I was going to write something about this story (VIDEO), in which a seventeen-year-old black boy named Trayvon Martin was shot and killed by a white man named George Zimmerman who judged him to be “up to no good.”
Anyone aware of the story’s facts knows this is clearly manslaughter at least. So why, then, haven’t the police arrested George Zimmerman? I don’t know about all of that, but Trevon Martin’s family wants the FBI to get involved. I agree with them.
Please give Deborah’s post a read, it’s very well written and says a lot about modern race relations in the United States.
UPDATE: Jonathan Capehart of The Washington Post wrote a great opinion article about this tragedy. Please give it a read.
Whilst browsing this blog today in order to ensure nothing is askew, I noticed a little detail. Both the first and last month listed under my “Archive” section are March. Which would support the thesis that EWWTY is officially one year old.
When I first started EWWTY, I had hoped to challenge myself by writing for it every day. While I didn’t end up meeting that challenge, I did manage to write daily for a few months. And I did, at least, manage to write often enough to maintain the blog.
Though I never managed to make WordPress.com’s Freshly Pressed, I’d say it’s been a successful experience. The fact that anyone found my writing thus far to be interesting is good enough for me. My philosophy is that if I keep on keepin’ on, one of my pieces will eventually end up being recognized. Probably when I least expect it.
A big thanks to all the readers and followers I’ve accumulated throughout the course of this year!
I knew I had to write something about this after seeing it. However, Ed Darrell expresses the same sentiments as mine with regard to Perry better, and in fewer words (and expletives), than I could. Which I appreciate, as now I may focus on making fun of him.
This ad will re-define the boundaries of political satire this election cycle. It reads like a Saturday Night Live parody of a Bush 2000 campaign ad. That is to say, Rick Perry is the exaggerated manifestation of Bush.
Here’s a quote from the video, to which I shall respond humorously.
…you don’t need to be in the pew every Sunday to know there’s something wrong in this country when gays can serve openly in the military but our kids can’t openly celebrate Christmas or pray in school.
Actually, Rick, I believe you do. [Insert rimshot here]. In fact, church every Sunday is merely one condition that must be met in order to ‘know’ that. The others – if I’m not mistaken – include KKK meetings every Friday night, and a propensity toward male prostitutes and/or giving blow-jobs to strangers in airport bathrooms.
That’s all I got for now. I’ll update this if I think of any other jokes. I’m sure I will.
Be sure to check out Ed Darrell’s blog, Millard Fillmore’s Bathtub. He’s got heaps of other interesting posts.
A moment ago, whilst engaged in my usual Facebook creeping routine, my eyes were drawn to one of the advertisements; as often is the case. I have long since accepted that Facebook is more aware of my interests than me. Being a dirt poor college student, however, I never actually click them. This ad was special though. It was advertising something free.
Spoiler alert: it was a scam.
Before you judge me as an inept webizen of these United Internets, I’ll have you know this petty scam did not get the better of me. Though, it came closer than any which preceded it.
Here’s why. Upon reading the ad’s entirety, the thought that it might be a scam hadn’t crossed my mind. Facebook, with it’s sleek, simple-but-dynamic charm instilled me with a false sense of security. Surely, a website with which I have such history wouldn’t usher me toward anything malicious. Especially not with all my friends around.
Oh, and also because what it was advertising put me in an excited unthinking frenzy. The potential to obtain a pre-release copy of Grand Theft Auto V. Gimme a minute, I gotta watch that trailer again.
Yeah, it’s gonna be the tits.
So you can imagine the extent of my enthusiasm when I spotted this deceptive little bastard of a GTA V Facebook Ad.
If I’m not mistaken, it seems this Facebook advertisement purports to be created by Rockstar Games with the intent to find beta testers for their new awesome video game. Once the webpage it linked to opened, the implication was the same, despite a less convincing presentation than the ad. Blinded by desire, it wasn’t until I read its directions that I could no longer suppress the stinging realization that I wouldn’t be beta-testing Grand Theft Auto V for Rockstar.
Other than the words “Congratulations Visitor from Facebook” it scrawled upon my browser’s header, obviously written by either a foreigner or a robot, there seemed to be a certain urgency to its words. As though it wanted me to dart through the process in a careless haste. As though it sensed my yearning to do so.
As you’ve observed, this clearly wasn’t set up by GTA’s publisher. The absence of Rockstar logos, the tacky green text against black background, and the presence of what has to be the sorriest attempt at a faux ‘verified site’ icon that could possibly have been produced are all indicators that some Russian teenager threw it together in a hurry between being cold, and, well… being cold. What else do you think there is to do in Russia? Be cold and scam Americans. That’s it. Oh, and pretend Anna Chapman is attractive.
Ohh, but I kid the Russians.
I must say, I’m quite proud I was able to resist what was a tenacious urge to give every bit of my info to this insalubrious website. Way to go me.
This near-catastrophe left me with a question regarding Facebook’s ad policy. Namely, whether or not they have one.
They do. The next inquiry I faced was how effectively they enforce the ad policy. Since I never click the ads, it’s never been an issue. This being a harder question to answer, I was brought to write this in hopes that my fellow bloggers could share any experiences they’ve had with Facebook ad scams. I wanna find out just how big an issue this is over there.
Some of you may have noticed that for like two days this blog’s theme just randomly changed to something else and then changed back. That was because I thought I liked the other theme better than this one at first but then after a few days I realized that I actually like this one better so I changed it back. I can be quite indecisive at times.
But anyways I still feel like I want a different theme, not that this current one – Steira – isn’t a great theme, I just get tired of looking at the same one all the time. Having said that I wouldn’t be surprised if I ended up switching back to Steira, as that’s kinda what I keep doing.
So over the next few days, don’t be surprised if you get here and everything looks different.
Oh, and I realize there’s a few days where I haven’t posted anything, my work load has been rough, but I’m gonna try to post twice a day for a week or so to make up for it.
So, that’s that. Too-da-loo, bitches!
(I mean bitches in a good way, it’s basically a compliment).
The commercial tries hard to make its point, the website it advertises tries even harder. The argument being made is noble, when you use the term “gay” to describe an adverse situation, or a foolish action or person, it is offensive to the LGBT community. Unless you have succeeded in avoiding contact with my entire generation, you have probably heard the phrase “that’s so gay” used.
When we were younger, we were chastised for using this term for a whole different reason: because the thought of young children knowing the concept of homosexuality scared adults at the time. Well, times have changed, and now it’s because using the term to describe derogatory situations is offensive to homosexuals.
The commercial has been aired a lot lately and although fortunately it does not seem to have reached the prominence of those anti-tobacco and marijuana commercials that worked so well, it’s no less gay.
I’m a socially liberal person; I’m in support of the LBGT political agenda, especially when it comes to gay marriage and DADT.
I believe that no government which provides benefits to heterosexual marriages – and legally recognizes them as such – has the right to deny those same benefits, and the corresponding legal recognition, to homosexual couples. It shouldn’t be a partisan matter, it’s simply one of empathetic rationality.
However, I refuse to ever stop using the word “gay” the way I have always used it, and I find it rather arrogant of the GLSEN organization to demand otherwise.
If you have been lucky enough to avoid this commercial, allow me to give a brief synopsis: Two evil obnoxious straight girls, Emma and Julia, are at work; Julia asks Emma if she is doing anything tonight, and Emma says she can’t because her parents told her she has to come home after work, to which Julia replies, “that’s so gay.” Luckily one of the wise customers is conveniently ready to teach these young ladies the error of their politically incorrect vernacular; she approaches and says, “That’s so Emma and Julia.” When Julia understandably inquires as to what the hell she’s getting at, she explains – in a display of superb comedic wit, I might add – that their names have become – somehow, unbeknownst to Emma and Julia – adjectives for dumb and stupid.
LOLZ!!!! GET IT?!?!
Well you shouldn’t. I didn’t. Probably had to do with the lack of sense that was made in this scripted social encounter. The producers must have been aware of the commercial’s analogous nonsense because they had to get a narrator to clarify it at the end by stating: “Imagine if who you are was used as an insult. When you say, “That’s so gay” do you realize what you say? Knock it off.”
First of all, I do not appreciate it when those below my level of intellect tell me what to do (which is why I hated high school so much), so the last bit of the commercial that orders me to “knock it off” is annoying at best. But had they at least come up with a better argument, perhaps one that made sense, it would have been more tolerable.
Their argument is so gay because it does’t make sense analogously. Emma and Julia are names, “gay” is a word. While words are versatile, and change meaning all the time, names are not; in fact, names do not even have real meaning in the same sense that words have meaning. Names do not describe – they identify.
Furthermore, while words have the ability to be used in many different lexical forms, names can only identify words from one lexical category (nouns). Therefore the commercial fails to convey its point because of the moronic nature of its analogy.
I realize that analyzing the syntax of the commercial’s language may seem like a desperate attempt to justify my usage of the word, but it is important that it be analyzed. When a person sets out to make an argument for or against something, a good indication of whether or not their argument has merit is how well they can convey the point that they are trying to make by using logic, as arguments rely on logic to be effective.
Obviously if your argument has no merit, it will be impossible to justify logically.
However, that won’t likely stop the person from trying anyway, and when they do they often attempt to formulate an analogy, in this instance, comparing the way in which one uses the word “gay” to describe a stupid or dumb situation with using the names of the girls to describe a stupid or dumb situation (which does not work because names cannot describe).
Analogies are, however, tools with which one strengthens an argument. An analogy that attempts to strengthen a logicless argument will always fail, just as this one did.
As was stated earlier, words have the ability to both change meaning and hold multiple meanings. This is why I will continue to use the word “gay” the way I always have and maintain a clean conscience. I doubt the “n-word” would be used so prolifically by the black community today if it still held the same meaning to them as it did to white slave owners in the 1700’s; the point being that even the most hurtful words have the ability to change meaning over time.
But what makes GLSEN’s demand even more preposterous is the fact that the word “gay” itself is a perfect example of the metamorphic tendencies of words’ meanings. I don’t even need to use any analogous or metaphoric examples to make my point.
But I will anyway.
For example, the statement “let’s go be gay together!” would have had a totally different implied meaning in the 1920’s than today. Even today the dictionary lists descriptions such as “happy,” “lively,” and “colorful” before “homosexual.” It’s not my fault that the gay community has chosen to align itself with these adjectives as well. Someone who is happy, lively, and colorful in character is not necessarily attracted to the same sex – but they are gay, at least according to the dictionary definition. But if I were to describe a person, place, or thing that is happy, lively, and colorful as gay (and I would) I’m sure GLSEN would have a problem with me.
When I use the term “gay” to describe something I perceive to be stupid or dumb (like this commercial), I’m not implying those things to be homosexual. At that point, the word has taken on a whole new meaning, and if you choose to be offended by the way I’m using it, you should probably stop being so gay. GLSEN’s inability to perceive the alternate slang meaning is a result of their desire to be offended by it.
If my friend buys a new bright pink and purple sweater, I will inevitably describe that sweater, and my friend, as gay. Does this mean that I’m accusing him of being attracted to male genitalia? No. Does it mean that I’m accusing his sweater of being attracted to other sweaters? No. It means that I don’t care for the sweater, and I know that his and my understanding of the word “gay” in the context of the situation will clearly convey my feelings towards it. Just because the word has evolved to mean stupid or dumb does not mean that I think homosexual people are inherently stupid or dumb, in the same way that I don’t think stupid or dumb things are inherently homosexual.
To answer the question posed at the end of the commercial: Yes, I do know what I’m saying when I say “that’s so gay”; just because you don’t doesn’t mean I need to stop using it.
Those of you who are fellow WordPress bloggers are aware of the cool little feature of their site stats that lets you see what people searched to find your blog, or an article on your blog.
Well I started getting them about two weeks ago, but I wanted to share with you all what the number 1 term that directs traffic to this blog is:
All the other ones are different ways of searching for getting away with smoking weed – in case anyone was wondering why I put so much time into those posts (can’t believe it actually worked).
Okay well this one isn’t really our fault. But it’s something we have to deal with.
Allow me to textually illustrate what happens in 1971 when I’m smoking outside a building and a young lady approaches, clearly struggling to carry a number of items. Let’s assume it’s a double entrance.
Go outside to smoke a cig * Young lady approaches door carrying multiple items * It will clearly be difficult for her to make entry into the building without help * Luckily, it’s 1971 and I see no reason why I can’t help her * “Hi there young lady, allow me” * “Oh, you’re too kind, sir” * Open door * Carry one item for her * Walk in behind her, cig in hand * Open second door for her * “There you go, miss” * “Why, how ever could I repay you?” * “Ummm, Sex?”
Hey, the 1970′s version of me is no less opportunistic.
Now let me textually illustrate that same scenario, except in 2011.
Go outside to smoke a cig * Young lady approaches door carrying multiple items * Dammit, It will clearly be awkward for me to watch her make entry into the building without help * Unfortunately, it’s 2011 and I see no way I can help her * Instead I have to stand here like an awkward douche-bag * I guess I could put the cigarette down … but that’s setting a bad precedent * Oh, good; she’s inside now
My goal with this blog is to offend everyone in the world at least once with my words… so no one has a reason to have a heightened sense of themselves. We are all ignorant, we are all found wanting, we are all bad people sometimes.
I was going to write something about this story (VIDEO), in which a seventeen-year-old black boy named Trayvon Martin was shot and killed by a white man named George Zimmerman who judged him to be “up to no good.”
