So, as many people already know I have recently gotten engaged to Javier Romero. Given that this has been a surprised to many people, Javier has written up an explanation of how we came to be together which is reproduced below:
"Wow… So many messages! Thanks, everyone, for your well wishes.
There have been many questions asked, and we realise that our engagement has caught many of our friends and family by surprise. So to being everyone up to date, I thought to write up the following…
First, to answer the basic questions:
• As for when we’re celebrating the engagement, it’s 15th November 2008 (if you’ve not got the invitation, let me know and I’ll send you the details on Facebook, which is where we’re organising the party)
• As for where we’re getting married, it will likely be in Rodden’s Scottish homeland (“civil partners” will be our legal status)
• As for when we’re getting married, it’ll be when we can afford a party worthy of the landmark! We’re thinking one to three years on
• As for when we’re getting children, it’ll be when we can afford the nanny! A dog may be in order first… heh
• As for what we look like together, here are some photos I quickly assembled from this year: http://picasaweb.google.com/javierromero1973/MyLifeWithRodden2008
Second, to answer the most basic questions of all: Just when and how did this happen? I’ll summarise this first; those who want the mushy long version can read blow.
The abridged version…
Rodden has been my best friend, as most of you know; I met him last June thanks to former business partner of mine. Well, Rodden and I realised this summer that, over time, we had fallen for each other. In fact, given that over months and months we have grown to know each other so well – the good and the bad – we also realised that we want to spend our lives together. As many of you know, though, we had stopped short of calling ourselves a “couple”; given our past experiences, we each saw the concept of “boyfriend” as temporary and saw our friendship as too important to jeopardise by taking that route. A trip to Scotland in August made us recognise finally, though, that we were just fooling ourselves: we were each others’ core relationship, and had been since the beginning. So rather than become “boyfriends”, well, we decided to get married instead. Hurrah!
The less-than-abridged version…
What would have happened had his face not been randomly generated on my friend’s profile? What would have happened had I not tried to see what a Facebook “poke” was? What if he had not messaged me in return?
In June ’07 I finally gave in to multiple requests and joined Facebook. One of my first Friends there was a former business partner of mine, Brian. I clicked onto his profile, and I saw this cute photo on his randomly generated list of some of his other Friends on the website. So I clicked on this person’s photo, got his profile, and saw that I could “poke” him… so I did (though not really knowing what that meant). Minutes later, he – Rodden Shaw – replied, thanking me for the “poke” and we started chatting.
So began a great friendship. It turned out that he worked a mere two buildings down from where I live (and often work), and so this former lodger of Brian’s – who turned out to be this outstandingly intelligent, interesting, and sweet person who had been compelled to grow up so quickly in his 20 years as he had been living on his own for years already – ended up becoming my lunch and coffee break partner for the months to come. We saw each other every week, often more. Having broken up with Daniel (a man whom I loved dearly but who’s brusque nature and drinking I could no longer handle) that same June, Rodden and I related to each other well as men who were very happy being single cute gay guys in London. From day one, I thought the world of Rodden, and he was undeniably cute, but his friendship came to mean the world to me. I knew I was coming to love him… BUT only as a friend.
Time passed, and come November I had met someone who made me think I could do relationships again: Johannes. It was a beautiful and intense affair with a gorgeous man. Oddly, I realised I loved Johannes when I found that he could distract me from Rodden (no one had ever done so in the previous months). But that relationship came crashing down only two months later around the winter holidays. And when I found myself without a date on 31st December, it was Rodden who came to the rescue in black tie, giving me the best New Year’s Eve ever.
2008 proceeded with more men as Rodden and I seemed to become more open to the idea of a boyfriend… Rodden came to have high hopes for a relationship with his friend, Rolf, and I met this amazingly sweet and sexy Irish guy called Colin; later Rodden became boyfriends with a British chap in Belgium called Richard. Our hearts flew and fell, and with every crash we found that we kept coming back to each other for consolation, counsel, and compassion.
Things started to change on 31st May at the party of our friend, John. Though Rodden wanted to stay on, I wanted to go home as a month’s worth of non-stop partying was catching up with me – Rodden offered me the key to his flat. No, nothing happened that night, but it felt such a welcoming and intimate gesture. As summer went on… and as I started to fall into a depression as my business had been struggling, and my cash flow suffering as a result… Rodden was there for me more and more. On one night that was especially bad, Rodden even took a series of night buses at 2am to come and comfort me, spending the weekend with me to make sure I was okay.
We talked and talked and talked all month. And so much started to come out, so much started to be shared. One night in late June we were talking and realised that we had become – and had been for some time – each other’s core relationship. Rodden said “soulmate” and, well, I had to admit to myself that he was right.
As the summer progressed, we just grew closer and closer. However we were two people who saw relationships as fundamentally temporary as that is what our pasts taught us. So though we knew we had these feelings, we kept insisting to ourselves and the world that we were “single” – our friendship was just not worth risking over the experiment of being “boyfriends”. Yes, we joked about being “the most coupley non-couple” in the world, but we psychologically needed to be “only” best friends.
Scotland changed everything though. In early August we went to spend a few days with his mother and meeting his family in Rodden’s place of origin, the Isle of Bute. Together every hour of every day, the feelings were too strong to hold back. We knew it: we were a genuine couple. And we loved each other, and had done for a very long time. And… we wanted to spend our lives together.
Less than three weeks later, in a moment of deliciously intense inspiration, I decided to make it formal and proposed to Rodden, who agreed to become my husband I realised that boyfriends break up, but that betrothal splendidly circumvents that. So… hurrah for us!
What’s funny is that, in telling our friends about the engagement, so many people have been saying how they saw this coming since as early as New Year’s Eve. How funny that last year’s two most confirmed bachelors have ended up like this…
Javier Romero"
Sunday, 14 September 2008
Friday, 9 May 2008
Cyclists, bloody cyclists!
I should immediately preface this post by pointing out that I myself am a cyclist who commutes to work on a daily basis. On my route every day I see cyclists displaying an astounding lack of regard for various laws pertaining to road use (and applicable to all road users, including cyclists).
Two offences particularly irritate me: cycling on the pavement (this is not acceptable under any circumstances, in the same way that doing 120MPH on the motorway is unacceptable even at 2am with no other traffic visible) and 'jumping' red lights.
A surprising number of cyclists also disregard their own safety (and that of no one else) by not wearing helmets or not using lights when necessary. Frankly, any cyclist who fails to take these most basic steps to protect themselves ought to have little right to recourse if injured. They also, in my view, have little right to express dissatisfaction with the habits of other road users.
There are two particular examples of my two main bugbears that particularly enrage me:
I work on Albert Embankment, beside the SIS ("MI6") building. Every day when I leave work I turn right and, in order to do so cross 5 lanes to reach the bus lane on the left side of the road. This can be achieved in absolute safety since the traffic is often sparse and slow on this stretch of road. For some reason, though, my colleagues have decided that it is preferable to cycle on the pavement and past the entrance to SIS in order to reach the cycle lanes at Vauxhall Cross. This stretch of pavement is wide, but packed with people walking to Vauxhall station and the risk to pedestrians from cyclists appears to be rather high. The cyclists travel faster than pedestrians yet the pedestrians are not necessarily aware of their approach, meaning that they could easily (and legitimately) step into the path of a cyclist with no notice.
Whilst cycling home last Friday I happened across a colleague of mine on his way home about 5 miles from our office. I don't think that he spotted or recognised me. I stopped for a red light at a crossroads and he sailed on through, past me. Shortly after this the light turned green and I overtook him in the next lane (I was about to turn right) and, again, stopped for a set of traffic lights at a very busy crossroads. Again, he passed straight through the junction. This is not the sort of behaviour that I would have expected of the individual in question, which makes it all the more annoying.
There is no doubt in my mind that the majority of cyclists are careful, law abiding road users whose lives are often put in jeopardy by cars, buses, vans, lorries and any other type of vehicle you can think of, however it's about time that we all start observing the law when using the road for each other's benefit as well as our own. When we do not do so we ought to take responsibility for our own actions.
Tuesday, 22 April 2008
Appalling Neglect!
October 2007 was the last time I bothered to update the blog that nobody reads, so it's time for a new post, I think.
I moved into a new flat in October last year, quite probably just before my last post. It is in the One SE8 development in Deptford (the postal code is SE13, contrary to what the name of the development may infer). The video on the One SE8 website suggested that I was about to move to an urban Eden, where everyone was beautiful (as I would be), dinner would be delivered to my door, my apartment would be remarkably clean and tidy, I would regularly be massaged by a stunning man and life would generally be wonderful. It is fair to say that this has not been entirely borne out, though there are indeed many beautiful people who live there. It has ultimately transpired that whilst there are many pretty distractions in human form, the apartments and buildings are rather poorly manufactured and constructed.
The first sign that there was anything wrong with the apartment in which I now reside was that light bulbs would constantly fuse and, in doing so, trip the lighting circuit. This was frustrating but since incandescent light bulbs are rather incredibly cheap these days it wasn't hugely inconvenient or painful. To try to remedy this situation I have replaced those very bulbs with their 'energy efficient' cousins. I must admit that my understanding of their workings is rooted in GCSE physics and is therefore not worth mentioning, but I believe that they are not prone to 'fusing' in the way that incandescent bulbs are.
Anyway, moving on, the next thing that I noticed was that a couple of the light fittings in the flat did not work. They still don't work, in fact. Given that they are halogen and all interlinked via a transformer this is odd, to say the least. Since I dislike halogen 'spot lights' as a general illuminator it doesn't pain me particularly that they do not work, however it is another problem to add to the list.
When I go away I switch my boiler off completely in an attempt to save money and to not waste energy. Whenever I would return from a trip and switch the boiler back on (by using the master switch in its timer) the integrated fuse would blow (though the circuit breaker would not be activated). Eventually this timer actually caught fire, though not in a particularly dramatic manner (it extinguished itself). This is the last of the electrical problems that I have experience thus far, but they are part of a larger impression given by my apartment that indicates incredible cost cutting on the part of the developer.
What is particularly odd about this 'cost cutting' is that a great deal of money has been spent creating an impression of decadence and sophistication within the rest of the development. There is a pool and gymnasium, a 'corner' shop, a restaurant, large pieces of art work, glass sliding doors at the entrances to most of the buildings, pleasant and relatively expensive OTIS lifts, exterior decoration that wastes a great deal of space to the benefit only of the aesthetic, automatic gates, 5A lamp circuits in each apartment, etc. In essence there is a great deal of style but very little actual substance. This is in stark contrast to my favourite 'development' in London, the Barbican.
The Barbican is the most prominent and identifiable piece of brutalist architecture in London and it is, in my opinion (though not in that of many others) simply fabulous. It remains Europe's largest multi-arts complex and, most importantly, the residents there are treated to a way of life that few can enjoy.
When you live there one of the most noticeable things is the almost absolute absence of noise. Depending on where you live in the development you may hear the sound of fountains and a waterfall, or a little bustle from some of the public areas, but what you very rarely hear are the hallmark noises of almost any large city: sirens, horns, shouting, animals, children... essentially all of the little things that are annoying when on your doorstep. This is despite the fact that the development exists near the heart of the 'square mile', the original City of London.
Possibly more incredible is the fact that your neighbours rarely disturb you and vice versa. Most of the walls are made of rather thick concrete and whilst that makes hanging paintings a tedious process that requires a workman (contractually), the only noise that shall emanate from next door is the sound of their light switches.
It is more than a little sad that this fantastic piece of modern architecture is overlooked and derided by so many people, especially given that it works so well functionally speaking. Hopefully, one day, it shall receive the common recognition that it so richly deserves.
I moved into a new flat in October last year, quite probably just before my last post. It is in the One SE8 development in Deptford (the postal code is SE13, contrary to what the name of the development may infer). The video on the One SE8 website suggested that I was about to move to an urban Eden, where everyone was beautiful (as I would be), dinner would be delivered to my door, my apartment would be remarkably clean and tidy, I would regularly be massaged by a stunning man and life would generally be wonderful. It is fair to say that this has not been entirely borne out, though there are indeed many beautiful people who live there. It has ultimately transpired that whilst there are many pretty distractions in human form, the apartments and buildings are rather poorly manufactured and constructed.
The first sign that there was anything wrong with the apartment in which I now reside was that light bulbs would constantly fuse and, in doing so, trip the lighting circuit. This was frustrating but since incandescent light bulbs are rather incredibly cheap these days it wasn't hugely inconvenient or painful. To try to remedy this situation I have replaced those very bulbs with their 'energy efficient' cousins. I must admit that my understanding of their workings is rooted in GCSE physics and is therefore not worth mentioning, but I believe that they are not prone to 'fusing' in the way that incandescent bulbs are.
Anyway, moving on, the next thing that I noticed was that a couple of the light fittings in the flat did not work. They still don't work, in fact. Given that they are halogen and all interlinked via a transformer this is odd, to say the least. Since I dislike halogen 'spot lights' as a general illuminator it doesn't pain me particularly that they do not work, however it is another problem to add to the list.
When I go away I switch my boiler off completely in an attempt to save money and to not waste energy. Whenever I would return from a trip and switch the boiler back on (by using the master switch in its timer) the integrated fuse would blow (though the circuit breaker would not be activated). Eventually this timer actually caught fire, though not in a particularly dramatic manner (it extinguished itself). This is the last of the electrical problems that I have experience thus far, but they are part of a larger impression given by my apartment that indicates incredible cost cutting on the part of the developer.
What is particularly odd about this 'cost cutting' is that a great deal of money has been spent creating an impression of decadence and sophistication within the rest of the development. There is a pool and gymnasium, a 'corner' shop, a restaurant, large pieces of art work, glass sliding doors at the entrances to most of the buildings, pleasant and relatively expensive OTIS lifts, exterior decoration that wastes a great deal of space to the benefit only of the aesthetic, automatic gates, 5A lamp circuits in each apartment, etc. In essence there is a great deal of style but very little actual substance. This is in stark contrast to my favourite 'development' in London, the Barbican.
The Barbican is the most prominent and identifiable piece of brutalist architecture in London and it is, in my opinion (though not in that of many others) simply fabulous. It remains Europe's largest multi-arts complex and, most importantly, the residents there are treated to a way of life that few can enjoy.
When you live there one of the most noticeable things is the almost absolute absence of noise. Depending on where you live in the development you may hear the sound of fountains and a waterfall, or a little bustle from some of the public areas, but what you very rarely hear are the hallmark noises of almost any large city: sirens, horns, shouting, animals, children... essentially all of the little things that are annoying when on your doorstep. This is despite the fact that the development exists near the heart of the 'square mile', the original City of London.
Possibly more incredible is the fact that your neighbours rarely disturb you and vice versa. Most of the walls are made of rather thick concrete and whilst that makes hanging paintings a tedious process that requires a workman (contractually), the only noise that shall emanate from next door is the sound of their light switches.
It is more than a little sad that this fantastic piece of modern architecture is overlooked and derided by so many people, especially given that it works so well functionally speaking. Hopefully, one day, it shall receive the common recognition that it so richly deserves.
Tuesday, 30 October 2007
Safety
Do you know what happens to a Rover 100 (Rover/Austin Metro) when it's propelled into a deformable concrete wall at 40MPH? If not I insist that you visit this page to find out.
For those not familiar with Euro NCAP's testing procedures, during the frontal impact assessment the test vehicle is hurled at a concrete barrier at 40MPH and only 40% of the front of the car contacts the barrier. This, apparently, simulates a 'typical' crash.
There is no doubt that crash tests are hugely valuable and Euro NCAP’s ratings should be taken very seriously. There is, however, an inherent flaw in the method of testing I have just described, namely that it simulates the test vehicle hitting another identical vehicle. This means that energy exerted on the car is dictated by its own mass and that the strongest parts of the vehicle absorb the highest forces (since they also transmit the highest forces and those forces are essentially reflected by the wall).
It is impossible to accurately predict what will happen to any given vehicle in a crash, but it is more than fair to assume that since the Rover 100 crumples when in a collision with an identically small, light and weak vehicle that the damage will be even worse when faced by practically anything else. The thought of it colliding with a modern car that would probably have a very strong (and therefore damaging) passenger cell really doesn't bear thinking about.
This, rather neatly, brings me to one of my biggest concerns when it comes to vehicle safety: compatibility. The fact that modern crash testing programmes don't account for the different types of vehicles that you make hit head on (they do so to an extent in side impact tests) hugely devalues the ratings given by Euro NCAP. A 1998 Renault Megane may give you four star protection when hit by another 1998 Megane, but what happens if it hits the larger, stronger and safer (for the occupants) 2007 Megane? That's not a question that I can answer, but crash tests between old and new cars have shown that many older cars (and their occupants) suffer as a result of the fantastic rigidity of the passenger cells of many modern cars.
I’m not wholly sure that I agree with the stringent laws that govern how safe new cars have to be for their occupants, however I do feel that new cars should not jeopardise the safety of other road users. That’s why significantly more stringent legislation needs to be brought in to protect pedestrians in impacts and new tests should be devised to ensure that the strength and mass of one vehicle doesn’t hinder the ability of another to protect it’s occupants.
Wednesday, 26 September 2007
The VW empire
I'm a little bit puzzled by VW these days. Lots of large car companies own other car companies or operate alternative brands (GM, Ford, Toyota, Mercedes, Fiat and many others own several brands) however VW seems to take a unique approach to automotive family living.
Whilst some groups have similar (and therefore competing cars) in their ranks, few replicate VWs tendency towards inbreeding. The 'A5' platform is a rather good case in point. The Golf, Octavia, A3, Touran, Caddy, Altea, Toledo, Jetta, Leon, Eos, TT and Tiguan are all based on this platform and, you'll note that many of them are competing against each other in the same market segment. It's also slightly ironic that in many measurable respects the cheaper of the models is the best (see Octavia vs Golf).
Why on earth would a company compete with itself, especially on this scale? It really does seem to defy sense, and the state of VW at present may well indicate that it's not the bests idea. I can only think of one other manufacturer who had so many similar vehicles on sale at the same time, and we all know how it ended for Leyland...
Whilst I'm on the topic, why on earth did VW produce the Bugatti Veryon? Ugly, expensive and - ultimately - a bit pointless, it seems to be an incredibly poor business decision as well as an incredibly idiotic thing to buy, even if you are ultra-rich. Maybe I need to have a few hundred million in the bank to understand such things.
Monday, 24 September 2007
To iPhone or not to iPhone, that is the question
I find myself completely torn over the iPhone. On the one hand I do not like the fact that consumers are forced into a contract with O2 when they have paid full price for the device and I find the fact that O2 pay a share of the revenue from the contracts tied to the iPhone even less appetising. On the other hand, the device really is a joy to use and it would be useful having something that I can dock at work (whilst putting my current handset on charge is no real hardship it's not automatic for me in the same way that docking my iPod is). The question is therefore whether or not I should ignore my misgivings that surround Apple's business practises and buy the handset that I want anyway...
It's a great shame that none of the handset manufacturers out there make a phone that offers all that the iPhone does in terms of usability. There are some pretty large omissions on the iPhone's spec, but it would offer me the level of fuctionality that I require so that isn't as much of an issue for me as it may be for other people. Also, it would make me incredibly happy to move away from Symbian S60 (which is particularly poor on the N73, which I am currently using).
The fact that I'm finding this decision so difficult probably indicates that I will take the plunge and buy an iPhone when it's released on November the 9th. Watch this space.
It's a great shame that none of the handset manufacturers out there make a phone that offers all that the iPhone does in terms of usability. There are some pretty large omissions on the iPhone's spec, but it would offer me the level of fuctionality that I require so that isn't as much of an issue for me as it may be for other people. Also, it would make me incredibly happy to move away from Symbian S60 (which is particularly poor on the N73, which I am currently using).
The fact that I'm finding this decision so difficult probably indicates that I will take the plunge and buy an iPhone when it's released on November the 9th. Watch this space.
Friday, 21 September 2007
The New Ford Focus
Ford's design direction has been rather interesting of late. The tail lights that appear on their S-Max, Galaxy and new Mondeo are strikingly similar to those of the (achingly beautiful) new Maserati GT. The face of the new Mondeo is imposing and beautiful without being brash or tacky. In fact, to my eyes it is now a significantly better looking car than many of it's prestige competitors. The rump of the car is a little too large and the alloy wheels that they have favoured for their demonstrators (stolen from the Focus ST and a little too similar to those worn by various Vauxhalls) are much too fussy (and small) to do the car any favours but these are tiny details that cannot ruin such a fundamentally good design. Ford have made a bit of a faux pas, however, in the new Focus.
I'm sure that almost everyone remembers the impact that the original Focus made when it was launched. This was probably heightened by the contrast between it and the very old and rather lack-lustre Escort it replaced (bear in mind that the final MKVI Escort was a direct evolution of the much maligned MKV, first realeased in 1990). Unfortunately the car that wowed the world was replaced in 2004 by the rather bland MKII Focus. In some respects the latter vehicle was an improvement, but in others it was a very definite step in the wrong direction. To my mind the biggest problem with the latest Focus is it's incredibly bland styling. Ford clearly believe that this was a mistake since they have already revealed a significantly face-lifted model only three years into the product's life-cycle.
According to Ford's marketing people every external panel apart from the roof of the revised Focus has been replaced. This has resulted in a slightly different tail-gate, smoother and more dynamic looking sides that have lost their rubbing strips and gained a purposeful crease running from the front wing to the rear and a wholly new front end that quite deliberately and successfully apes the new Mondeo. Unfortunately, however, the basic shape of the car has remained the same. Even worse, the revisions to the rear are minimal and completely out of tune with the new front end (much the same as with the Vectra when it was last face-lifted). The resulting car may well be pretty when viewed from the front, but from every other angle it looks wrong.
The interior of the car stays true to the same story. The centre console and the instrument panel have been revised but the rest remains the same. This means that to anyone who is familiar with the current Focus the revisions look like an afterthought rather than a thorough reworking of a car that desperately needs it. Worst of all Ford have put a starter button beside the handbrake in what must be one of the most counter-intuitive positions possible. Whilst keyless entry and a keyless ignition do have undoubted benefits it's pitiful that Ford have felt the need to shove it into the revised car without thinking it through properly.
I hope that the next generation of the Focus is better than this half-hearted restyle. It needs to be if Ford is to turn things around and it would be a great shame to see them be anything less than the best as they were for a short time of late.
I'm sure that almost everyone remembers the impact that the original Focus made when it was launched. This was probably heightened by the contrast between it and the very old and rather lack-lustre Escort it replaced (bear in mind that the final MKVI Escort was a direct evolution of the much maligned MKV, first realeased in 1990). Unfortunately the car that wowed the world was replaced in 2004 by the rather bland MKII Focus. In some respects the latter vehicle was an improvement, but in others it was a very definite step in the wrong direction. To my mind the biggest problem with the latest Focus is it's incredibly bland styling. Ford clearly believe that this was a mistake since they have already revealed a significantly face-lifted model only three years into the product's life-cycle.
According to Ford's marketing people every external panel apart from the roof of the revised Focus has been replaced. This has resulted in a slightly different tail-gate, smoother and more dynamic looking sides that have lost their rubbing strips and gained a purposeful crease running from the front wing to the rear and a wholly new front end that quite deliberately and successfully apes the new Mondeo. Unfortunately, however, the basic shape of the car has remained the same. Even worse, the revisions to the rear are minimal and completely out of tune with the new front end (much the same as with the Vectra when it was last face-lifted). The resulting car may well be pretty when viewed from the front, but from every other angle it looks wrong.
The interior of the car stays true to the same story. The centre console and the instrument panel have been revised but the rest remains the same. This means that to anyone who is familiar with the current Focus the revisions look like an afterthought rather than a thorough reworking of a car that desperately needs it. Worst of all Ford have put a starter button beside the handbrake in what must be one of the most counter-intuitive positions possible. Whilst keyless entry and a keyless ignition do have undoubted benefits it's pitiful that Ford have felt the need to shove it into the revised car without thinking it through properly.
I hope that the next generation of the Focus is better than this half-hearted restyle. It needs to be if Ford is to turn things around and it would be a great shame to see them be anything less than the best as they were for a short time of late.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
