I don’t know if you all appreciate the same weird sorts of internet humor as I do, but my friend just made this for me and I was nearly in tears laughing (click for larger):Ahahahahahaaaaa it’s funny because it’s true :(
(Thanks, Jeff!)
“Is your pet feeling left in the dirt because of his/her unsightly rear? I’ve got them covered… Rear Gear is handmade in Portland, OR and offers a cheerful solution to be-rid your favorite pet’s un-manicured back side.”
Yes folks, now we can’t even see our pet’s buttholes. Heaven forbid we acknowledge that an animal poops, especially when we have to clean up after it. No, instead hang a gaudy attention-attracting sign on it’s butt, so your virgin eyes don’t have to be sullied. Seriously, what the hell? What happens when these things want to sit down? Or poop?!
Though I have to admit, this one made me chuckle a bit:
Danger! Toxic waste exit! Do not approach without pooper scooper!
“Is your pet feeling left in the dirt because of his/her unsightly rear? I’ve got them covered… Rear Gear is handmade in Portland, OR and offers a cheerful solution to be-rid your favorite pet’s un-manicured back side.”
Yes folks, now we can’t even see our pet’s buttholes. Heaven forbid we acknowledge that an animal poops, especially when we have to clean up after it. No, instead hang a gaudy attention-attracting sign on it’s butt, so your virgin eyes don’t have to be sullied. Seriously, what the hell? What happens when these things want to sit down? Or poop?!
Though I have to admit, this one made me chuckle a bit:
Danger! Toxic waste exit! Do not approach without pooper scooper!
I have just one thing to say about the Oscars.What the hell is Sarah Jessica Parker wearing? A gold tube with exploding foil at the top? Is she a candy bar wrapper or something? I mean, I’m not Ms. Fashionable, but what the hell?
Other than that, I have nothing to say. I watched the Oscars for about 20 minutes just because my roommate had it on. I usually don’t give a damn about them, but this year I’m especially apathetic since I hadn’t seen a single film that was up for Best Picture – yep, not even Up or Avatar. I blame that on the fact that I’ve been single for most of the past year, and I think I only watch movies on dates.
…And before I start contemplating how sad that is, I’m going to go to bed. Will post about my Stanford trip tomorrow!
The Middlesex-London Health Unit in Ontario decided it needed a new way to reach high schoolers when it comes to sex education. And what do teenagers like more than video games? The result is quite possibly the most bizarre game ever, Adventures in Sex City.
Sounds awesome, right?! The game is just a True or False quiz about various sex facts. That part of the game is actually pretty good; it covers a lot of common misconceptions people have. But that’s not the strange part. Let’s meet the characters you get so select from the Sex Squad:
But cheesy superheroes isn’t the bad part. “In the dark of the night, Sex City is in panic because of the terrible Sperminator whose sole mission is to infect all citizens with various sexually transmitted infections.” Gem over at Startled Disbelief has to best summary of this super villain:
The Sperminator is “a flying burly white guy in a Speedo and Mexican wrestling mask, with two giant penises for arms.”…The Sperminator spews STI-infected sperm onto your character, causing your character to utter phrases such as “Eww, that’s sticky!” or “Aagh, right in the face!”
While I still feel a bit confused after playing the game, I think Gem has a good point:
“That said, this isn’t really a game. It’s a true-or-false sex-ed exam with a really bizarre hook. I’m sure that’s the point: the designers want it to be so over-the-top ridiculous that people are clamouring to play it even though it’s a terrible game—and in playing it, these people might actually learn something. As terrible as the game is, I’m convinced that it will likely accomplish its goal.”
The only thing the worries me is the way they portray the Sperminator. I know it’s a silly game, but should we really be labeling people with STI’s as evil, horrible people who are purposefully going around trying to infect others? People with incurable STIs are still able to have loving relationships.
Anyway, appropriate advice for Valentine’s Day: don’t be a fool, wrap your tool. And go play that silly game.
Rarely a day goes by that I don’t find something on the internet that makes my head explode. Seriously, this blog is starting to get so negative. I get linked to so much mind boggling garbage; you guys need to start sending me happy awesome stuff to renew my faith in humanity.
But until then, here’s more stupid shit:
Real men don’t like going to church because they don’t want to “sing love songs to a man”, because the “vicar wears a dress”, because they feel like “mongrels on parade at Crufts” and because they want to be waited on by women rather than queue for coffee after the service.
Okay, that’s an interesting hypothesis. It would annoy me if this was the case, but I’m being realistic. I’m sure there are plenty of guys out there who like to make ludicrous gender stereotypes. What exactly should churches do about this? The charity Christian Vision for Men has some suggestions:
These include redesigning the interiors of church buildings to make men feel more at home. Instead of the usual flowers and statues of the Virgin Mary, they suggest, “How would it go down to decorate with swords, or pictures of knights, or flaming torches?”
Because I know all men decorate their abodes with swords and knights and torches. Well, at least the ones into Dungeons & Dragons.
The charity continues: “Maybe it’s not ‘politically correct’, but men quite like the attention of women! They also like to be waited on – so long as they are not made to feel guilty. Instead of having to queue for coffee, why not ask some of the women to go round with trays of coffee and biscuits or chocky bars? Coupled with a charming smile, many men would find that very attractive!”
…So let me get this straight. Christianity, which is notorious for its patriarchy and oppression of women, is still not manly enough? We need to go back to the 1950s and have women do their duties of serving men? I’m surprised they didn’t suggest the women make them a sandwich while they’re at it.
“Jesus, I am so in love with you,” or “Beautiful one I love, beautiful one I adore,” – many men wouldn’t sing that to their wives, let alone another man, the charity advises. …
Men don’t want to feel brainwashed by reciting words that they don’t believe: “The language can be offputting, even the word ‘love’ has undertones of the love of a man for his woman – they’d rather ‘admire’ or ‘respect’ another man. Think how they will respond if called to be Jesus’s lover, or to be ‘intimate’ with him. Don’t play into Satan’s hands by using language that he has corrupted.”
So not only is it unmanly to love your wife, it’s kind of gay to love Jesus, because Satan changed love to include icky homosexuality.
Oh, and the brainwashing part? Yeah, I think that’s always been a bit of a problem, girly decor or not. Kind of may explain why so many people are becoming atheists. But apparently women love being “brainwashed by words they don’t believe,” because we’re just mindless coffee-serving baby machines, after all.
Other suggestions to attract more men:
You know what? I kind of like this marketing idea. Yeah, it’s horrendously ignorant, offensive, and constructed on both male and female gender stereotypes. But it’s going to attract manly testosterone filled douchebags who are too homophobic to sing songs and expect women to wait on them. Religion can have those assholes. Atheism will gladly take all the thoughtful, open-minded, non-douchebag men that you scare away.
Though the one flaw in that plan is all the religious women who will have to deal with being transported back in time 60 years. We’ll take them too, once they realize they need to escape.
There are times to be eloquent, level headed, and respectful in our discussion of other cultures and religions. This is not one of those times. What the flying fuck?
Rape victim receives 101 lashes for becoming pregnant
A 16-year-old girl who was raped in Bangladesh has been given 101 lashes for conceiving during the assault. The girl’s father was also fined and warned the family would be branded outcasts from their village if he did not pay.
According to human rights activists, the girl, who was quickly married after the attack, was divorced weeks later after medical tests revealed she was pregnant. The girl was raped by a 20-year-old villager in Brahmanbaria district in April last year.
Bangladesh’s Daily Star newspaper reported that she was so ashamed following the attack that she did not lodge a complaint. Her rape emerged after her pregnancy test and Muslim elders in the village issued a fatwa insisting that the girl be kept in isolation until her family agreed to corporal punishment.
Her rapist was pardoned by the elders. She told the newspaper the rapist had “spoiled” her life.
“I want justice,” she said.
…
I don’t need to point out how disgusting this is, but it’s something that needs to be shared. People need to know that misogyny and down right insanity is still alive and well in our world. We can argue back and forth if this is the fault of Islam, culture, or some mix of the two. There are those that will argue that religion isn’t the problem, it’s simply people using religion as an excuse for their horrible actions.
But you know what? Religion isn’t exactly helping the situation, is it? A religious ruling to isolate and whip your daughter because she’s a rape victim is just a tad bit scarier to disobey than a law or social stigma. You may still face legal ramifications or ostracism, but you get the added bonus of God’s disdain, eternal damnation, and all sorts of legitimately horrifying things to a believer. It’s a bit harder to institute social change when you’re being told it’s a divine commandment.
Not all Muslims are women-hating extremists. Let’s hope the moderates continue speak out against these sorts of immoral acts.
We can stop worrying about Harry Potter, Catcher in the Rye, and The Perks of Being a Wallflower when it comes to banning books. Folks, we have bigger fish to fry: Merriam Webster’s Dictionary.
After a parent complained about an elementary school student stumbling across “oral sex” in a classroom dictionary, Menifee Union School District officials decided to pull Merriam Webster’s 10th edition from all school shelves earlier this week.
School officials will review the dictionary to decide if it should be permanently banned because of the “sexually graphic” entry, said district spokeswoman Betti Cadmus. The dictionaries were initially purchased a few years ago for fourth- and fifth-grade classrooms districtwide, according to a memo to the superintendent.
“It’s just not age appropriate,” said Cadmus, adding that this is the first time a book has been removed from classrooms throughout the district.
…Really? The dictionary is now corrupting our youth? Give me a break. First of all, how many kids sit down with the goal of reading the entire dictionary and will accidentally stumble upon a naughty word? Or more importantly, who fucking cares if they do? Heaven forbid if parents have to explain things to their children. Are we going to require gender specific dictionaries now, so little girls can’t accidentally find the word “penis”?
There are already plenty of fifth graders who know stuff about sex. The dictionary seems like a fairly benign source of information when you consider where else they’re hearing things from – or not hearing things from, which is often the most dangerous scenario. I was in 5th grade during the Monica Lewinsky scandal, so I quickly learned what oral sex was. Did I immediately run out and start sucking dick? Of course not.
Thankfully some of the parents in that town are rational human beings, so hopefully the dictionary won’t remain banned:
“Censorship in the schools, really? Pretty soon the only dictionary in the school library will be the Bert and Ernie dictionary,” said Emanuel Chavez, the parent of second- and sixth-grade students. “If the kids are exposed to it, it’s up to the parents to explain it to them at their level.”
I dunno. Bert and Ernie are two dudes living together. That may be a bit to homoerotic for small children to handle.
No, this isn’t another post about Pat Robertson’s stunning ignorance. It seems that the Westboro Baptist Church were inspired by his line of thinking and have launched a new website: God Hates Haiti (NOTE: Visiting their site probably gives them money, so visit at your own guilty conscience). You’re greeted with an image of a smiling Westboro protester amidst the rubble in Haiti, and a list of links about why Haiti received God’s wrath.…
Yeah, I really have nothing to say other that fuck you, Westboro Baptist Church. You hatred is so fucking predictable that I’m having a hard time being shocked by it anymore – and that’s pretty scary.
Oh, Mitch Daniels. I generally don’t have many good things to say about you, but now you’ve made it particularly difficult for me. Take it away, Mitch:
People who reject the idea of a God -who think that we’re just accidental protoplasm- have always been with us. What bothers me is the implications -which not all such folks have thought through- because really, if we are just accidental, if this life is all there is, if there is no eternal standard of right and wrong, then all that matters is power.
And atheism leads to brutality. All the horrific crimes of the last century were committed by atheists -Stalin and Hitler and Mao and so forth- because it flows very naturally from an idea that there is no judgment and there is nothing other than the brief time we spend on this Earth.
Everyone’s certainly entitled in our country to equal treatment regardless of their opinion. But yes, I think that folks who believe they’ve come to that opinion ought to think very carefully, first of all, about how different it is from the American tradition; how it leads to a very different set of outcomes in the real world.
You know what? It’s late and I’m exhausted from today’s festivities, so let’s play a game. Instead of me going through and refuting everything he said, I’m leaving if up to you guys. How many misconceptions, stereotypes, blatant lies, and logical fallacies can you find?
At quick glance I see 11. Can you find all the ones I did? Can you find more? Good luck, boys and girls!
(Via Freethought Fort Wayne)