Dog eared

But not dead tired. Ran 48 minutes, a hilly, lopsided figure of 8 route. Quite enjoyed it.

Watched Little Miss Sunshine on DVD. Have since felt a resurgence of energy, and enthusiasm and happiness.

Meanwhile the 27th is Freedom Day. I have no plans but feel I should go hiking, or do some sort of communing with nature. Perhaps go fishing at the farm. Spiderman 3 is also showing. If I hadn't been to the Berg recently I probably would be going now. Sally is going to J-Bay.

Meanwhile these are my new cycling goals, am still coming up with the running ones (like the Knysna marathon):


1) Jock Cycle race:24 July - 150km with some serious climbing (Nelspruit)
2) Cycle to Sun City on the Fri (150km), race Cansa on Sat (103km) and do easy 60km on Sun, staying at Sun City (Usually get preferential rates for this weekend) - First weekend in Aug.
3) 21-24 Oct - Cycle down to Durban with Cycle 4 Kids Thurs to Sat and then do the Amashova on the Sun (you could join us)
4) OFM
5) 94.7

Then, I spoke to the dude at Lindsay Saker. He serves on the board of a local sports club. He says that he has been asked: to not accept my application to join their club. It's commendable that he said to me he felt that was unreasonable (I call that a spiteful request) and wasn't going to send someone away that wanted to join his club. He also said he felt the same as I did: that many officials locally put their interests ahead of the actual sportsmen. What that means is that cycling is less important, and cyclists are less important, than these people, and them having their say, and them demonstrating just how powerful (control freaky) and effective (paranoid) they are, is more important than people actually being able to get on bicycles and riding them.

It's also interesting in the first place that people contacted him, or spoke to him. I wonder how they knew it was my intention to join Lindsay Saker? Of course I mentioned it on my blog, and on that day my blog had nearly 100 hits (the average is around 20-30). So I seem to have some blog stalkers (The OFS English Department Part 2). If it's true it is ridiculous. Instead of talking to me, they're fishing, and sneaking.

It baffles me that there are people whose world is so small and filled with fear that they dedicate themselves to the control and surveillance of other individuals. You can't control other people, or, if you do, all you achieve is losing the focus you need to live your own life in a balanced way. That's a miserable state of affairs. If I'm correct in these assumptions, this particular post ought to circulate and there will be an attempt to get me into trouble. So let's conduct an experiment to prove the theory:

I just want to reiterate here, that I called up a woman, Mrs Tortius (see below)



who had been really rude to me at the road championships, and her response to everything/anything I said was a robotic: 'You must take that up through your local club.'
More than once I said, "I am a human being, talking to another human being, and that's your response? Can't you speak to me like a human being?"
'You must take that up with your local club.'
"Yes but I am talking to you."
'You must take that up with your local club.'

I'm sure this same woman, who had nothing to say other than her programmed code, had a lot to say in The Halls of Power, surrounded by learned colleagues, who nodded and scribbled notes. I call that hypocrisy. I call that cowardly. I also call it a failure to face someone who is holding you accountable for something, and fails to do so because of basically feeling so superior to them that it is lowering oneself even to respond to them. That's a disgusting attitude.

What really bothers me is that I can guarantee you that Mrs Tortius goes to church, and so do some of the other characters in this sad state of affairs. The contempt she displayed I think fits in with a basic sense of 'Being Right.' But being right in a sense that separates you from those you deem to be 'wrong'. 'Being right' is exactly how people rationalise being rude and eventually monstrous to others.

We're supposed to all be people, on the same page, and God is meant to decide who is right - or good. People who think they have God's blessing to do that (on his behalf) deserve a taai klap so they can wake up a bit. And these people who vip and stubbornly resist other people, ought to be stopped at the door of the churches they visit, because for all their good intentions, and all their self-love, they don't operate as conventional (aka kind, compassionate, intelligent) human beings when called upon to do so. That's my take on what a conventional person ought to be. Obviously it is not a view unanimously subscribed to. Which is a shame