IDAHo

IDAHo
International Day Against Homophobia

Celebrating the day, on 17th May 1990, when the World Health Organisation finally took homosexuality off their list of mental illnesses.
Yes, it was only 18 years ago

I am a 35 year old gay male who has been out on the scene for about 16 years, been out to work colleagues for about 14 years and to family for about 7 years. In all that time I have experienced 5 instances of homophobia, of various levels of severity, that I can recall, though obviously all are unacceptable.

My first experience of abuse of this nature was when I was about 20. I was living in Grays, in Essex at the time and on a day off, a Sunday if I recall correctly, I was walking across a main road on my way to a cash point before heading into London for some drinks.
Just as I'd crossed the road a car sped past and someone yelled out of the window, "Fuckin' Poof!”
It may well have been obvious that I was gay, I was wearing jeans that accentuated my arse and a tight, ribbed white t-shirt, but even so, that sort of abuse isn't acceptable.

Probably the same year, while I was working at Ravel, in the Lakeside shopping centre, the shop was “invaded” by a group of travellers trying to get money back on a pair of stolen shoes. When they realised that they wouldn't get their way they began to leave and insulted every member of staff, and some customers.
I was singled out a bit when one of the women said to me, “And you! You're a poof!” To which I replied, “Yeah! And?”
She was taken aback that I had agreed with her and said, “I'm gonna get my dad in to sort you out!” To which I replied, “Only if he's good looking!”
It was while regaling this story to the weekend staff on the following Saturday that everyone who worked there came to know I was gay. So they did me a favour really.

A few months later we had a particularly grumpy and disagreeable young woman working with us. She walked out one evening saying that she quit. She came back the next day demanding her job back, but the manageress refused, which resulted in her getting some abuse from the woman's boyfriend who was doing all the talking. He then turned on me with a few special words, "As for you! You're just a fucking pervert!”
Ravel took the easy option for this woman and gave her a job at a fairly local branch, though it was at a lower hourly rate, shorter hours and the manageress, who knew and liked me, made sure that she quit within the week!

The next incident I experienced was, by a long way, the most serious that I have personally experienced.
I'd moved to Torquay by this point and had been enjoying a night out with friends at Munroe's night club.
Originally, Munroe's had opened as a gay club, but over time more and more straight people were going as the music and atmosphere were so great, oh and the fact that drugs were easy to come by probably had something to do with it!
This particular night, as I began to leave with my boyfriend and my mate, who I was renting a room off at the time, we saw a can of beer fly across outside the front door! We thought nothing much of it, but then got verbal abuse, the details of which I cannot recall, as we walked out. We just ignored it being uninterested and a bit merry.
As we had got a couple of minutes along the road, just out of sight of the club, I heard a noise and looked around to see three guys running at us. I managed to warn my companions just in time for my friend to get punched right in the face by the leader of the trio. He was a big bodybuilder type guy and was standing over my friend just pummelling him with punches. The other two acolytes didn't do anything, just egged him on.
At the time, I was a skinny 10 stone weakling who had never been in a fight outside of the school yard, and so I couldn't take on this guy. I did manage to place myself in between him and my friend until he got bored of punching us and ran off with his mates.
All the while this was going on, there was a young couple leaning out of the bedroom window of the nearest house watching. I had yelled for them to phone the police, but they didn't seem bothered. “We haven't got a phone!” was the excuse, and this was in the days before everyone had mobiles, but his tone said it all.
My friend suffered a fractured jaw and tons of bruises and was off work for about two weeks. I was off just the next day with shock, though I only had a few bruises and bumps to show for the ordeal.
We did hear a few months later that the leader of this group had been attacked himself, over drugs we think, and was in a vegetative state in hospital. Strangely we had little sympathy for him.

My latest experience of homophobia was one I covered recently on the blog. A new work colleague, still in training, had interrupted a conversation I was having with another work mate about Heath Ledger, just after he had died. His comment was along the lines of:
“He topped himself because he was fed up with comments about that batty boy film!” meaning Brokeback Mountain.
He then told us that he had tried to watch the film with his girlfriend but couldn't as it made him "feel sick!” He then added that "Gays are wrong! Just wrong!”
He apologised afterwards when I had informed him that I was gay and didn't appreciate being told I was “wrong.” But he left early that day and, when my supervisor and the building manager found out what had happened, they banned him from the site.
My employers still kept him on though, sending him to another site, their justification for this being that he hadn't actually insulted me directly and he had been given a final warning! Which is hardly going to get them on Stonewall's list of good gay employers is it?

I have said that these are the only incidents of homophobia that I recall, but what do you class as homophobia? Should I have included the time when a long-time friend refused to discuss my sexuality when I tried to come out to her?
What about the fact that my sister has still not told her kids that I am gay, even though I've told her that it is alright to do so?

I look back at these events and think to myself in 16 years I haven't experienced that many incidents of homophobia and consider myself lucky.

Lucky?

I feel lucky that I have had to endure only a few of these incidents? That says quite a lot about my expectations of today's society doesn't it. I should expect to be treated as an equal and not to be judge on who I am attracted to, or what happens, or doesn't, in my bedroom!
Attitudes need to change throughout society. Acceptance and tolerance are bad words for the gay community to use. Do we accept redheads? Do we tolerate people with blue eyes? No, because it isn't an issue.

Being gay needs to become a non-issue, just a description. We should be able to say:

"I fancy girls with long legs!”
“I like big boobs!”
“I like my men tall dark and handsome”

Whether we are male, female or transsexual and it shouldn't matter.

As the latest slogan says:

Michael John Cahill

I originally honoured Michael John Cahill in 2006 for the Project: 2996 tribute and have been granted the honour again. As before, I hope this tribute honours him as much he deserves. Grief is such a personal thing it affects us all in different ways. Grief can affect you for people you do not know as well as those you do. I have experienced a fair amount of loss in my life, but you can never truly equate your loss with that of someone else. It is also difficult to pay tribute to someone you didn’t know and never met. All you can do is research and hope you get all the facts straight. I could, however, find no fresh information about Michael since my original tribute.

Michael John Cahill was in Tower 1 of the World Trade Centre, based on the 99th floor. This floor was in the upper area of where the first plane hit the tower.
I can’t even begin to imagine what Colleen, his wife, must have been thinking when she first heard the news and saw the pictures.
Michael was 37 years old and, from what I can tell, a REAL family man. He had a wife he loved and two young kids who he loved spending time with and wanted to be a good role model for. To this end he rejoined his high school cross country running team as its captain, as he believed that sports were important in their development.
Michael worked hard, often out of his house for more than 12 hours and regularly taking work home with him, but his family knew that it was all for them. Colleen, his wife said, “We knew we came first. He would always make a point to tell me, ‘I know it’s hard for you being home with the kids,’ so he would always make time to be with them so I could take a break.”
Even his sister, Denise Troise, was amazed at her brother’s devotion to his family, saying “I can’t even imagine a more dedicated father and husband.”
He was known for his weekend barbecues which usually brought together his close-knit family, neighbours and friends.

Posthumously, Michael has been awarded a promotion to Managing Director by his firm, Marsh & McLennan. He has also been awarded the Dean Award from St John’s University Law School, from which he graduated in 1991.
But, possibly the most telling award made to this loving family man is the bench and plaque placed in his East Williston village green by his friends and neighbours, and the fact that around 1000 friends attended the memorial mass at St Aidan’s Roman Catholic Church in Williston Park.
Jim & Evelyn be proud of your son, you must have done good raising him.
Colleen be proud of your husband, you picked a good one. One who loved you enough to spend time away from you to provide the things you needed and deserved.
Connor & Fiona, be proud of your daddy. He was a good man. Ask your family about him. Find out all that you can and fix him in your mind, that way, he will always be with you.

You will never forget.
We will never forget.
Michael John Cahill

Please don’t forget to check out Project 2996 for all the other tributes that have been made today to honour those who died on that awful day.

Michele Ann Nelson

7th December 1973 – 11th September 2001

Michele Ann Nelson was a benefits specialist, working in the Human Resources department of Cantor Fitzgerald in the World Trade Center. She had been there since 2000. She formerly worked at J & W Seligman and County Seat Stores and lived in Valley Stream, New York. Michele left behind a younger sister – Monique, and her mother – Mrs Winsome Nelson, along with a vast network of family and friends.

Some words used frequently to describe Michele were: Beautiful, intelligent, hilarious, thoughtful, caring, punctual, giving, forgiving, positive, & spiritual.

Once again, for me, it is difficult writing an honest tribute to someone who I never got the chance to meet. The overwhelming impression I get from the tributes that I have seen and the thoughts that have been written, is that of an incredibly caring person who always thought of others. Whether it was giving good advice to someone considering quitting college, or kind words on the death of a co-worker’s relative, she made a difference just by being her own caring self. She is an example that we should all follow.

Michele seemed to make an impact on the lives of everyone that she met. Brief acquaintances were influenced by her shining example of how to live life. Even now, 8 years on, her example is being spread via her family and friends, and via tributes on the internet that give a multitude of examples of the kindness, generosity and her incredibly caring nature.

Excelling in her studies at school, graduating from Pennsylvania State University, then Baruch College of the City, Michele was constantly trying to improve her skills, shown also by her attendance of New York Restaurant School, from which she posthumously graduated in December ‘01. I think that we can all learn from the example that Michele set during her brief life.

She had a mantra that she would repeat three times a day: “This is the day the Lord had made, I will rejoice and be glad in it.”

Please take time to read tributes left to Michele and her family at Legacy.com and at the memorial site set up by Cantor Fitzgerald. And don’t forget all the other victims of that terrible day, all of whom will be paid tribute to via Project 2996.

Journey

You stare, I glance,

You smile, I dance,

I can’t believe that you would notice me.

You wink, I blush,

Makes my blood rush,

To my heart you now hold the only key.

You write a note,

My mind it floats,

I can’t focus on any sight around.

The scenery,

Such raw beauty,

All drifts on by, I don’t know where I’m bound.

And then, it stops,

The bubble pops,

I leave the train, my journey at an end.

Your card, I keep,

I cry down deep,

And tell my hopeless story to a friend.

END

Stephen Gately

The first section here, in the sickly green colour, is an original article written by Jan Moir in the Daily Mail newspaper. Following it is my response to her hateful comments:

“The news of Stephen Gately’s death was deeply shocking. It was not just that another young star had died pointlessly.

Through the recent travails and sad ends of Michael Jackson, Heath Ledger and many others, fans know to expect the unexpected of their heroes – particularly if those idols live a life that is shadowed by dark appetites or fractured by private vice.

There are dozens of household names out there with secret and not-so-secret troubles, or damaging habits both past and present.

Robbie, Amy, Kate, Whitney, Britney; we all know who they are. And we are not being ghoulish to anticipate, or to be mentally braced for, their bad end: a long night, a mysterious stranger, an odd set of circumstances that herald a sudden death.

In the morning, a body has already turned cold before the first concerned hand reaches out to touch an icy celebrity shoulder. It is not exactly a new storyline, is it?

In fact, it is rather depressingly familiar. But somehow we never expected it of him. Never him. Not Stephen Gately.

In the cheerful environs of Boyzone, Gately was always charming, cute, polite and funny.

A founder member of Ireland’s first boy band, he was the group’s co-lead singer, even though he could barely carry a tune in a Louis Vuitton trunk.

He was the Posh Spice of Boyzone, a popular but largely decorous addition.

Gately came out as gay in 1999 after discovering that someone was planning to sell a story revealing his sexuality to a newspaper.

Although he was effectively smoked out of the closet, he has been hailed as a champion of gay rights, albeit a reluctant one.

At the time, Gately worried that the revelations might end his ultra-mainstream career as a pin-up, but he received an overwhelmingly positive response from fans. In fact, it only made them love him more.

In 2006, Gately entered into a civil union with internet businessman Andrew Cowles, who had been introduced to him by mutual friends Elton John and David Furnish.

Last week, the couple were enjoying a holiday together in their apartment in Mallorca before their world was capsized.

All the official reports point to a natural death, with no suspicious circumstances. The Gately family are – perhaps understandably – keen to register their boy’s demise on the national consciousness as nothing more than a tragic accident.

Even before the post-mortem and toxicology reports were released by the Spanish authorities, the Gatelys’ lawyer reiterated that they believed his sudden death was due to natural causes.

But, hang on a minute. Something is terribly wrong with the way this incident has been shaped and spun into nothing more than an unfortunate mishap on a holiday weekend, like a broken teacup in the rented cottage.

Consider the way it has been largely reported, as if Gately had gently keeled over at the age of 90 in the grounds of the Bide-a-Wee rest home while hoeing the sweet pea patch.

The sugar coating on this fatality is so saccharine-thick that it obscures whatever bitter truth lies beneath. Healthy and fit 33-year-old men do not just climb into their pyjamas and go to sleep on the sofa, never to wake up again.

Whatever the cause of death is, it is not, by any yardstick, a natural one. Let us be absolutely clear about this. All that has been established so far is that Stephen Gately was not murdered.

And I think if we are going to be honest, we would have to admit that the circumstances surrounding his death are more than a little sleazy.

After a night of clubbing, Cowles and Gately took a young Bulgarian man back to their apartment. It is not disrespectful to assume that a game of canasta with 25-year-old Georgi Dochev was not what was on the cards.

Cowles and Dochev went to the bedroom together while Stephen remained alone in the living room.

What happened before they parted is known only to the two men still alive. What happened afterwards is anyone’s guess.

A post-mortem revealed Stephen died from acute pulmonary oedema, a build-up of fluid on his lungs.

Gately’s family have always maintained that drugs were not involved in the singer’s death, but it has just been revealed that he at least smoked cannabis on the night he died.

Nevertheless, his mother is still insisting that her son died from a previously undetected heart condition that has plagued the family.

Another real sadness about Gately’s death is that it strikes another blow to the happy-ever-after myth of civil partnerships.

Gay activists are always calling for tolerance and understanding about same-sex relationships, arguing that they are just the same as heterosexual marriages. Not everyone, they say, is like George Michael.

Of course, in many cases this may be true. Yet the recent death of Kevin McGee, the former husband of Little Britain star Matt Lucas, and now the dubious events of Gately’s last night raise troubling questions about what happened.

It is important that the truth comes out about the exact circumstances of his strange and lonely death.

As a gay rights champion, I am sure he would want to set an example to any impressionable young men who may want to emulate what they might see as his glamorous routine.

For once again, under the carapace of glittering, hedonistic celebrity, the ooze of a very different and more dangerous lifestyle has seeped out for all to see."

I am currently feeling a bit remiss as I have yet to comment on the disservice that has been done, by Daily Mail journalist Jan Moir, to Stephen Gately, his grieving friends and family, and the many thousands of fans and supporters of the recently deceased singer.

I was made aware of this hateful tirade in the Daily Mail a couple of days ago thanks to at least 3 friends on Facebook. Not being a regular reader of any newspaper let alone this one I may have missed this attack if not for the outcry of protests by many thousands of people on Facebook, Twitter and even Jan Moir’s “fellow” journalists. I have been trying to find the right words to describe how I feel about it and why her opinion, to which she is entitled, should not be published in a national newspaper thus leading the world to believe this is what this newspaper also believes and endorses.

There are several issues I have with Ms Moir, but mainly it is her blatant anti-gay stance that rankled me. Never mind the fact that she has alluded that Stephen Gately’s grieving mother is delusional in her beliefs over the cause of his death. Never mind that she doubts the competency of the Spanish coroner who stated that the death was from natural causes. And never mind that she seems to feel that any death is nothing more than an inconvenience, “like a broken teacup in the rented cottage.“

Kicking a man after he has died, Ms Moir criticizes the Irish star in various ways.

Stating that he wasn’t a competent singer – “even though he could barely carry a tune in a Louis Vuitton trunk.”

Criticizing the way he came out – “Gately came out as gay in 1999 after discovering that someone was planning to sell a story revealing his sexuality to a newspaper. Although he was effectively smoked out of the closet, he has been hailed as a champion of gay rights.”

Criticizing his “abuse” of the newly granted right to allow gay people to celebrate their partnerships in a Civil Union – “Another real sadness about Gately’s death is that it strikes another blow to the happy-ever-after myth of civil partnerships.”

In response to these attacks I would answer that:

Despite being extremely distasteful to critique a man who has only just died, I will allow her opinion of Stephen’s singing ability. Everyone is entitled to have differing tastes, something which Ms Moir does not seem to entirely accept in others. Our differences are what make us unique. Her saying that he could barely carry a tune is, in my opinion, wrong, though even I noted sometimes he had his off days. Don’t most singers? Don’t most people? Was this article written on one of her off days? Who knows? I’ve never read any other articles by this award-winning journalist to compare it with.

Her condemnation over the adulation he received after being forced to come out is not acceptable though. A persons sexuality is not something that should be forcibly disclosed unless the said person is being blatantly hypocritical (i.e. a gay politician speaking out against gay rights issues while denying their own sexuality), even then I am still undecided as to the right anyone has to disclose a personal detail such as this.

Stephen could have denied this “accusation,” or he could have attempted to ignore it, though this would have been virtually impossible. Instead he confronted the issue head-on and was rewarded by the response that the public loved him even more for being honest about his personal life. I’m sure that this must have been a relief to him despite him possibly not being ready for such a confrontation at that time. He was in a new relationship, one that ended 3 years later, during which time he suffered depression and an addiction to prescription medication said to be caused by the break up of Boyzone the year after he came out. I’m sure the new and intense spotlight on his personal life could not have made things easier for him at this time though. Despite all of the issues he was dealing with, Stephen did become a champion of gay rights, however reluctantly. Just by turning up at an event organized to highlight the lack of equality LGBT people still face in this country (and on this planet), he helped generate the publicity necessary for these events to become successful. He was a young face, a star popular with young and old people alike, a person that young people could empathize with and feel helped to represent them and their feelings. He, for a time, was the face of young gay Britain, a necessary role to reassure the next generation that, whatever their sexuality, they could be accepted. Ms Moir’s article though enforces the attitude that acceptance is conditional on every other aspect of your life conforming to her (the public’s) ideals and opinions. That, however, is not acceptance, that is merely tolerance.

Coming out can have many unnecessary consequences even in the post-Ellen era that we now live in. The fact that Stephen acknowledged his sexuality in public should be praised, as it widely was, because he could have faced rejection by his fans and thus by his employers, losing his ability to work in his chosen profession. He could have faced rejection from family, friends and his peers in the industry if those who did not already know his “secret” were not willing to accept him for who he was. And, as unappetizing as it may be, just being out can leave you as a target for certain section of society, for either physical or verbal attacks. All these factors need to be taken into consideration, especially by a celebrity, when deciding on the right time to reveal their sexuality. I find it slightly reassuring that, with each celebrity that comes out, the media storm is becoming less and less intense. These are, in truth, non-stories which the press make into tabloid headliners by sensationalizing the details and reinforcing certain beliefs about sexuality that some people find distasteful.

Most surprising to me, considering her subsequent claim to be a supporter of Civil Union rights for gay couples, is her statement that, “Gately’s death is [sic] another blow to the happy-ever-after myth of civil partnerships.” Citing the coincidental recent death of Kevin McGee, former husband of Matt Lucas, who committed suicide in the week preceding Mr Gately’s death. Her linking of the two was tenuous, being just that both were gay and had at some point been in a civil partnership and both were now dead in some sort of deathly and inaccurate algebraic equation: Gay & Civil Union = Death.

Firstly, the fact that Stephen Gately was in a Civil Union has nothing at all to do with how he died. Neither does the fact that he may or may not have been involved in sex with their visitor that night. What may do though is the fact that he had smoked cannabis as may a possible genetic heart condition. The fact is that Ms Moir seems to be claiming a higher knowledge of medical pathology, and of this death in particular, than the coroner who actually examined Stephen’s body.

The overall impression that this article gives to the reader is that Stephen Gately heralded his own death by the choices that he made. Jan Moir alludes that he led a life “shadowed by dark appetites or [that was] fractured by private vice.” What, other than his sexuality and choices within that sexuality, can she be referring to? From everything else that is said in this piece, the only conclusion that I can come to, and that thousands of other complainants have come to along with me, is that she is referring to his sexuality and her distaste for it. I have come to the conclusion from her piece that Jan Moir believes that Stephen Gately chose to be, and act, as a homosexual, chose to take cannabis and chose to have a threesome (something which heterosexual people wouldn’t do within a marriage) and so it was inevitable that he would (should?) die.

This is a totally intolerable piece of writing that never should have seen print in a national newspaper as an article. The Daily Mail felt shame enough to change her original title of the piece from “Why there was nothing “natural” about Stephen Gately’s death ” to “A strange, lonely and troubling death,” though neglected to edit, retract or apologize for the article’s content. Several advertisers with the Daily Mail, in print and on-line, have expressed their wish to be disassociated with the article, though I am unaware if any have gone the whole hog and pulled their advertising from the paper. I applaud any that have done, or will do this, as simply moving the advert to another section does nothing to affect the finances of the Daily Mail, which is probably the only thing that will make this type of hate-filled article a thing of the past with them.

As for Jan Moir, I hope that after she is forced to issue a satisfactory apology and retraction, is disciplined by and dismissed from the paper, and then subsequently forced to exit from the world of media, that we do not see her in 5 years time as a contestant on some droll reality show, as seems to be the career choice of almost all disgraced “celebrities.”

As another recently departed celebrity once quoted, while playing a gay character no less, Jan Moir “your approval is not needed!”

[Patrick Swayze as Vida Boheme in To Wong Fu, Thanks For Everything, Julie Newmar"]

Gone

This is a poem I wrote about my dad based on a dream I had on consecutive nights about 15 years after he had died.

Gone

I ask him where he’s going, this dark and dismal night,

With skin as pale as snow, eyes wide through fear and fright,

But, onward, onward he does march, dark clouds are all around,

The smouldering black, the choking mists, absorbing every sound.

For minutes, hours, days and years, the darkness carries on,

I can no longer see him clearly, and ask “Where have you gone?”

But, once again, the sound’s not there,

I cry and choke back on a tear,

I will not, dare not, show my fear,

That all that I have held so dear,

Finally has gone.

END

Turn Left

The following review was written just after the first broadcast, on UK television, of the Doctor Who episode, Turn Left

******** Spoiler Warning********

We’ve all wondered “What if?” at some point in our life. We may even be able to isolate specific moments when a decision has changed our lives, for better or worse, over long periods of time. I know I can think of more than a couple of moments like that in my life.

This episode of Dr Who, Turn Left, explores what would have happened to Donna, or not happened to her but around her, if she had taken one small decision slightly differently. As Marvel Comics would have titled the comic (if they were still running the title);

“What if Donna Noble had turned right?”

Like dominoes, turning right at this specific point had a cumulative effect on the world surrounding Donna, and affected the fate of the whole planet. As Rose points out to Donna, she is “the most important person in all creation!” This episode goes some way to proving that point, but I imagine that the next two will prove it even more, though I don’t know how.

Donna sets about this change in events when she encounters a sinister fortune teller on an alien planet, which she is visiting with the Doctor, of course. While interrogating Donna, the fortune teller distracts her long enough for an alien creature, one of the Trickster’s brigade, to attach itself to her and influence her, and allow her to alter her long past decision. (The Trickster was previously seen in “Whatever Happened To Sarah-Jane?” episode of The Sarah Jane Adventures.) What difference could turning right instead of left make anyway? Ho-Boy!!

Because of the change of direction, and subsequent change of employer, she never worked at H.C. Clements, she never met Lance Bennett and he probably proposed to some other “silly” temp to make her the victim of the Empress of Racnoss. When Donna wasn’t with the Doctor to tell him to stop when he was defeating the Empress he stayed until the end, which in this case was his end. The Doctor died in this battle, leaving the Earth almost defenceless. In the Doctor’s absence, his once and future allies try to defend Earth, but all are killed or taken in battles that, in the real time line, the Doctor would have won. Martha Jones dies saving a colleague when her hospital is transported to the Moon in the adventure that took place in “Smith & Jones.” The hospital returned, but at the cost of Sarah-Jane Smith and her young companions, Maria Jackson and Clyde Langer. Luke wasn’t mentioned strangely, or they may just have talked over the point where his name was said.

Buckingham Palace and subsequently London and most of South-East England were destroyed when the Doctor wasn’t present to prevent the replica of the Titanic from crashing there.

This devastation results in massive relocation in WWII-like evacuations and the expected millions of US dollars in aid never materializes as the US and much of the world is devastated when the Adipose children are born from the fat of their citizens. Another event prevented by the intervention of the Doctor (and Donna) in real time [Partners in Crime].

When the Sontarrans attack Earth with their Atmos car systems, intending to poison the Earth, the UK is saved only because of its previous ill-fortune, as there is a serious lack of petrol after the oceans were “closed” following the previous attacks. The remaining members of Torchwood Cardiff, Gwen Cooper [Williams?] and Ianto Jones, are killed defeating the Sontarrans, and Cap’n Jack is transported to the Sontarran home world. With the UK in dire straits, the emergency government initiate measures the world never thought it would see again and sends the non-British to “labour camps,” which the ever on-the-ball Wilf sees for what they truly are, concentration camps. By this point Donna’s mum has given up all hope, not just with Donna but with life. And when Donna and Wilf witness the stars “going out,” she finally realises that she is ready to help the mysterious blond who she has met on various occasions but who will not reveal her name.

Donna is truly terrified when the blond, Rose Tyler [as if you hadn't guessed], shows her the “thing” on her back which so many other people have almost seen. She is also told by Rose that she will die. She mistakenly believes that by agreeing to Rose’s time-travel plan she can prevent this, it isn’t until she has made her journey that she realises that only by dying will she make the changes necessary to restore her true reality. Her false decision rectified by her self-sacrifice means that time is restored and Donna is returned to the room with the fortune teller on the alien planet and the “time beetle” dies. The fortune teller is now terrified of Donna, stating: “You are so strong? What are you? What will you become?” almost certainly a portent of things to come (over the next two weeks?).

I took my time when coming to review this episode because I was so overwhelmed by it. For an episode without the Doctor (much), it was an incredibly action-filled, thought-provoking and incredibly well performed piece. Catherine Tate showed almost every emotion possible throughout this episode, an amazing performance that should win her a BAFTA. One should also go to Russell T Davis for writing this incredibly difficult episode. So much happened in this episode, or didn’t as the case may be, that I had to watch it a second time to get my thoughts sorted and my brain around all the information. I may even watch it a third time as I’m bound to have missed stuff.

I had forgotten how strangely Billie Piper talks, like she has a mouthful of something [teeth?] all the time! And, isn’t it amazing how switched on Wilf is for an old geezer. When the news report mentions “rhinos” he immediately realises that they must be aliens. What has happened in his past to make him so insightful to what the universe is really like? I hope that can be explored at some point in the future. We are all now waiting in desperate anticipation of the end-of season finale double bill to beat all end-of-season shows.

Almost everyone is in the next two episodes apparently: The Doctor, Donna, Rose, Martha, Cap’n Jack, Ianto, Gwen, Sarah-Jane, Luke, Jackie Tyler, Mickey, Wilf, Sylvia Noble, Francine Jones, the Daleks, the Judoon, and . . . wait for it . . . as if you didn’t know already, . . . guess who’s back? . . . (I can tell you as Confidential gave it away, right at the end), . . . . Davros!

And, just what, or who, is the red Dalek? There have been many rumours going around about this series, especially about what is coming up for the finale, but I have yet to hear any rumours that could be true, now that certain possible stories have been proven wrong by stories that we have seen. For example, I had heard that Donna was going to “hatch” spiders out of her back, which had been laid there by the Empress of Raknoss. That was obviously an off-the-mark assumption about the time beetle in this week’s episode. But, is the red Dalek really a transformed Harriet Jones? Or. could “she” be someone else who is strong and has been destined for something since she was born? Just my own personal theory.

As I’ve just mentioned Confidential gave away the mystery guest character for next week’s episode, but it also cleared up some other things and made me aware of some things I just hadn’t connected. Such as, the planets that are being destroyed. Two have been mentioned that I have spotted, and were both mentioned individually, in separate episodes so it would take someone more obsessive than me to have linked them. But, in Partners in Crime, it was mentioned that the Adiposian hatching planet had been “lost.” In The Fires of Pompeii, it is revealed that the home planet of the Pyroviles has been destroyed. Obviously, if the stars are “going out” then their planets would not be able to survive. RTD also pointed out, in Confidential, that it has been said that death follows the Doctor around. If he didn’t go certain places would so many die? This episode, as was RTD’s intention, shows that if the Doctor isn’t around then see how many more millions would die!

And finally, I hope that they resolve the bee thing! It is really beginning to buzz, I mean bug me now. I’ve heard that Davros is using bees to make Daleks, but that seems preposterous as Daleks made out of honey would not be very scary, just very tasty! Oh, and I was just slightly freaked out when I found a dead bee at work the other day!! Had one escaped Davros’ work hive? We’ll find out within a fortnight!

Welcome

Hello, and welcome to my blog. I hope to contain within this blog the best of all the written work that I have created. I want to hold it all in one place so that it can be viewed easily by anyone, and my current aim is that I hope it may lead to a change, for the better, in career for me.
I am looking for a new career, but am not sure what it is I actually want to do. Something creative and that keeps my mind continually stimulated. Any job offers are more than welcome, please contact me by either leaving a comment or through the email address which you can find on my profile.
In the mean time, enjoy. All constructive criticism is more than appreciated.