Breaking news! Clear links between the Catholic Church and Emo culture!
What Would Jesus Cut Himself With?
Breaking news! Clear links between the Catholic Church and Emo culture!
What Would Jesus Cut Himself With?
please go to isohunt.com and download these songs, burn them to cd and then enjoy over two million dollars worth of music.
Vanessa Williams – Save the best for last
Sheryl Crow – Run baby run
Reba McEntire – One honest heart
Janet Jackson – let’s wait awhile
Guns ‘n Roses – Welcome to the jungle
Guns ‘n Roses – November rain
Def Leppard – Pour some sugar on me
Bryan Adams – Somebody
Aerosmnith – Cryin
Linkin Park – One step closer
Green Day – Basket case
Goo Goo Dolls – iris
No Doubt – Hella Good
No Doubt – Different people
No Doubt – Bathwater
Sarah McLaughlan – Building a mystery
Sarah McLaughlan – Possession
Gloria Estefan – Rhythm is gonna get you
Gloria Estefan – Here and we are
Gloria Estefan – coming out of the dark
Journey – Faithfully
Journey – Don’t stop believin
Destiny’s child – Bills, bills, bills
This is about the Chaser and their “Make a Realistic Wish Foundation” sketch. So i’m a little slow; jumping into the debate jacuzzi when the hot water’s run out and all the champagne bottles have been popped and drunk. Or some other, better, metaphor.
What i’m trying to say is I’m bringing it up because I haven’t seen my opinion reflected anywhere. People are happy to say they went too far and it was in bad taste and highly offensive and insensitive to sick kids and charities, but it seems that if you disagree, you somehow are laughing at sick kids and discrediting the work that charities are doing. The same way that people against “pro-life” are somehow “anti-life”. I don’t see it like that.
I agree that there is ‘a line’ in satire, but I think we can only ever find it when we cross it, therefore crossing it is necessary. But I don’t think that’s what this is. People have railroaded the argument to say it is wrong to laugh at sick kids – even MediaWatch claimed that – but the Chaser’s sketch never had the kids at the receiving end of the joke, it was the crappy, cheap reincarnation of the charity that was the butt. In his Herald Sun article, Colin Vickery describes the sketch as “making dying children the but of a sick joke”. Amanda Meade at The Australian tells us that “mocking dead celebrities is one thing, mocking terminally ill children is quite another.” Even Prime Minister Kevin Rudd stated that “Having a go at kids with a terminal illness is really beyond the pale, absolutely beyond the pale.”
These statements don’t correlate with the Chaser’s sketch. If you were laughing – or assuming you should be laughing – at the dying kids, then surely it is you who should be looking at your values, not the Chaser. The gags in the sketch are the “realistic wishes” that are granted. The first joke lands when Tabitha, whose dying wish was a trip to Disneyland, is given a pencil case instead. A digital sparkle is added as the crappy pencil case is presented – clearly this is the joke. The irony of a charitable organisation run by greedy corporate types who see no point in spending money on kids who “are only going to die anyway”. I find it extremely irresponsible of journalists to suggest that we are supposed to be laughing at the kids. This is a complete misinterpretation of the sketch and only feeds hate and anger.
Jim Schembri of the Age writes that “there is no target to the piece other than terminally ill children.” and that “The Chaser team is simply making fun of sick kids for being greedy, the MO, presumably, being to get a laugh out of being grossly insensitive.” This is completely off the mark, anyone who watches the clip again can see it, but a suggestion otherwise easily manipulates you into thinking that the jokes are about the kids. They just aren’t. The media and even Kevin Rudd are to blame by making this about whether we should laugh at sick kids, not whether we should have the right to make satire. If people are offended by the sketch that is fair enough – people can be offended by anything, and they have the right to. We should debate what is right and wrong. If enough people feel that the Chaser overstepped the mark then the consequences should be an apology for offending and a gesture of goodwill, such as a large donation. But censorship is going too far, and enters extremely dangerous ground.
I personally didn’t find the sketch particularly funny, but I honestly didn’t find it offensive at all. It only reminded me of the great Mr Show sketch about the essentially same thing. But I did think that the sketch that followed it, which turned Fritzl’s dungeon of incest into a kitsch Brady Bunch opener, was actually quite offensive (and hilarious). I think it would be hard to argue that a survivor of incest (or Fritzl’s actual daughter) would be not offended, but a child who has had a wish granted by the Make a Wish Foundation would/should be upset by the a young girl getting a stick instead of meeting Zac Efron.
I think the truth is that the Chaser boys picked a charity which has its reputation at stake and doesn’t want to be satirised (which ironically (?) will most likely see an increase in donations due to the exposure). I think that is the main reason it’s been classed so offensive. The charity has a loud voice, groups such as incest survivors do not. Even if the sketch simply referenced dying children, and not a specific charity I don’t think it would have had somuch exposure.
Steve Price of 2UE posted a video blog about it all asking how the Chaser boys are “allowed to make jokes about dying children and get away with it?” This was asked by Steve the day after the sketch aired, and thanks to his misinforming rhetoric, spurred on people to get upset about television “mak(ing) fun of children who are dying.” Pricey got his wish and the Chaser has since been pulled from the air for two weeks, and Amanda Duthie, Head of ABC TV Comedy lost her job over it (after MediaWatch‘s name and shame, also falsely claiming that the joke was about dying kids).
I think it is disgusting and a real blow to the power of satire, which has always been the leader in the pushing important issues. Ever since Shakespeare, ‘the fool’ has always been the smartest.
Also, you can tell how Steve has his finger on the pulse by ending his to-camera by saying the Chaser is “boring telivison that just upsets everyone.” Boring? Are you suggesting that people have been driven to offence whilst in a panic induced by boredom? You’re only deflating your own argument by using a description that completely contradicts your sentiments. It sure was ‘boring’ how those chaser guys forced us to laugh at kids with cancer, I almost broke my jaw yawning.
The other thing that pisses me off about this is how a bunch of the blog/news websites will say how terrible and offensive it is, then feel the need post it as proof. If it really is so terrible that it should never have been shown, then you can’t claim it is any less offensive when showing on the net. How it is less offensive now? It’s only proving that in certain contexts it’s ‘not offensive’. One of those contexts would have to be satire. So the Chaser Boys should be able to push the boundaries within satire which should always safe ground.
Or is it possible that that if the sketch itself was actully funnier then no-one would have been offended? Meaning that because people weren’t really laughing they assumed it was because they were shocked.
It’s as if everyone wants to jump on the Chaser bandwagon, but then they don’t want to stay along for the ride. If you find it offensive because you don’t understand the black humour and where the jokes actually lie, don’t watch it.
This is a book I bought the other day as a gift for my girlfriend. I did give it to her, but I didn’t really mean it. I really just bought it for myself. But i’ve worked out that Karma is easily fooled. At the store I bought it and said, “My girlfriend is gonna love this”, to the sales assistant. When she asked if I wanted it gift wrapped I told her that I’d rather wrap it myself at home. I played the whole lie out, feeling good about my self for being so kind to others, then gave it to her in front of other people making sure that the Karma would be paid out, everyone seeing how generous I was.
But this wasn’t the first time I’ve selfgifted. A few years ago I saw a thing called ‘the book of cool‘ which is a book with a bunch of DVD’s instructing you how to become an ‘expert’ at a whole range of things from yo-yo tricks to card tricks, to gun slinging tricks to whip and rope tricks, and I guess some more yo-yo tricks. I thought this would be a great gift for my friend Tom. So i bought it for him (wink, wink). I kind of did plan on giving it to him, but then kind of just opened it up myself and watched it. And I’m not opposed to wrapping up used gifts come birthday time and palming them off as new, but I didn’t want to miss out on all the bragging I could do by showing people stupid bar trick videos and whip experts on the dvd. So i kept it for myself.
In one sense there the gifts that keep on giving. In the sense that the ‘giving’ process has never ended. Like this ‘gift’, it’s a stuffed Mario toy that I won in one of those skill tester claw game machines, I literally said “Watch me win this for you!” thinking I wouldn’t actually manage to win it. But I did, and it looks great on my shelf.
Mark Hogencamp is an artist who works with models. Not ‘won’t get out of bed for less than 10 grand’ or ‘Australia’s next top’ type, in fact not even the Facebook-upload-in-bikini-at-a-lake-taken-by-some-guy-who-works-at-a-video-store-and-is-trying-to-get-his-folio-together-so-now-i’m-a-model type ‘model’. But the small and plastic type.
Marks photos are set during WWII mostly in the fictional world of Marwencol. He uses 1/6 size soldier figurines to reenact both real and fictional battles. Now this isn’t exactly on it’s own something amazingly unique, in fact there are a bunch of different web communities that have a healthy obsession with collecting and photographing war models. (Which Mark is also involved in. Actually the photo above was his submission to an online competition. Where Mark took away the glorious 1st place prize of a $40 Toy store voucher) There may be lot’s of people doing it and some do it well, but still Mark’s photo’s are leaps and bounds infront. He doesn’t just setup scenarios, he gets his plastic to emote. Marks photo’s are so powerful that they hold their own against actual documentary war photography and have done in gallery exhibitions. He is in fact getting more recognition for his art and is the subject of an up and coming doco Welcome to Marwencol.
Mark’s work is also fascinating because of where it comes from. Mark began creating his photos during his recovery from a savage attack by a group of thugs that put him into a coma and left him with brain damage. Using the models Mark has been able improve his motor skills and help heal the emotional wounds that the real life violence left him with. And you can see it all transend into scenarios of revenge and violence againt the SS soldiers that he creates. Mark even has himself as a character in his fictional town where he plays out various storylines. Including encounters with a beautiful time traveling femme from the future who saves his life.
Mark’s stuff is truly amazing and I can’t wait for the doco to come out. Here are a couple of more shots that i’ve found, the crappier quality ones are video grabs and don’t really give the feel that they deserve but give an idea of what he does, including a bride and groom in front of hanging SS soldiers. Just like I imagine my wedding day. Enjoy.
I should mention i haven’t included any photos of Mark out of respect for his privacy, and i hope i haven’t included too much personal detail. I’ve always believed that context is important in art. And I just was really blown away by his photos and i think it’s rare for art to really capture so much. And I’ve seen quite a few exhibitions of documentary photography that don’t come close to capturing what Mark does. People can be physicaly at a war with incredible things happening all around them, but you have to be at war emotionaly to truly represent it.
So we all know Jesus has made a return recently to appear in the lid of a marmite jar of the Allen in South Wales. Yep that’s him. Or is it? I mean is it really Jesus?
I thought this was a little suss when i read it in the South Wales Echo, something just didn’t feel right. I mean why would Jesus choose marmite over vegemite? But then the article that slipped through the biased left media came to my attention. This could not possibly be Jesus. Because as told to us by the crack team of journalists at Tasmania’s Murcury, Jesus already made his comeback in a burrito Jesus’ face in a buritto Tasmania News – The Mercury – The Voice of Tasmania. This makes so much more sense, second coming of Jesus was not to some soccer mum in wales, but to a fellow carpenter Lloyd Osborne. Llyoyd in fact ‘resurrected’ Jesus after his wife has crucified the out of date burrito to the bin two days earlier. “It was still in the packet, and I opened it up and took one out … Whether it’s a message from one carpenter to another I don’t know. I am renovating the house, so maybe I should put in a shrine for pilgrims to come and visit.” Further evidence in Llyods favour is that the first ever religious-food pareidolia (or in lay-mans terms ‘seeing shit that’s not really there’) was on a tortilla in mexico in the late 70’s. Check mate skeptics! Over 8000 people made the pilgrimage to the humble site of the sacred tortilla, where Mrs Rubio left her house open and unlocked so people could come in and worship.
Why would Jesus come back as food? Well, maybe Jesus has a dodgy matter transporter like in the movie the Fly and he cant help but want to bring a snack with him when he comes down to earth resulting in the blending of atoms and a tasty Jesus looking snack? Maybe not. But one thing is for sure this Cinnamon bun is definitely Mother Teresa.
I’ve been making my way through the HBO series OZ lately, just on the final eps of the final season, six. Man, i’m gonna miss it.
OZ pioneered hour long drama for HBO, it was definitely ground breaking and it’s entertainment value still holds up. It’s brutal, crude, violent and has probably more full frontal male nudity and sex than ‘sex and the city’, only it’s mostly rape. But to be fair i haven’t seen the sex and the city movie, which for all i know could be chock-o-block full of violent sodomy and forced deification into the mouths of nazis.
But what is really great about OZ is that is combines all this with story lines to make soap operas cringe. It’s like Nieghbours. If you tried to explain a character to someone who started watching mid series the exposition is as lengthy as its opening credits “So he used to be that guys prag, and prag means bitch, but he’s fallen in love with the nazi’s newest boy-toy, who befriended his son, who along with his other son is now also in prison, but then turned him on him. And he used to be a lawyer and so he’s representing him pro bono, but he’s falling in love with his own lawyer who his boyfriend is jealous of, and he killed the nazi’s new prag cause he killed the other guy’s father. Oh and his brother is kind of retarded, and they gave him some pills so he started growing old really quickly, but they found out they’re actually step brothers and his mother who he never knew has turned up and is teaching the inmates how to sing. Oh and that guy talking now is actually already dead, he was killed a few seasons ago.”
It’s also been cool just seeing all the different actors that you recognise from current shows, the first 4 or so seasons give you a good chance to say isn’t that guy on ‘the wire’? And one of the best gems is JK Simmons, who is recognisable from so many comedy roles, but here in OZ he plays Vern, the swastika-arse-burning, homophobic inmate raping nazi. What a hoot!
Oh, by the way, not as good as the Wire.