were all sad Zoe had left and they wished Chris had left. This panel again was not representative of a normal panel of interviewers, there was Lord Lionel Blair, who in his hey day was a self obsessed dancer with airs of his own royalty.  Now he can hardly be neutral because he had been in the very business Zoe currently is in, i.e, Zoe being on the West End in musicals and stage productions.  Then there is also a Nolan sister, famous for being part of the Nolan Sister's singers, well there's no connection there is there (said with sarcasm)? Lastly Luisa Zissman, who just doesn't like Chris in any form at all.  While on Bit on the Psych, one panel member advised Zoe of her constant defensiveness and talking, trying to get Zoe to see what she was doing at that very moment.  But still it did not work.

Zoe could have repealed her status in the public eye had she firstly apologised for this small snippet, and had she then reflected how it may have been seen by the viewers.  Her failure to do so is the mark of someone who does not have humility.  Her social support comes primarily from her family who must be constantly stroking her and telling her how wonderful she is, because they certainly have not challenged her behaviour.

Zoe if I never see you again on TV it wouldn't bother me, unless perhaps you gained a little understanding and stepped down from your own soap box.

The dsigrace of PMQs

In what should be one of the most revered establishments of democracy in the UK Prime Minster's Questions is farcical. As always the Prime Minister avoids answering questions and answers the one he wish they had asked.  The end of his response will be a jibe at the oppositions record, from which he would of had researchers delve into dubious statistics. Of course the use of reports and statistics is something both sides of the House use. However, they do not use the same sets and choose to use those which favour their own.  So what the public get is a skewed view, or not a lie but dubious truth of what the present state of the country is.  Maybe Mr Not-so-honourable Cameron does not like answering questions properly. If he were to do an exam paper at secondary school he would not get marks for answering a question he thought was asked but wasn't, he'd fail and never pass his exams. But he got where he is today, after going to a high profile University.  Therefore he must know how to answer a question, but he chooses not to answer the question.  He could be embarrassed by it, or the true answer would make him and his party look incompetent, or he just doesn't know the answer.  So it is a matter of avoidance and it is purposeful.  This can be seen when Cameron has nothing but a counter attack strategy to a question, as the saying goes "the best form of defence is offence." Which he certainly does advocate.

At PMQs MPs engage in what can only be seen as barbaric behaviour.  Every PMQ is as worse than supporters at a football match.  There is booing, jeering, shouting, screaming, the Speaker stands up and with a red and angry face points in one direction of the house and tells them "the question will be heard."  It is no wonder the online group called Mumsnet partitioned Berco about this behaviour.

What is needed is a set of rules, rules set out on the expected behaviour of all MPs at PMQ, expected behaviour on how questions should be answered, because they frankly never are, unless they happen to be benign.  However, politics is a cut throat game, and PMQs shows how bad it has become. It's only a pity both sides of the house are not working towards a strategy of government for everyone's advantage.  At the moment, it is only MPs themselves who are coming up on top, possibly because of their large pay cheques.

How not to deal with a high volume work load - a critique of Wikihow

In order to get some tips on dealing with a high workload I ventured onto Wikihow and an article titled "How to complete a high volume workload."  In reading it I tried to relate the experience of these tips to my own high volume workload and though what a load of codswallop. The word "codswallop" is English slang, possibly closely related to cockney and means rubbish or nonsense. I am unable to trace the origins of it at this moment. 

Wikihow's 7 solutions broken down

1. Create an organized work area. Now if you happen to work in a hot desking environment it means you do not have a set desk to sit at, you can not return to the same desk or guarantee the same desk each day. It also implies you are stupid enough not to understand how important organization is in a high volume work environment. So the suggestion is equally demeaning to the individual who reads it. This raised the heckles and inspired the writing of the critique.

2. Think about how your workload is increasing.  If you are already in a high volume workload environment it is usually quite apparent why your workload is increasing, but thinking about it doesn't actually improve the situation, there is no solution in understanding why your workload is high the solution is in how you deal with it.  Yes I have a fecking high pile of work on my desk which is the result of idiots in the IT department who can't get a fecking thing right because last week they had all cued up to have their third lobotomy. I got it on good authority the head of IT is now a goldfish and their IQ has shot off the scale.

3. Now this one made me laugh and I searched for the cream pie to ram it hard in the face of the Wikihow author who wrote it.  Again it takes assumptions the reader is an idiot and doesn't already know this.  Wiki's solution is, take a moment to review each task, work harder and work more accurately on the task and get it right first time.  Fecking codswallop, because any sane person would already know they are working harder than they have already worked before, they already understand the importance of getting something right first time and not wasting further hours doing it multiple times. In fact this point does nothing but to help make you feel more stressed in your own high workload environment.  I would suggest a large group of overworked volume people get together and seek out the author to then give them a dunce hat and sit them in the corner.  This is one possible retribution and for the sake of humanity is the lightest and least offence to read. After all who wants to break the human rights act?

4.  Know your priorities.  There maybe a little bit of sense in this comment, however let it be known the nature of a high volume workload can often mean it is actually difficult to know what your priorities are, especially if a good part of your day is spent fire fighting.  My second name is Fireman Sam, and I always have an extinguisher under my desk. It's very useful. Priorities can clash, be superseded and go out the window with a gust of air. Probably from the fart of the individuals who wrote this well meaning but short sighted set of solutions.

5. Consider the aspects of the work task which get it done.  Here the emphasis is on understanding again how to do you work and what part of the task is going to be most important.  Although really what this point is saying when you read between the lines "if you don't already know what the most important aspects of a task are, then you really should not be doing it and should be sacked." For if you are already in a high volume work environment it is the volume which is killing you not the tasks, were the same tasks in a low volume environment you'd have no problem.  There is a small bit of hope on this solution form Wikihow as it says the person who gave you the task has confidence in you.  But equally the person who gave you the task could be overstretched has got nobody else available and you muggings are the only one they can turn to. Of course you can feel good about yourself because there is a suggestion of you are the person for the job.  However, feeling good about yourself doesn't actually get the work done.

6. Treat yourself kindly.  At last here is a morsel of help which could of been elaborated on more, it could of had an entire web page on how to keep yourself psychologically healthy in a high volume workload environment. Sadly Wikihow does not.  The most important solution so far and with very little meat.  All I can say is don't ever ask Wikihow how to make a ham sandwich, it will talk a great deal about the bread and give you two words about the ham.

7.  And now a hilarious comment with no actual solution at all, as indeed most of the pointers by Wikihow appear to be just that, solution-less dribbles from an idiot with a dunce hat on.  Here it states you should take pride in being a go-getter who is on top of their workload.  However, you have to keep it up, because they will have no toe rags pulling dead lead legs around.  Feck someone give me a slap in the face if this is any kind of solution at all, then cover me in honey and throw me into an infested pit of insects who particularly like honey. Give me a break what planet has this solution come from?

So I learnt absolutely nothing from Wikihow, it was like watching a film with great actors only to see the script was crap, the story was crap and I'd just been shafted for my money at the box office.

If your workplace has put you in a position which makes it a high volume and pressurised environment the best thing you can do is to change your mental viewpoint.  Your employer knows what the problems are and your employer doesn't have the capacity to deal with them.  If they are unsupportive of you why should you be supportive and break your back doing everything you can. What will happen is you will get burn out.  Change your own mental attitude, do your work but don't let this environment because a mental stressor which results in your own breakdown, get your fists up and stay calm and cool as you can.  If at the end of the day your employers expectations are so high they can not be met, you have the option of walking.  Yet this is usually a stupid suggestion to make because you have responsibilities at home, mortgage to pay, food to put on the table.  Put it another way, a stressful workplace and a mental breakdown also want do you home life any good, your mortgage any good or the people you love any good.  Ultimately consider, life is short anything can happen and do everything you can in your arsenal of mental crutches to protect your own well being.  If this doesn't work, log every incident which is of particular stress to yourself especially diarising discussions.  Create an evidence folder and then consider the option of constructive dismissal.  Take legal advice on any such decisions, but think how much is your own peace of mind worth, and is your organization supportive in it's duty of care which includes mental as well as physical health?

Wikihow you need to get your act together and learn to answer the question when it is asked and answer it properly.

George Bush the artist, you're kidding

The news today had an article about George W. Bush, apparently he'd taken up painting now he was no longer a president. I suppose someone like him has to do something in their spare time. The pictures were in no doubt bloody awful. He got air time because he was was the unfortunate choice of president for an American public who must of been having a particularly backwards day when he won the election.  There's no change about him, he is still the not very bright man he always had been.  Except now he doesn't control enough fire power to bring a nuclear winter to the entire world. One picture shown was of Tony Blair, and this was given a fortunate comical appearance to it. Deserving of what Tony Blair should be remembered, the Tory in red clothing. The pictures he seemed to concentrate on were of famous world leaders, portraits. I doubt whether he painted them as they sat for him. He probably used photographs or TV. I have a 13 year old nephew who likes to draw and am sure he would do a similarly decent portrait. Maybe he'd do one of Bush. The thing is nobody would want to view it. Afteral the subject is a bit boring lets not say too much about the painter either.