Part 3: Mini-rant on Vegetarians

No. Stop. Shut the fuck up for a second and listen. Because I know what your open, gaping mouth is about to say.

Eat whatever the fuck you want. That's cool, B. But don't get pissy. If you're going to be a vegetarian, let's get some real names going. I don't know what makes my inner wrath grow more: judgmental selective-dieters who judge others by what they eat (Group A), or the vegetarians, or even vegans, who can't even properly define their diet (Group B).

Quick lesson in Vegeterianomics, people.
---
Vegetarians can be broken down into an enigmatically large number of specific food consuming groups. You can see how confusion over a pescetarian versus an ovo-lacto vegetarian might drive people up a wall, when, say, a fish dinner is being made for a dinner party.

So, if you're a vegetarian, and you were too stupid to figure out what kind, follow Rageoholic's Guide to Alternative Eating Styles.

Pescetarian: You eat everything but meat. Fish included. When you think of the word "vegetarian", this is what you think of.

Ovo-lacto Vegetarian: Ovo = Egg, Lacto = Lactose = Milk. These holistic bad boys eat just about everything, so as long as it isn't meat. I believe this means they will not eat shellfish or fish, as well, so in this context, meat is simply the flesh of any animal. At least you won't fuck up my generous offer of meatless omelettes.

Ovo-lactos can be broken down into Ovo-vegetarians, and Lacto-vegetarians. Infer at your own discretion.

Now we fall into those real freaks, the Vegans. This is where it can get ridiculous, just based on sheer lack of awareness, or importance, to these diets. At this point, I'd like to dedicate this article to my friend Celia, the coolest vegan I know. You know why? Because she explains how she eats without being condescending. And we're off.

Vegans: Won't touch it if it comes from animals in any way. Includes milk, eggs, cheese, anything from an animal.

Raw veganism: Everything you eat is raw, plain and simple. Same dietary needs as above. Apparently, you can partially cook some of the food. Weird fucking restriction, if I may say so myself.

Fruititarian: Same as above, except you can't hurt the plant with your collecting of food. Unclear whether or not this includes vegetables.

Macro/microbiotic diets: I...don't even know where to begin.

So, Group A, you can go to Hell, and Group B? Pick something from this list, or a more fully defined list, and stick to it. Stop using the word "Vegetarian" because it's annoying and confusing as shit, as well as being inaccurate, since you don't only eat vegetables.

Now, you'll have to excuse me, I have a plate of bacon that needs tending to, while I indulge myself in the exploits of the global Mafia.

With bountiful love,
Rageoholic

Part 2: Schrodinger's Grammar Nazi

Simultaneously, I am both a Grammar Nazi, and not a Grammar Nazi. I live in a state of linguisto-quantum flux. Some days, I explode with anger towards people who can't seem to press a couple buttons consecutively in a legible way. Other days, I rock the lulz like a boss. It seems, then, I am also a hypocrite.

But am I? Is it okay for me to type incorrectly, and yet rage at others?

Yes. It's my divine fucking right to do so, because as you can see, I type like a secretary from the 70s. There's no number that accurately represents how many words per minute I can type, people.

Okay, okay. Let me flesh this out for a second. I understand that many social networking sites have character limits, and most include spaces to be a character. By shorthanding our typing in a way that remains comprehensible, people are able to communicate in an extremely efficient manner, capable of getting across more information that if you, say, type like this. I get that. Completely. But, for the hordes of people who do choose to type that way, the vast majority of them can't type properly. Hell, for many of the kids, they can't even write with a pen or pencil properly.*

Anecdote: During a literacy class, focusing on writing speeches, I was editing one of my students' speeches. And it was an awesome speech. Can't remember the topic offhand, but I must have listened to it a good twenty times, the speech constantly holding my interest. One of the points of the criteria was a script, done in good copy, with proper structure, grammar, punctuation and spelling. Needless to say, I wanted to spit my eyes with a pen when I say a page laden with internet patois*. I don't care if you litter a friend's wall saying "wen r we goin 2 da mall?". I don't. But when it's on an assignment worth a chunk of your literacy grade, which you may or may not care about? Come on, kid. Get your shit together. The hell do you have a cell phone at 11 for, anyways?

End of anecdote.

There's a time and a place, people. Not on work reports. Not on school reports. Not in a science journal, or any journal article. Not on a blog. Not in an essay of any kind, personal or otherwise. Not in a book, unless it's intended due to the context of the novel, poem, etc. Hell, not even on most forums. Save it for Facebook, and social networking sites, where you don't care that you come across looking uneducated. Internet forums, fine. Youtube, ...well, it's a sinkhole anyways.

The point of proper writing is to make your information communicable. I suppose that's fallen into the annals of history, along with the quill pen (Hipster acquisition #25), and paisley. But shift back to something like Youtube, or a forum, where people regularly engage in flaming wars, or baseless insulting. If you can't type properly, you're in no place to judge someone's intelligence. Hell, even Tucker Max writes properly, and he's a self-admitted douchebag. You're better than a douchebag, aren't you?

I suppose, finally, what really irks me is the following: I was on a tv streaming site a few months ago, and it has a built in Chatango chatroom, you know, to speak with other viewers, share awesome shows, pictures, anything. I was typing something to someone, and a random user asked me why I typed the way I did. I responded, as usual, that I simply type properly, from years of practicing while I gamed online. I had the opportunity to learn to do something extremely well, while playing a friggin' game. It just seemed smart. I believe his response bordered on me being homosexual, as well as my typing, and that it was weird and I was stupid for typing the way I did.

Needless to say, the rageohol in my system started bubbling, and he was trapped in a cage of rage.

So, yes. After all I've gone through, I reserve the right to type however the hell I want, at any time I want, because I know how to do it properly. I also reserve the right to berate, intimidate, lambast, and shakedown anyone who comments upon the way I type, when they themselves restrict their text to nothing more than internet patois.

And finally, I get to slam into people who choose to write poorly, due to nothing more than sheer laziness.

Capisce?

With love,
Rageaholic

*"Internet patois", as I've dubbed it, likely started with 9-button based text messaging, as it took an extremely long time to type properly. The introduction of T-9 was meant to make it easier, alas...

The Real Part 1: Nostradamus Effect and other shows of the same calibre.

My brother sent me a box full of old video games and a box of books, last night. In that box of books, I found the complete collection of translated prophecies by our favourite doomsayer, Nostradamus, complete in the original French, replete with translations in English and analyses of each quatrain. Now, these quatrains have long been used in a number of fictional ways as a premise to invoke the destruction of the world, or a number of other plot progressions. It's a pretty cool plot device, because the authors often use the quatrains to look forward, and predict things.

Sidebar: A quatrain is a stanza of four lines. The rhyming pattern in A, B, A, B. I don't think there's a meter, or a type of stress used. I'm also too lazy to think about poetry in French, right now. But, I need some credibility, so....It's iambic pentameter.

Now, I don't know if you all know anything about the Nostradamusian (<- New word! I make words up.) prophecies. If you want to learn, however, go to a library. Start studying the man before you blindly pick up a book, and start overlaying his ideas with modern history. This pursuit has led to the creation of myriad essays by, in some cases, reputable scholars, and in most cases, non-reputable "scholars", elevating Nostradamus to the tier of a prophet (something he himself denied vehemently) rendering him the most clairvoyant mind to have walked the Earth, based on the idea that he has foreshadowed some of the most globally-affected events in our history.

The death of Princess Di? Yeah, that's apparently in there.
Napoleon's attempt to take over the world? Yep.
Hitler? Uh-huh.
"Global Warming"? They're still looking for that quatrain.
9/11? Yeah, he guessed that. Like a boss.

Now, I'm more inclined to believe in Nostradamus, rather than people who interpret (and mistranslate) his works. He said he's no prophet, and I believe that.

Enter: Nostradamus Effect

Nostradamus Effect is one of the many shows on Discovery (Or the History Channel) that focuses on conspiracy theories, focusing on, in many episodes, the relationship between events in history and Nostradamus' writings. Now, I will admit that, yes, there is a disclaimer at the beginning of this hour program, that states ""We will neither refute, nor endorse, these theories; merely, present the evidence."

Except they don't "just present the evidence". In fact, in none of these conspiracy theory worshipping shows do they simply just "state" the evidence. My readers, you are well aware of what Socratic dialogue is. Ask and answer questions with someone, in an attempt to come to some truth. Well, these shows use Socratic dialogue, except instead of engaging in a discussion that leads to something fruitful, they plants questions into the audience's head, refer to these building questions (that, although hypothetical in nature, they continue to build upon as though they are explicit fact) and continue to delve into realms that I will lightly describe as unscholarly.  By planting and building upon erroneous conclusions (which help formulate further questions along the same mental strand), they bring the viewer into their world of ideas, legitimizing what they're saying as fact by building upon the mentally poisonous ideas they espouse. The outcome? The viewers have long forgotten about the disclaimer and wholeheartedly believe everything they've just seen, anxious to repeat it ad nauseum.

Most of these conspiracy theory shows use this same technique of bait and more bait and more bait. It doesn't matter if it's about aliens, if it's a documentary like "Loose Change", or that other one that talks about the illegal nature of the U.S. Treasury, they're all unabashedly biased, trying to prove their point, by repeatedly instilling their conclusion amidst a broken trail of half-facts and what I like to think is selectively edited interviews with professionals. And it crushes me.

I was going to mention the erroneous nature of using hindsight to state someone's a prophet, since such a technique would be rife with bias. You know, the whole, "Hey, how many parallels can we draw to these words and real life, in the most cryptic, symbolically-affluent way possible?".


This proves detrimental to my way of life. I can guarantee that a scholar of the likes of Nostradamus did not want future generations to recklessly compile erroneous information and disseminate it like a plague, and yet, that appears to be the real effect of this show.

Next time on the Page of Rage? I rant about puns.

People who still have credibility: This dude, who maintains objectivity in his books and show.
Picture on my dartboard: Everyone else.

Page of Rage - Part 1: Nostradamus Prophecy Enthusiasts

Welcome to the first official post of the Page of Rage, brought to you by yours truly, Rageaholic.

Before I fall into a blinding, uncontrollable rage about enthusiasts who can't get enough of conspiracy theories involving Nostradamus' work "The Prophecies", I thought it would be nice to preface this blog with a few self-answered questions.

Who am I? An angry Canadian academic/teacher, prone to becoming belligerently angry at anything I find to be stupid, bothersome, ridiculous, anger-inducing, ignorant, childish, (insert synonyms here), and just plain wrong.

What's the point? Have you ever been to a social gathering (party, box social, kegger, art showing, car show) where you inadvertently engage (not through your own volition) in an argument where the other person lacks an iota of factual information in their position, resting on hearsay, "experts" they happen to know, fallacious experience, or anything else that causes you to question the worth of their existence?

Typical arguments which lead to such an outcome:
- The existence of God
- Anything about World War II
- Buddhism
- Aliens/Any conspiracy theory, except for...
- 9/11, because everyone's got a theory for this one
- Homosexuality
- Politics
- Fiat currency (That one's for you, Erik)
- Islam, its' history, and....
- Terrorism
- The Drop Fees Campaign (If you're not a local, don't bother trying to make sense of this one)

Note: This list is open to be added to, either through my experiences, or through comments that people leave. I know you're out there, debaters.

Where/When are unimportant.

Why? Why do this? Because I'm sick and tired of people being uninformed. It irks me greatly that even in a setting of higher learning (Re: University), people lack the skills to argue properly, resort to fallacies like they're impenetrable life rafts, and that there's no sense of objectivity left in the world. Also, I get an ego boost from people reading and enjoying my rambling.

How? (Or, what's the format going to be? How will you pick topics? Et cetera, et cetera...) For me, anger strikes at least once everyday. Hell, watch the Discovery Network and you'll automatically know why. So, topics will either be suggested, or come at random, or I'll hit one of the aforementioned topics in the list, if the well has run dry.

Well, that about answers all the questions you might have. To any others, we'll, I'll get around to it.

Happy reading, friends.
- Rageaholic