Outsiders and Plain Weird and Unfocused Rage06 Sep 2010 07:30 am
By Gainsbourg

Does indie culture, asks one reader of CiF’s ‘indie professor’ Wendy Fonarow, really offer its female participants sanctuary from sexual objectification and imposed gender roles? Or does it, in fact, offer nothing more than objectification of a less overt nature and an alternative but equally rigid set of expectations?

The indie professor responds cautiously. Outwardly, the indie scene might be less macho than others, but wankers get everywhere, and remain wankers even if they listen to fey guitar music. And just because one of them has swapped his pink Ben Sherman for a bootleg Dirty Projectors tour shirt, his raging cock issues won’t magically resolve themselves.

Another reader – SexyLikeLemmy, apparently – isn’t at all happy with this assessment. Not that he particularly disagrees with it. No, it’s more that he’s sick of journalists sullying the purity of his musical experience with their ‘political ideology’, such as that of expecting not to get sexually assaulted.

Thanks to Nicholas.

This is infuriating! Why am I surprised that a music writer would write an article completely void of anything to do with actual music. Why? Why do music writers always do this? What compels you to apply your own vision of how you think the world should be on every one else?

What is it with you fucking people? Why must you try to enforce some ignorant orthodoxy of your own on every scene that comes down the road? Why? Why can’t you just see music for music? Why must you always try to attach some political ideology to everything? It’s asinine and it makes YOU the only one running around trying to be the equality hall monitor.

Is that what it is? Where all music writers hall monitors when you were kids? Miss the power over the other kids?

Let me let you in on how it REALLY works out here in indie-heaven. Whenever a group of guys gets together to build a band they always have to take into consideration that they’ll get slagged off in the press if they don’t find some way to live up to indie expectations. Get it? Whose the real cultural enforcer? YOU PEOPLE!

Think about it, you got 2 guys trying to put together a band, they know damn well they BEST get at least one girl, if they can’t find one, they better get a gay friend in there some how. Who cares if they know how to play? That’s not important. What’s important is getting treated fairly. You don’t stand a chance in the press if you don’t play there little game. Fine, find some girl and stick her on the bass, just turn the fucking amp down live so she won’t screw everything up!

You writers know fuck all about music, what you do know about it thrusting your orthodoxy on everyone else.
SexyLikeLemmy

So there you go. The truth, if you can handle it, is that Kim Deal was only there so the Pixies could call themselves an equal opportunities employer, and Vivian Girls are probably some sort of bloody PC local government initiative.

But take heart, girls in bands. Because as useless as you are, you are at least marginally preferable to benders.

Curtain Twitchers and Outsiders and Retired Colonels and Self-appointed Sages27 Aug 2010 08:50 am
By Gainsbourg

Thanks to Laura for discovering the splendidly named grumpovian, a proper, old-fashioned, mean-spirited bastard who, for reasons that remain unclear, was compelled to answer when HYS asked, how concerned are you about your sexual health?

Cease sex education immediately. What a lot of absolute tosh! In this world full of left wing do-gooder, liberal pansies, what do we need this nonsense for. We never had such a waste of time when we were at school, 50 or so years ago, and we found out what to do, as did the early cave men! We will be telling them how to use toilet paper next! Teenagers deserve what they get, as they have no moral scruples whatsoever, following in the footsteps of their parents. Don’t treat them on the NHS, but let them pay privately for their disease. Why should precious resources be diverted from real, and genuine sickness, to deal with the likes of some teenagers who, with their “sex education”, should know better!
grumpovian

Has grumpovian misunderstood the point of sex education, mistaking it for a simple how-to guide for youths so far out of touch with their essential natures in a digital age that they require step-by-step instructions in order to perform the most basic biological functions? Or is the raw, bleeding truth that he/she/it (I’m going to go with ‘it’) knows full well what sex education is, and simply wishes AIDS on the young?

If I wasn’t in a generous mood (and, as luck would have it, I’m not), I’d say the latter.

Permanently Bewildered and Self-appointed Sages and Shit Sherlocks and Slow Readers and The Regular Twats23 Aug 2010 07:30 am
By Gainsbourg

Thanks to Luke for dredging this shit up from an HYS debate about the merits of university.

Is a university degree necessary?

Er… try asking a coherent question if you want a sensible answer.

A university degree is not necessary in the same way as air, food and water are. You can live a happy and fulfilled life without a university degree, you won’t survive five minutes without air to breathe.

If you want to be a medical doctor, a university degree is necessary for you to attain your ambition. (Note for aspiring medics: you also need air to breathe!)

If you want to learn how to learn and how to think, to explore a subject of interest to its fullest extent… well, you can acquire these skills elsewhere, but a university degree is a good way to set your feet on the right track. Oh, and you still need air to breathe.

Define ‘necessary’ and you might be able to answer your question for yourself. Trouble is, I learned how to craft such debate by, er, going to university. Oh, and I still need air to breathe too!
Megan

BA (Hons) in Smug Pedantry, right? I did the same course, which is why I feel qualified to craft this equally smug response: the actual, entirely reasonable question was, ‘is a university degree necessary for success in later life?’

I’ll give you a 48-hour extension to resubmit your answer. Any later and you’ll be forced to wear one of those striped beanies with the little propeller on top for the rest of your life. People will laugh openly as you walk by and small children will follow you around for hours at a time, poking you with sticks, but at least it’ll draw attention from the long, silvery thread of drool perpetually dangling from your chin.

Delusions of Grandeur and Hypocrites and Miscellaneous Prats and Outsiders and Permanently Bewildered and Retired Colonels and Self-appointed Sages and Unfocused Rage18 Aug 2010 07:30 am
By Gainsbourg

You might want to clear your diaries for this morning, because Heidi has sent in this Wagnerian misery cycle from Your Freedom, elegantly composed by a man with an awful lot of time on his sticky hands. He evokes his own train-wreck psyche so vividly you can almost hear him sniffing your chair. He’s a Regular Twat in the making, if he doesn’t cast us all sobbing into endless vortices of despair.

Are you sitting comfortably?

Wight1984.

Your argument is based on this in my view now wholly unjusifed position that women are oppressed.

While this may have been true 100 or more years ago, where is the evidence that they are now?

On the contrary, there’s far more evidence that MEN are repressed.

e.g. the UK pensions age is STILL 65 fo women and only 60 for men.

Ironically as women live several years longer than men on average, many men don’t even make it to 65, so it’s DOUBLY DISCRIMINATING aginst men.

And lookee here, we’ve had FEMINISM for about 100 years and especially in the UK for about 50, but NOTHING IS DONE about this GLARING INEQUALITY.

Women can get a state pension at 60 and men have to wait till they are 65. I wonder why?

Or then we have 100s of soldiers dying in wars or arriving home without the faces they used to have or not as many limbs or in wheelchairs for the rest of their lives, and about 95% to 99% of them are MEN.

Seems to be another INEQUALITY issue that the feminists aren’t talking about.

And then there’s what happens in divorces, with people like Heather Mills waltzing up and taking £25m of their husband’s – in this case Sir Paul McCartney’s – fortune, which it doesn’t appear like they’ve done anything to deserve.

HOw many MEN do we see marrying rich WOMEN and coming away with MILLIONS in divorce settlements?

Let’s even talk simpler everyday things.

Why is it that men on the whole have to ask WOMEN out for dates – and face rejection/humiliation if they are refused?

Why is it that millions of women still think it’s OK not to work and let their husbands bring in the money, like the footballer’s wives?

Whereas if a man did that, he’d be viewed as a total sponger and treated with derision and contempt.

Why is it that if a ship goes down at sea,it will STILL be women and children first into the lifeboats, and if any man caused a woman to die to save himself in such a circumstance, he’d have to live the rest of his life with the title “coward” hung around his neck?

So you are clearly swallowing this LYING feminist propaganda that women are some kind of underclass, when it appears that any OBJECTIVE OBSERVER who came from another planet would fairly soon conclude that it is MEN who are the underclass and women are the rulers of this strangely physically stronger, but yet still mostly enslaved and dominated other gender.

I’m now going to explain to you, what your probable REAL problem is, and who is responsible for it, and IT ISN’T MEN.

Men and women basically have simple underlying goals in life despite all the superficial complexities which muddy the waters, and hide the truth of what is really going on despite all appearances.

i.e. men are seeking a mate to make them feel comforted, respected and loved, and have a SEX partner.

If a particular man can afford it, or is considered a “dominant male” as they say, he may well have SEVERAL such “mates” either sequentially or even at the same time.

Women on the other hand also have A BIOLOGICAL MISSION, which once again is basically to find a mate, but this time with the aim of reproducing.

They want to build a nest and have chicks in it.

They want as nice and as protected a nest as they can get of course, and they also want the most esteemed mate they can find to produce the highest quality offspring and maximum degree of protection.

It makes me laugh to know, that one of the most esteemed (probably THE most esteemed) female author in literary history is Jane Austen who wrote Pride and Prejudice.

And do you know what the first line is (approximately) of that book?

She writes “It is an indisputable fact that a man with a fortune and X thousand acres of land must be in need of a wife.”

Her whole book is basically a treatise on the art of manipulation/seduction of a WEALTHY MAN/MATE desired by a woman, and the goal is to get his worship and for him to beg her hand in marriage.

i.e. the same old BIOLOGICAL MISSION of finding the best quality mate and feathering one’s nest to the optimum degree.

And WOMEN THEMSELVES have rated this in polls as the best novel in history.

So let me explain what this cry of “inequality against women” is really all about.

The feminists – due to their own psychological problems caused by unhappy childhoods – have brainwashed a large proportion of the rest of women into believing that this role of WIFE/MOTHER is some kind of repressed slavery, that has no real importance, significance, when in fact it’s the ONLY thing that really matters in the majority of women’s lives – it is THEIR BIOLOGICAL MISSION.

But finding a mate and having children is also quite a scary mission to carry out, it’s not easy to get the man women really want as Jane Austen explained, men can be very obstinate and relucatnt to commit, and childbirth can be scary, and women then lose their freedom because they have to look after their children, and in most cases then put their own needs in 2nd place.

So it’s very easy for women also to hum and har about it, to ask themselves if that is REALLY what they want to do, and of course the more “intellectual” they are, the more they’ll tend to debate it endlessly, rather than JUST GET ON WITH IT like the lower class, less intellectual women do.

And in that INTERIM, UNDECIDED period, in steps the feminist propagandist, who says that being a wife and mother isn’t the answer, and that a woman should prove she can do anything a man can do: – she should be a nuclear scientist, a poet laureate, a big business chief, an MP or even prime minister, and show actually that women don’t even NEED men, men are nothing really, so they aren’t to be FEARED.

Because women DO fear MEN, just as men even before feminism have lived in fear of women.

Because when another person has WHAT YOU NEED, that gives them POWER OVER YOU.

So in the case of men, they need women as sexual partners – they’ve got this awesome and overpowering biological desire which suddenly just appears TOTALLY UNEXPECTEDLY in their teens – and they also want the SOCIAL EESTEEM of having a girlfriend/wife, or they are considered “losers”.

And then men also have what WOMEN need, which is basically again the ability to give them children via sex,and also to give them esteem, give them a place in society, make them respected by other women, who will enviously look on if they get a “trophy man” like the footballer’s wives do.

Or otherwise the man ends up a sad old bachelor who other men look dubiously at, who clearly “couldn’t get a woman”, or the woman ends up as the “old maid” who no man apparently wanted.

So instead of facing up to the human and animal level biological problem of FINDING A MATE, the feminists divert women, especially young ones, down the avenue of saying MEN ARE THE PROBLEM, that the cause of women’s problem is the behaviour of men, which of course in the sense I’ve explained it is true, just as men’s problem is the behaviour of women.

Because each sex is actually trying to CONTROL the other, in fear of the possiblity that the other gender will use their POWER against them.

So tradiationally men use to congregate in groups, and to some extent still do, and mock women.

Not because they REALLY disrespected them, believed them unequal, but because when you are IN FEAR of somebody, you try to pretend they don’t have the power over you that they actually do.

So all the feminists are doing is basically the same but as regards MEN.

Trying to cut men down to size, humiliate them, so they don’t have to feel AFRAID of them any more.

And naturally because ALL women have got some of this fear, just as all men have some fear of women, lots of young women especially who haven’t yet “got their man” and are in fear of whether they ever will, are easisly persauded to join in the “protest” about the fact that they can’t control men as much as they’d like.

But even worse, by the feminists proposing the solution for the girl/woman who is unhappy about her inability to control the men she desires to, who won’t do what she wants them to do , that they should COMPETE FOR JOBS with men, show they can outdo men in the workplace, they gives a huge problem to a lot of women who DO NOT wish to compete with men or even necessarily enter the workplace at all.

Women in the past were not EXPECTED to be in the workplace, and certainly not in any difficult or responsible job, they were basically just awaiting the day they would marry.

So even if they had some kind of a job as nurse, secretary, teacher or whatever, it was only ever considred to be temporary, except perhaps in older age when their children didn’t need them any more, and they could retake whatever they wanted, for both the money and the feeling of being part of society, involved and contributing in some way.

e.g. many wealthy women who don’t need to work, and probably don’t WANT an ordinary job, because they don’t want to do things they aren’t interested in, or be bossed around, get involved in charity fundraising and so on.

But the problem is that a lot of women are not AMBITIOUS, PUSHY, OUTGOING, they do not WANT to shove their way into “the big bad world” they are NATURALLY reserved, or shy, and there’s nothing wrong with that, it’s party of their natural self-protective instinct.

Getting a job is not just an activity, it’s being forced to interact with A SOCIAL GROUP, with its PECKING ORDER, and few people who work will not be subject to some kind of abuse or even overt bullying.

You are forced to be with people you often don’t like and almost certainly would never choose as friends.

Envy, competition, rivalry, dislike or even outright hate, and all sorts of other ugly emotions, run rife in the average workplace, so it’s a potentially very threatening environment for a woman, especially a more refined, cultured or sensitive one.

And how have the feminists addressed this problem of women?

They have said, if YOU as a woman can’t hack it in the workplace, if you can’t get a job like men do, if all you can do is keep house and feed babies, you are INADEQUATE.

You should be ASHAMED OF YOURSELF.

You are letting down WOMEN, in their “heroic struggle” to get equality with men, you’re letting down all the millions of women who have been abused, repressed and brutalised by men throughout the ages.

And that’s all NONSENSE.

Throughout the ages, the REAL truth is that as now, MOST men have been the servant, slaves and worshippers of women, and the only women who have complained about it are the ones who CAN’T GET A MAN TO SERVE AND WORSHIP THEM.

e.g. we don’t see footballer’s wives attending feminist study groups.

So I don’t know how old you are, but the reality for young women is simple.

There’s nothing wrong with you getting a job if you want one, but bear in mind there’s a man/boy out there, who’s trying to make his way in life, and HE is your potential mate.

He – and I’m in contact with young men who at times let me into their private thoughts – believes that to be worthy of YOU, being YOUR mate, he has to have A GOOD JOB.

And so if YOU take the job that HE NEEDS to be a respected member of his community, and thus to be deemed worthy of marrying (eventually) YOU, then when it comes to the time you want a mate, HE no longer exists for you.

He is getting drunk in a bar somewhere, bemoaing his failure, or maybe even commited sucide after his failure to SUCCEED.

Do you know, yet another “equality” is that between 4 and 6 time as many MEN/BOYS worldwide are committing SUICIDE than women/girls?

So clearly MEN/BOYS are now under some kind of presure that women/girls are not.

And that pressure is to SUCCEED.

Almost ANY woman can find SOME man or other, on her own level of looks/class/intelligence to mate/marry with, and SHE does not need a job.

But for a man, if he doesn’t “get that job” he is NOTHING, society regards him as a failure, a loser, somebody who should go hang his head in shame, and yes, it might well be better for himself and everyone else if he decided to “end it all.”

And that’s no joke – that’s EXACTLY what numerous young men and even older ones rejected by the system are doing, and even if they aren’t going that far, millions have now gone into addiction to prescripton or illegal drugs.

Have you not seen all the endless DEMANDS to legalise cannabis on here?

What’s THAT all about?

And I can guarantee you few or no women are starting those threads, or supporting them, the drug problem – prostitution aside – it is almost entirely a problem affecting MEN.

Women who use drugs – alcohol and tobacoo excepted – are usually only dragged into it if their partner does, and otherwise wouldn’t do so, except for the posh little rich girls who do cocaine and so on, desperatly seeking attention for their unloved and miserable lives.

So THIS is what’s really going on out there: men/boys being destroyed, and feminists smugly laughing at it vengefully out of their hate for everything male, and INNOCENT women/girls in the middle getting conned into believing that the male is their natural enemy who is suppressing them, when actually he is what they most need as a friend, protector and mate.

It’s appalling, and anybody can see this is what is really going on, if they stop looking through the eyes of prejudice and hate, which emotional states are mainly just brought about by FEAR.

AS I’ve said, boys/men are JUST AS AFRAID, or more so, as women/girls are of men.

Life is scary, uncertain for all of us, and demonising and scapegoating the other gender as the feminists are doing, is no way to security for any of us, quite the opposite, causing estrangement, competition and hate, between those beings – men and women, boys and girls – who should be cooperating, supporting, befriending and loving one another.

Like I said, most womem who get assaulted behave in such a way that they effectively bring it on themselves.

You don’t agree that, because you think women should have a freedom in society that is just not realistic, and no SENSIBLE women (you know, most of whom have NEVER been sexually assaulted) agree with YOU.

If you don’t want women to get raped, it’s REALLY EASY.

I’m going to give an even longer list of things women SHOULDN’T DO now, seeing as you have now annoyed me.

1. Don’t go in bars alone or even with just one girlfriend unless you are getting WELL KNOWN taxis to and fro door to door and preferably a relative or friend instead of a taxi.

2. Don’t walk in any public area on your own. You can get away with it in crowded city centres, as long as you stick to the CROWDED areas, avoid quiet streets where you could be dragged into a back alley or whatever without anyone noticing.

(university campuses tends to have a lot of these dodgy little quiet parts, and hence we find a lot of girl students get attacked).

3. Don’t dress in public in any provocative way. Not EVER. When you are married, your body is FOR HIS EYES ONLY.

4. Avoid mixed sex work places, and if you have a choice, don’t work at all, because as soon as you do, if you’re attractive, every male in the workplace will see you as an object of quarry/sexual fantasy.

If their parents can’t, THE STATE should support unmarried girls who need the money with basic benefits, and such girls/women should be entitled to refuse any work or not work at all if they please, as any form of work is a potential threat to their security.

If you must work, pick a female dominated environment like a hospital, typing pool or a girl’s or junior school.

If you expose yourself to public view on a routine basis, you will become an object of fantasy to any male who is able to see you regularly (but if you’re mostly covered up, that won’t happen much even if you are visible in face).

5. Don’t ever go alone on buses or trains if you can avoid it, or certainly not regularly or in any place you are not familiar with.

6. Don’t get drunk and incapable, because you think you can trust your girlfriends, but you may be wrong when they too have had a lot to drink.

7. Don’t have men friends except relatives, foolishly imagining you can have an “only friends” relationship with a boy/man, because any male friend of your own age if he finds you attractive (which you may not realise) will see you as a potential mate, and thus you can’t guarantee he won’t try to make the “friendship” physical sooner or later. It’s that old thing called his BIOLOGICAL MISSION “popping up” again.

8. Don’t tease with or flirt with men ANYWHERE. They’ll imagine you might want to have sex with them, when maybe all you were doing was trying to get served first at the bar, or “being friendly.”

9. Find a mate/marriage partner via one of your relatives or friends, (or some civilised group you can safely be part of like a church or whatever) and don’t EVER agree to go out with a man who you haven’t checked out thoroughly, and you wouldn’t see as long term relationship/marriage material.

10. Don’t go to university or college after 16 and attend a single sex girls’ school before 16, not a dreaded and dangerous comprehensive, full of boys all hoping to sneak a peek at you in the showers or be the first to rob you of your “virtue.”

If you want a degree, go to a girl’s only college or do an Open University degree.

We need to open some WOMEN ONLY universities/colleges for women who want to be doctors or teachers etc., and don’t want to be harrassed at such an early age.

You can stil have a social life amongst family and trusted friends.

Just make sure you are always (when out) part of a LARGE and (adequately sober) GROUP.

There you are – there’s govt helper’s 10 commandments.

If you follow ALL of those, your chances of getting even sexually assaulted, let alone raped, are almost zero.

PS and if you protest at any of those, you think you should have “more freedom”, undestand that boys and men have to be careful of thier movement too, not usually for fear of rape, but for fear or violent assualt, that can happen to men in all kinds of place – e.g. pub toilets – you wouldn’t even dream about, and for very flimsy reasons (e.g. somebody decides “you gave them a dirty look” or “you were ogling my girlfriend/wife”)

So please GROW UP and realise men have got LOADS of problems like women have too, and have to take LOTS of care with their own personal safety, just like women do.

You only have to read the news, and you see that grown men get beaten to death on a fairly regular basis by gangs of one kind or another, usually for some flimsy reason like complaining about the noise they were making or whatever.
govt_helper

I’m assuming govt_helper has recently suffered some rejection/humiliation himself.

And by ‘assuming’, I mean ‘hoping’.

Delusions of Grandeur and Racists and Self-appointed Sages16 Aug 2010 07:30 am
By Gainsbourg

Good news, writes Sarah Boseley on her Guardian blog. Recent trials have shown that hundreds of thousands of children’s lives could be saved each year in Africa and Asia with vaccines that Westerners take for granted. And guess what? The G8 is committed to doing just that. No-brainer, innit?

Ah, except there’s a problem, see. Because the G8 is also committed to treating and preventing HIV and AIDS in Africa and Asia, and – curse you, cruel God! curse your balls! – there’s only so much money that the world’s largest economies are willing… sorry, able to spare in order to save the lives of poor brown people.

So where does the money go? On the one hand, reducing child mortality would ordinarily be an absolute priority for any civilised nation. On the other, diarrhoea lacks the glamour of AIDS.

But wait, says koushixinfei: we’re asking the wrong question. We shouldn’t be worrying about which preventable diseases to treat in the developing world, but whether we should be treating them at all.

The economics doesn’t work. Save a child in Africa now and in 20 years you have another 3 to 5 to save, you need to price that in. A vaccine which saves a child for 10 USD today, will imply another 30 – 50 USD in a generation. Pestilence and Civil war is the african choice to manage population growth. I’m not sure we should be imposing science and engineering on them, any more than they should impose pestilence and civil war on us. And yes, it is us and them if you are going to use the language of “donor nations”.
koushixinfei

Yeah, this saving lives thing is all well and good, but in this post-ideological age, surely pumping billions of dollars into helping people who – let’s be brutally honest here – contribute nothing to the global economy is just a bad investment?

And who says they want to be helped? We have our medicine and technology and infrastructure, they have their disease and child soldiers and rape. We should respect their culture, fucking leave them to it, save the money for other things. Like rats, power tools and Huey Lewis and the News CDs.

Curtain Twitchers and Delusions of Grandeur and Miscellaneous Prats and Retired Colonels03 Aug 2010 07:30 am
By Gainsbourg

Look, I’m going to level with you. I don’t like people. I think they’re brutal, selfish and stupid. Nevertheless, I sometimes wake up in the morning with the sun shining on my face, feeling almost at peace with the world, and in those moments I question myself. I think, am I the problem? Am I the one who needs to change?

Then I get up and take a look at HYS (currently asking: would you step in to help a child?) and BAM! Top two comments, pair of cunts.

You only need to read the ‘Sarahs law’ HYS to see why people are fearful!

I found a 4 year old wandering the streets near my old flat with no shoes on, in mid winter with snow on the ground. I had to stand on the pavement waiting for 20 minutes for the police to show up because I was so terrified of the implications of taking a half dressed kid inside to warm up. The kid nearly froze as a result.
Peter_Sym

No, I wouldn’t help. And yes I am concerned they would be abusive.

The problem nowadays, is that an adult is considered a threat to a child despite the adults good intentions.

Personally, I’d walk away, and if the child was hurt or abducted, then sorry, but not my fault. Blame the parents, government, society as a whole.
martin622

So the first two people we encounter on this thread are: a man who’s such a coward that he’d have watched a toddler freeze to death before risking any course of action with ‘implications’; and a complete monster who wouldn’t lose any sleep if he abandoned a child to some horrific fate, purely to make a point.

Extrapolate this result across the rest of our species. I feel vindicated. Equilibrium is restored.

Miscellaneous Prats and Permanently Bewildered and Plain Weird29 Jul 2010 07:30 am
By Gainsbourg

emma2001 offered up this bleak vision of the present in response to David Mitchell’s CiF piece on the burqa debate. Thanks to Giles.

When a Goverment starts telling people what they should wear we are on the road to George Orewells 1984 which is the country we now live in

But remeber today sunday we allow the Goverment to tell us that Tesco/Asda/Sainsburys can only open for 6 hours to let us shop

What hope has this country got of ever living in freedom when we allow the Goverment to tell us when to shop

Think of it

Emma
emma2001

Just think of it, when you’re trudging all the way to the corner shop at 4:01pm this Sunday. Think: “this is my Oceania. This is my war-torn totalitarian murderhole. This is my Iraq, my Zimbabwe, my Sudan. They may not be laying waste to my cultural heritage. They may not be violently suppressing dissent. They may not be dragging my family away to death camps. But they are restricting trading hours for one day of each week. Repression of basic human desires. Just as Orwell predicted. Shit, I’m like a philosopher or something. I could murder some Space Raiders.”

Delusions of Grandeur and Miscellaneous Prats and Plain Weird and Racists and Werthers Original Imperialists23 Jul 2010 07:30 am
By Gainsbourg

Although it looks more like a hilarious tear-soaked pillow of hubris since his invitation was rescinded, Nick Griffin’s call for things to ask the Queen at yesterday’s garden party is, in fact, a bucket of curdled pomposity. If you manage to put your hand in there without being sick, you’ll be rewarded with a fistful of semi-congealed racist throat slime.

Here’s what Chris pulled out…

Your Majesty, we have met before, remember me?…. I am the lion that stands on your crown, I am the Dragon that is the spirit of your nation, I am the sword that rose from the lake and was given to Arthur, I am the blood that runs through your nation’s veins, I am the breath that your nation breathes, I am the morning mist on the downs, I am the heather on the moors, I am the sun that shines on the Dales, I am the mountains of caledonia and Cymry, I am the white cliffs of Albion, I am the beat of the Morris man’s bells, I am the sound of the pipes over the hills, I am the snow that falls on the meadows. I am the soldier who fought for you, and you father, and your father’s father, and his, I am the Gesith that stood on Senlac field, I am the wise old man you met when you were young, I am the young man your great grandchildren will meet, I am the ghost of the past, and I am the future…. Remember me now?… Your Majesty?
Sigbrit

Sigbrit, we have met before, remember?…. I am the rapidly descending silence every time you walk into a room, I am the pretty Somali girls who laughed at you on the bus, I am the modern world that makes you shit your silly pants in fear and confusion, I am the weird smell of rotting dog food that you leave behind when you do, I am your parochial bafflement at exotic foodstuffs such as ‘sizzling beef in black bean sauce’, I am the look of disappointment glued permanently to your mother’s face, I am your grandchildren’s crippling embarrassment, I am the ghost of your past failures, and I am your dismal future…. Remember me now?… Sigbrit?

Miscellaneous Prats and Self-appointed Sages05 Jul 2010 07:30 am
By Gainsbourg

What’s more depressing than the Daily Mail? The Daily Mail taking the moral high ground from the BBC, that’s what.

When commentator David Mercer said something during the Wimbledon coverage about some supposed “puppy fat” on this year’s paedo’s choice Laura Robson, the Mail called him out on it. With a straight face and everything. Literally tens of people rushed to voice the same two opinions (bad Mercer/good Mercer), and Jo brought this silly prick to our attention.

Sorry but I completely AGREE with Mercer’s comments.
ALOT of the female tennis players now are carrying TOO MUCH weight! You cannot say its “puppy fat” thats an old wives tale!
I can never recall Chris Evert, Billie Jean King or Martina Navratilova carrying a spare tyre of fat around their middle??
The men done have spare tyres do they?
Sorry but the girls are not fit – hence all these little screams when hitting the ball etc…..
Samantha Jane, East Sussex

Samantha artfully tops and tails this dripping pisstowel of unpleasantness with two shining examples of the arsehole’s apology. It’s the apology that isn’t an apology, the brother of ‘not being funny, right’. What it means is: “I deeply regret doing or saying what I’m about to do or say, but not enough to actually refrain from doing or saying it. I’m basically a complete failure of a human being with an overinflated sense of entitlement; nonetheless, I shall deign to consider your pathetic feelings by prefixing the following cuntery with the word ‘sorry’, then you can all go, ‘that Samantha is harsh but unfailingly correct. And I tell you what, she’s certainly magnanimous in victory. I wish I could be more like her, rather than considerate and well-liked’.”

So female pro-tennis players: consider yourselves told, right? Fucking screaming barrels.

Curtain Twitchers and Permanently Bewildered and Self-appointed Sages and Shit Sherlocks01 Jul 2010 07:30 am
By Gainsbourg

Hey, kids. Remember the 1980s revival a few years back? Well, here it is again, this time with added social realism. Just as George Osborne is getting ready to make 1.3 million people unemployed, the government is going to sew up disability benefits so tightly that only limbless, headless torsos and brains in jars will qualify. Honestly, it’s like punk only just happened!

But what do the spluttering breadheads at This Is Money think? Go on, guess.

Thanks to Ken.

Quite right too.
Recently I followed a couple of people after they had signed on for their job seekers dole and found that 5 of them were actually working,one guy as a betting shop manager only yards from the dole office he uses.Time to stop these spongers.
R Markson, Manchester

Ladies. Can you make out that figure over there, crouching in the bushes outside your house? That’s R Markson. But don’t worry! He’s only making sure you don’t commit any benefit fraud or anything. Just act like he’s not there. Don’t you normally do some stretches about this time?

The labour party paid out beefits willy nilly only to buy votes
Mike, Penzance

I remember when the Labour party came round offering me beefits concealed in a discreet brown envelope. But I was smart. I told them I couldn’t promise to vote for them, although I might after a little more persuasion. Well, they were dropping by twice a week after that, right up to polling day. Now I can’t move for fucking beefits. They’re making my life hell. Please help me.

It’s interesting that people say there aren’t enough jobs to go round, yet half a million Poles showed up here a couple of years back and found work immediately – for example working in the chicken factory in Llanelli, or picking cabbages in Essex. When I was chucked out of a high-paying job twenty-five years ago I spent 3 months driving trucks, stacking paint in warehouses, and shifting furniture for LESS than I would have got on the rock’n'roll (since I had a wife and two kids). At the end of that period I still couldn’t find a job so I started my own business, working out of the back bedroom.

That’s where the jobs come from, chaps. Once you go on benefits, you’ll never get off again – starter jobs always pay less.
Jim Blythe, Cardiff

Yeah, scumbags, that’s where the jobs come from – Jim’s back bedroom, where you’ll find a low-resolution video camera, three barrels of vegetable oil and a pile of beefits that goes all the way up to the ceiling. Apply in writing, with photo. No time wasters.

Is it me or have i started seeing things,since the chancellor anounced he is going to start cutting incapacity benefit, there has has been a sudden surge in wheelchairs and walking sticks? from people who look like they do not need them ?? two words spring to mind – CON ARTISTS..
Michael, lancs

Personally, Michael, I think you’re fucking cracked. But it would be a suspicious coincidence, wouldn’t it? The Treasury announces a crackdown on benefit fraud, so naturally a load of people go out and commit benefit fraud. It makes perfect sense when you don’t think about it.

yeah bring it on, but i don’t think it will happen, there isn’t any jobs anyway,unless we send all immigrant s home that wouldn’t b a bad thing,british jobs for english workers
N Thatcher, bath

Nargaret is going all-out imperialistic on us. British jobs for English workers. So fuck you, the Scottish! Get out, Welshers, this call centre is ours now! Nice restaurant you’ve got here, Irish. Be a terrible shame if it suddenly got taken over by the English. Whoops, butterfingers!

Don’t just cut benefits, reduce the number of benefits there are – housing benefit/local housing allowance should be combined with jobseekers allowance instead of administered separately. If people can’t be trusted to pay their rent themselves, that’s their problem.

Privatise Jobcentre Plus, and make its staff behave like recruitment consultants driven by targets – and scrap the useless Pathways to Work scheme – there is nothing that they can’t do that can’t be done by jobclubs.
Merge or shut down most universities (especially ex-polytechnics) and make companies take on apprentices. One family friend started work as an articled clerk and retired as a circuit judge – we need to return to that instead of lumbering people with student debts for useless degrees.
Jobseeker, South London

I can see what Jobseeker did here. Having demanded an unworkable oversimplification of our complex system of benefits, and called for Jobcentre staff to effectively retrain as recruitment consultants – because we need more of them in the world – Jobseeker (who I’m going to assume is a man because I’m a dreadful misandrist) read back his post and, being an utter fucking cockslap, thought to himself, “no, this is far too reasonable. What can I do to make myself seem even more insanely rightwing and stupid? Ah, I know: ‘shut down most universities.’ High five!”

Next Page »