Today's News - Now With Chickens!

There's some stuff you just can't make up. No matter how hard you try, you'd never come up with stuff like this. Headline over there across the pond at the BBC News: One legged hen's horseback return. Wait. What now? One legged hen? OK, shouldn't 'News' have been in quotes? Unless that one-legged hen can talk, I'm thinking the term 'news' is probably used pretty liberally in the context that it was.

It seems that a hen, yes a hen, a hen was rescued from the clutches/jaws of a fox, but not before the fox could chomp off a leg. (But can you blame him? Chicken legs? Good stuff!) According to a one Mrs. Marian Nicol, it was her son who "found the injured hen lying on her back after hearing a noise where the chickens were kept. Her leg had been chewed by the fox." Hence why she was lying on her back. It's not like she could hop around and hop for help. It is a chicken. They do have their limitations and breathing and walking are about the sum total of them.

The hen, who goes by the name of Peggy for some reason, apparently used to "land on the backs of the horses and sit there", but that was before all of the leg mauling. "Since her leg was damaged she hasn't been able to jump up there, but we sometimes lift her up and she will sit there." Well, what else is she going to do? She has one leg. You just said it! One leg!

Mrs. Nicol said that her and her son "treated" Peggy and "she is making a good recovery." They don't explain what all it entailed when they "treated" her. Had the chicken not been riding on the back of a horse, I would have just assumed that the "treatment" consisted of 11 herbs and spices.

There is a video of this oddity in the animal kingdom. It's not long and it's just like what it sounds like it is. It's a chicken. On the back of a horse. And the horse is walking. Ta-DA! At one point, Mrs. Nicol is heard to say about Peggy that she's "Just as happy as a hen in, um, uh, clover?" What the heck does that mean? A hen in clover? Do hens like clover? I've spent a lot of time on farms and I do not recall seeing any clover anywhere near the hens. A hen in clover? (Well, they're clearly not four-leafed clovers, as if they had been, that chicken might still have two legs.) How about if we come up with a more appropriate metaphor? How about happy as a hen in barbeque sauce? Or happy as a hen in a casserole? Happy as a hen in a biscuit?

You can view a 30-second video of the hen atop the horse over at this link. It's nothing profound, but it is there. You wouldn't think that it would be that hard to know what it was that you're most interested in filming if you're the one with the camcorder, but it was seemingly not so obvious to whomever was doing the filming, as most of the time it's a wide shot of the horse's arse with half of a chicken on top of him. The chicken! You're supposed to focus on the chicken! The story is "Chicken Rides Horse" not "Horse's Ass Grows Chicken"! Detail! Detail!

For some reason, there's a lot of chicken news being covered by the BBC lately. There's also the story of a cockerel (which I believe is the equivalent in the United States to a rooster) named Basil who was adopted by a farmer after Basil was evicted from a Tyneside housing estate where he had taken up residence. Basil was asked to leave because he was crowing loudly in the early morning hours. (He is a rooster. They do do that.) Apparently, this rooster was a hot topic for quite some time over there. But it's good to know that people on other parts of the globe are just as idiotic as some of the folks here in the US because of course Basil ended up with his own Facebook group. (We're so doomed.)

The article says that after numerous complaints "housing officials (had) to issue the bird with a notice to quit." I'm just guessing that since it was a bird that it was unable to read the notice it had just been issued. And even if it could read it, I'm guessing he didn't care.) People even wrote letters to the Queen asking for her to intervene! It's a chicken, people! (Look, I don't know a lot about the royalty thing that goes on over there, but is that one of the official powers of the Queen? Intervention with Poultry? If so, is it just chickens or are there others birds that she can have not evicted as well? And my final question, are these royal powers of the Queen limited to only birds and if so, is it only the tasty ones?)

A one Claire Thorburn ended up taking Basil in and giving him a home on her farm in Bamburgh, Northumberland where she has 30 hens! ( Holy cow! Basil! You've hit the jackpot! ) But Basil quickly took to a hen named Bonnet and now, lo and behold (brother and sister of Flora and Fauna) they are the proud chicken parents of two baby female chicks and one baby male chick. And for some reason, folks seem to think that because Basil was able to find an uninhibited female farm bird for fornicating that it means that he is happy now and it " proves how settled he is in his new home." It does?

How unhappy can a chicken be, really? Unless it's in the middle of having its leg gnawed off by a fox. I haven't heard of a need for any sort of Poultry Prozac or anything. And maybe it is the new digs that has Basil all happy and frolicking. I think it could be more likely that it's all of the fornicating that has Basil all happy and frolicking and continuing to fornicate. He's on a farm with thirty chicks! (And rumor has it those chicks are animals!) How bad could it be? Where do I sign up? Do I have to crow in the early morning hours? Because that really won't work for me; I'm not much of a morning person.

At this link, you can watch a 20 second video of Basil's new owner saying something which I found to be completely undecipherable due to an accented accent! I was, however, able to understand her say that Basil had been sitting on the eggs for 21 days! Wow. Now that's a henpecked husband.

Sphere: Related Content

UK Gay

Aw, those crazy Brits. It's always something. And it's usually amusing. This time, we're looking across the pond to the BBC reference tool the E-cyclopedia. Over on the BBC's fine website, they open one of their E-cyclopedia articles with the following statement: "Amid rising debate - inspired by the UK Government and legal authorities - about what are suitable terms for minority sexual groups, here as a special public service, is a one-stop primer clarifying what words are in and out about being in or out." Huh. Sort of like "A British Guide To Acceptable Words To Use When Describing Someone Who Is Gay"? OK, then. Now, granted, this article was from 2002, but since everything is still in effect and relevant, so is the article. Onward.

According to the E-cyclopedia, "The UK government has decided that, following consultation with the gay community, the term homosexual will not be used in its papers." (The term "papers" refers to legislation.) Really? Apparently, the word was originally intended, by one Karl Maria Kertbeny of Hungary in 1869, to stop the use of the word "pederast" (which means "one who practices intercourse, especially with a boy." Well, THAT doesn't sound good at all. I'm glad ol' Karl stepped in when he did.). And while the UK government isn't going back to "pederast", they're not totally sold on "homosexual" either.

But in the anti-discrimination laws, which apparently are different that your run of the mill "legislation" over there, the UK government will replace the word "homosexual" with the term "OTPOTSS". (WTF?) "OTPOTSS" stands for "Orientation Towards People Of The Same Sex". I don't care what it stands for, I don't like it. It sounds like a cross between an opossum and an octopus. And can you imagine what that would look like? I can. It would look something like this:

And that's just wrong. (It's certainly not right.) Why can't "homosexual" or "OTPOTSS" just be replaced with "gay" like it is in the rest of the legislation? It sounds better, you don't need a thesaurus and you're already using a word that means the same thing! I think it's just the work of someone who really likes acronyms. (Maybe they used to work for the US Government.)

They do seem to be OK with the term "gay", however. The thing is, they're not quite sure how long they're going to be OK with it and they don't think it will be around long. (They don't explain why that is, which I find extremely odd.) Those who are in favor of keeping the term "gay" around say that "when judges were considering hate crimes against gays, they would best understand a simple term like "gays". (Um, if they have to dumb things down for the judges over there so that they are able to understand the oh-so complicated concept of "gay", that brings to light a whole different issue, now, doesn't it?) So, if the term "gay" is going to become obsolete, they're going to need to replace it with something, right?

Well, I'm not looking to Philip Hensher to be the guy who defines the new term. He says that when young people use the term "gay" it means "hopelessly naff". (And now for the definition of "naff". Who knew this British stuff was going to require so much explaining? "Naff" basically has the same meaning as when the term "gay" is used to describe something lame. So they're using it the same way some of us are using it. Side note: In looking for this definition, I learned it is also used in the gay community of London as a dismissive term when used toward heterosexuals in the context of an acronym meaning "Not Available For Fucking". Who knew?) But back to Mr. Hensher. Yeah, he suggests, as a replacement for "gay", using the term "sodomites". I suggest we don't ask his opinion for anything else. Ever.

Although "gay" will be used for hate crimes, the term LBGT, will be used to define the groups which can be targeted for homophobic hate crimes. (The acronym LBGT stands for "Lesbian, Bisexual, Gay and Trans-People". If they didn't include the gays in that one, they'd have the term BLT, which wouldn't really represent a targeted group for hate crimes as much as it would a targeted group for a tasty sandwich.) I don't know how they can use "homophobic" when they're against "homosexual". It appears to be very "homo-selective" if you're asking me.

After all of the misfortune of being lesbian floating around these days, you'll be happy to know that the UK government sees absolutely nothing wrong with the term lesbian and the use of it may continue. (Such a relief to know that I can continue my usage of lesbians. Or something like that. Regardless, it's all good. Or it should be. It certainly was.)

You know, I've come to the conclusion that if people put half as much effort into how to just accept those who are gay, (or homosexual, OTPOTSS, naff, lesbian, transgender, transsexual, transcontinental, bisexual or anything I left out) as they put into trying to figure out what to call those who are any or all of the above gay references, we'd all be a lot better off. (We'd definitely be better off than anything that requires a bunch of legislators to convene in order to figure it out.)

Sphere: Related Content

What Did You Think I Was Talking About?

Many, many reasons exist as to why I love the press/media over there in the UK. And bbc.co.uk only exemplifies that mindset. "One Minute World News", that seems to be their motto/slogan. And the world is a pretty big place, so that's quite the accomplishment. They're just so amusing, with their blunt and direct style of reporting and how their stories are often infused with their witty, witty puns and their tongue in cheek comments. Oooh....tongue in cheek. Apparently some of that wittiness is wearing off on someone.

From the fine folks across the pond at bbc.co.uk, we have this descriptive portion of one of their stories: "He had nothing else to do all night and licked it until he destroyed it. I'm sorry it's in bits, I hope it's recoverable." Followed by this: "We underestimated how long Gerald's tongue was, but you have to laugh. Gerald has a huge tongue." Well, I'm sure you're thinking what I was thinking. That they must be talking about a giraffe named Gerald, at a zoo, who licked a webcam that had been set up to stream live pictures of the birth of a baby zebra and destroyed the webcam. Of course. Wait. What?

Gerald the giraffe did just that. Licked a webcam to it's death. Apparently, giraffes in general have huge tongues (who knew?). But Gerald has a ridiculously huge tongue which was able to reach the webcam and just lick, lick, lick it's smooth, shiny, attractive front all night long until his heart's content. Gerald, you lucky dog, er, giraffe.

Wait a minute. What did you think I was talking about?

Sphere: Related Content