I DESPISE Bad Spelling

Everyone makes mistakes, and I forgive people for one or two mistakes that are typos or hasty grammatical errors, but repeated and blatant disregard for the rules and intricacies of the English language are endlessly frustrating.  There is nothing like a misspelled word or dismal grammar to make me royally upset.  I do NOT understand bad spelling and awful grammar.  Yes, I am aware that my computer will tell me when I have misspelled a word, and I am aware that misspelled words "still get the point across."  However, arguments such as these are lazy and illogical.  My computer can also add and subtract numbers.  It can even divide and multiply.  Does that mean I should not know how to add and subtract and divide and multiply?  That's just one example.  There are many others.  In the end, all the arguments against good spelling are just terrible excuses.  I believe that proper spelling is an absolute necessity.  I don't claim to know how to spell EVERY word, but I know how to spell the ones I use, and if I don't, I LEARN how to spell them before using them.  It is a simple thing to do, learning to spell.  I may be alone in this, but when people show an inadequacy in spelling or grammar, it makes me think they are inadequate in other aspects of memory-based intelligence.  I am not saying they actually ARE lacking in intelligence, but I definitely have tons of suspicions, at least initially. 

Here are some very common mistakes that literally make me want to hurt myself:

"are" instead of "our" and vice versa...  Example:  Are project is going to be good.

"their" instead of "there", "they're" and all the various mix-ups with those words...  Example:  They're massive house is over their next to there expensive car.

As you can see, those are all grammatical errors.  Spelling errors are also very common, but I can't bear to type any.  Additionally, they are much harder to think of because almost any word can be misspelled.  I was prompted to write this after reading a terribly misspelled word, but I apologize if anyone who can't spell is offended.  Some people are annoyed by mismatched fashions or incomprehensible accents; I am annoyed by bad spelling and bad grammar.  Very annoyed.  I actually cut this post short because it made me quite frustrated and angry just thinking about the subject.

Shakespeare, Hamlet and Romeo & Juliet

I would just like to explain my theory about Shakespeare. I have done some such revealing in comments. I think that some of his plays are about common human flaws, and he blows the flaws out of proportion as a lesson or a warning, as well as simple, relatable entertainment. At this point in Hamlet, I don't really know enough to comment with very much certainty, but i seems to be a more serious play, whereas I see Romeo and Juliet as more of a satire. Part of my theory revolves around Shakespeare's tendency to use double meanings. To me, it makes sense that some of his plays are themselves intended as something other than what they initially seem. In the case of Romeo & Juliet, it seems a serious and tragic play, but I have a personal opinion that it is really about how ridiculous people are about some things, especially when they have little recognizeable control over their emotions, like Romeo and Juliet's "fated" love. I'm tired of writing, but please leave comments for something I've forgotten to elaborate on and I will see if I cam clarify more. I'll eventually get around to reading the doping in bicycle racing article that I mentioned earlier, and then I'll comment. I have been re-reading all the Harry Potter books, so I've been busy. ;) Oh, I feel it's necessary to mention I began reading them well before they were popular, so that magically justifies following popularity, a practice I basically detest in most instances. Besides, Harry Potter is fun to read, it is as simple as that.

Bicycling Crashes and some Bike Terminology

I was inspired to watch bike crashes by my own last post, and I figured some things needed to be clarified so that some of the crashes don't look like total idiotic mistakes (some are still dumb mistakes though).

Some good knowledge to have if you'd like to be entertained by guys in tights crashing their bikes while going fast (35+mph) or sitting still:
Peloton - The main group of riders in a race.  There are about 150 or so riders in the Tour de France.
Clipless Pedals - Basically, these are pedals that bike shoes attach to so that riders can not only push down on the pedals, but pull up, especially useful for climbing mountains and sprinting.  Every pro biker uses clipless pedals.  To unhook from the pedals, you have to click your heels out, and it takes a notable amount of foresight to get them out really quickly.  In road bike racing, the seats are higher than you can sit on with your legs touching the ground.  The result of high seats and shoes hooked into pedals is a lot of falls that are very difficult to avoid.  Trust me, it hurts to fall over sideways while you're clipped in.  Also trust me, it hurts to crash going 20mph with people behind you when you're clipped in.  Gravel/Sand IS dangerous, and it hurts too, trust me.  :)
Drafting - Simple physics.  If someone blocks the wind for you, you can save a LOT of energy and maintain a pretty ridiculous speed for a bicycle.  If there are 5 or 6 people in front, it is marginally better for each additional person.  In racing, teams (yes, there are teams) take turns pulling, as its termed, the other members of the team.  The result is that almost everyone rides very close together for most of every race.
Slippery pavement - Just like race car slicks, the tread on bike tires is mostly smooth.  Rain and road paint combine to make painful slippery situations.
Fans - TdF fans are crazy and there is not a good way to sanction or restrict such fans from getting dangerously close, and dangerously stupid, with the riders.  Lots of crashes result.
Rules - There are some rules in cycling that seem counterproductive to making a legitimate race, but it all makes sense somehow.  They are pretty complex, but I'll explain some basic principles.
   Everyone in the main peloton gets the same time.  If you are in a group, the group gets the same time (as long as you are 1 second or less behind the guy immediately in front of you).
   Riders in the last 5km or so get the same time as the group they were in if they crash.
  A stage win is not synonymous with an overall win in Tours like the TdF.
  Spectators CAN help you up and stuff, and all teams have cars following the race that carry extra bikes, extra water, and extra food.  Sometimes cyclists do things on their bikes that require hands off the handlebars, like eating and changing clothes, so sometimes accidents happen when stability is low.
  Various other complex rules and courtesies are present in cycling.  For example, if a huge group crashes, sometimes EVERYONE will slow down and let the crashed riders catch up.  It is complicated.

If you have any other questions, I'd be very happy to answer them.  As you can infer, I am very interested in this topic.
A couple of good crash videos:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xFAoZTfkCE (caution: a little bit of BLOOD!)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qBE98Raljwo (No blood, lots of idiots)
And a good sprint by the aforementioned Mark Cavendish:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frdU3_aKZNs

This is related to reading because I read about things like How to Avoid Crashes, How to Repair Your Bike, and How to Sprint Fast in lots of magazines.  ;)
Next week, I might write about cheating in bicycling, which is very intense and complicated.  It involves using steroids, blood transfusions, and many other things, so it should be interesting.  Then I can ask a good question like: "what's your opinion on doping in sports?"

I love to read. I read a lot of different stuff. Like magazines

I am a regular reader of a few magazines, and I would like to comment on them.  One magazine I regularly read is Guitar World.  It is, pretty obviously, a guitar magazine.  Since I play the guitar, it is a good magazine to read.  Except, because of the vast amount of guitar music, I am often very uninterested in the musicians they choose to cover.  Plus, I am extremely picky, and I find some of the "virtuosos" to be ridiculously annoying.  For example, Yngwie Malmsteen is arguably one of the best guitar players in the world, but he plays what is called "classical shred" and it is just a lot of technically impressive and super annoying guitar fireworks.  I am more a fan of something that has groove AND technicality, so I am often disappointed in Guitar World for covering a plethora of guitarists whose music is downright annoying, despite amazing technical ability.  If you want to be impressed by guitarists I really can't stand, then look up Michael Angelo Batio, Yngwie Malmsteen, and Rusty Cooley.  Then, if you want to hear some equally impressive and not annoying guitarists that I like, listen to Paul Gilbert, Joe Satriani (NOT Chickenfoot), and Tosin Abasi (Animals As Leaders) or the band Scale the Summit (from Houston)!

The other magazine I read regularly is Bicycling Magazine.  It is about bicycling, and specifically about road biking, which is the type that I much prefer and exclusively participate in.  They're the bikes with skinny tires and curled handlebars.  This magazine often reads like a workout magazine because biking is a sport, and workouts that improve bicycling skills are almost always included.  It is a great magazine and besides the workout articles, it includes stories about bikes, people who ride, and reviews of gear (bikes are surprisingly complicated and gear is VERY extensive).  A lot of great humor is often written into the articles, and the writers are pretty journalistic.  I like to read all the stories, like one about a regular office worker who suddenly dropped her real job to become a professional biker for the best bike team in the world, which is pretty darn impressive.  Besides biking stuff, the magazine will have triathlon workouts and other triathlon related things.  This is because biking is usually the longest leg (in miles, not necessarily time) in a triathlon.  Running magazines have a similar multi-sport reading group, and thus some bike and swim articles as well.  If you don't think that biking is exciting, try watching a few Tour de France crash videos on YouTube, they get pretty darn brutal sometimes.  I saw a guy basically fall off a cliff on one.  And another guy almost decapitated a dog once.  TDF enthusiasts that watch the tour are ridiculous, and the race is on public roads, so some European people do some crazy things like chase the cyclists in thongs, and let their dogs run around the course.  Ridiculous.  Also, there is a LOT of strategy in bike racing, and while some may laugh, it is very interesting.  Check out Mark Cavendish and Mark Renshaw if you're interested.  Cavendish is a sprinter, and he won the last stage of the Tour de France in 2009 by drafting off Renshaw until the last 200 meters or so, where he took off at about 50mph to dominate everyone else.  On a flat stretch of road.  It is pretty cool to see him just take off, so that's another good YouTube video.  Cavendish is pretty much a British douche, so my favorite cyclist is Tyler Farrar, an American who is also a sprinter.  He gets beat by Cavendish a lot, but he is pretty classy.  And that's about it.  I read about things I'm interested in, so guitar and cycling are obvious choices.

Note About Those Things You Have to Type After Each Comment

When you post a comment, it makes you type a thing with random letters and it is really annoying.  Once, when I was unable to read the random letters, I clicked the handicap button.  I would not recommend doing that to anyone else.  It is a bad idea.  It basically screams alien transmissions at you and you're apparently supposed to decipher letters of the alphabet from it.  I'll just say it did not help me at all and it made my computer slow until I stopped it.  Weird.  Think of it as comedy aimed at the visually impaired, though, and it is pretty amusing once or twice.  Feel free to comment on your experience with the post-comment handicap icon, or any other handicap experience, preferably not a boring one.

I read the newspaper. An article was about a particular racial slur and it was ignorant.

I read the newspaper.  It was depressing.  I hate reading or watching news because it is VERY subjective and it is never subjective parallel to my own point of view.  There was one story about "the N word" and it was very offensive to me.  It suggests that we should ban the word!  If we ban that word, we'll have to ban other words and, really, words can not cause any harm of their own accord.  It is ridiculous to assume, as the author of this particular article did, that "eradicating" the word is going to help the problem in any way.  I think it is downright ignorant to blame a word for the terrible cultural norm that is racial discrimination.  The word is used as an expression to express the hate that is the actual culprit.  Sometimes, it is even used as a term of endearment.  By her logic we should ban the word evil, and then evil things would cease to exist, right?  And also banished should be words like lower-class, poor, unfortunate and why not middle-class too.  Then, we would all be good and we would all be rich.  In no way do I mean to suggest that the word is not offensive to some people, because that is obvious.  I am just upset that the author blames the word for the problem and not the culture and people who use the word in a hate crime-type way.  Words don't hate people; people hate people, and to address the word as the problem is stupid.  We should, and DO, have a ban on hate crimes and racial discrimination, and I think we should focus on enforcing those bans rather than trying to ban the word itself.  (Of course, I am biased because I like to call all my friends the "N" word as a term of endearment.  How would you feel if you couldn't call your girlfriend,or boyfriend for the ladies, "baby"?)

Note:  the ( )s separate a section of my blog that is controversial.  It is meant to be ironic sarcasm.  It is supposed to be sarcastically ironic because it is sort of serious but also whimsical.  I can't explain it very well, but it was fun.  I hope you can figure out what I meant, and I don't actually call my friends the "N" word.