Guh.

For the life of me I cannot remember where I stumbled upon these

but seriously how fantastic are they?

Star Wars + Lego = Epic beyond all proportions.

Recession Times

Good good things happen in bad towns.

Just a Vincent Cassel picdump. Because he is a bit fantastic really.

Kids are wonderful, but I like mine barbecued.

 

Looking at these pictures is like looking at a car crash. So wrong yet so mesmerizing. Not quite sure where I first saw these, found them while I was trawling through my hard drive.

It never fails to amuse me when people romanticize children. To those who rant about 'protecting' the innocence of children from the evils of the world: you're all morons. Children are barbaric folk. Childhood is the time when humans are at their most animalistic - before the constraints and decorum of society are imposed upon them. They're also far tougher than people give them credit for. Many people forget that Romeo and Juliet were just 14 (in an era where it was the norm to be married at 11 or 12 due to short life expectancy). Not to mention, as controversial as the subject may be, I doubt many would disagree the fact that child soldiers are capable of just as much cold-blooded cruelty as their adult counterparts.

The concept of childhood innocence is a Victorian ideal that lives on today, making it a concept that's been floating around for just a little less than two hundred years. Not that long in the grand scheme of things. Don’t get me wrong, obviously children need to be protected, it’s just the reasoning behind it I have problems with, the false morality. The basic truth lies in the simple fact that they are our offspring, our future, the continuation of our lineage, and like many other mammals we fight to ensure they survive. Not because of some misplaced sense of preserving ‘innocence’.

A lot of this rant stems from the controversy surrounding Tavi, the wunderkind blogger (someone who I’m absolutely in awe of), with parents rallying up in arms on how it was dangerous to allow children to blog. It reminds me of the video game controversy, where morons state that presenting kids with scenes of violence is a perfectly palatable excuse for them turning into raving loonies, ergo we should prevent them from seeing these scenes until the day that they magically transform overnight into adults (usually their 18th birthday). 

My take on this reasoning? Don't be fucking daft. Kids aren't morons, they'll find out about these things sooner or later (and thanks to the interweb usually sooner rather than later). In order to ensure that they don't screw things up how about educating them instead? In the case of blogging and facebook etc. why don't you teach your kids how to use the Internet responsibly by ensuring that maybe its not the best idea to write personal details about themselves online? On the case of video games, why don't you inform your kid that Grand Theft Auto is a fucking game and maybe its not the best idea to go round blowing up cops, sleeping with hookers and running down civilians? Cause truth is, if your kid can’t tell the difference between reality and fantasy, either he wasn't taught to properly distinguish the difference or he's a bloody sociopath.

Basically, my argument is that instead of looking to block in order to protect, people should be looking to construct. I'd argue that the importance lies in the formation of a child as a subject, in their education, in the very act of teaching them the basic morals that are fundamental to a functioning society.

This is the crux of parenting.

It is why the family is the revered nucleus of nearly all societies, past and present. No other relationship best enables the transference of ideology. This is why I have such an issue with 'free' parents; those that never say no, that allow their children to do as they will in fear that it will 'infringe on their rights'.  Give me a fucking break. I'd argue that you're doing your child an enormous injustice if you don't discipline them, if you don't teach them societal constructs of right and wrong that prevent them from being violent barbarians or selfish morons. 

To the (many) parents who think differently: Congratulate yourselves on producing a weak-minded generation that has never been curtailed; one trapped and obsessed within the realm of their imaginary ego, ignorant of self-reflection and self-development.

Congratulate yourselves on contributing to the degeneration of our fucking species.

(I think it’s safe to note that this rant has also emerged from looking around me and seeing children and adults alike who are the product of this imbecilic championing of freedom and individuality. Note: ‘freedom’ and ‘individuality’ are some of the most dangerous words in existence. They are so easily infused with connotation due to the moral weight they hold. I definitely believe in a form of freedom and individuality. I just think that taken in a case like this the words mean utter fucking bollocks. A more complete entry on this point is possible depending on how arsed I am).

[title quote of Awesome by Bob Hope]

Hah.

 

The man I worship

 

In other words, the man who is born into existence deals first with language; this is a given. He is even caught in it before his birth.

- Jacques Lacan

May contain elements of shameless authoritarianism

So today in my country a woman killed a snatch thief. As expected, there was a token commentator in a paper who stated that instead of lauding such an action, we should stop and pity the snatch thief himself. The thing is, while I definitely agree the existence of a criminal is always indirectly the fault of the society as a whole, I am a massive proponent of the idea that if you do something wrong, you deserve whatever you get. Don't get me wrong, I disagree with those who say that these people are inherently 'evil'.

I just believe in publicized deterrents.

The lack of deterrents was what frustrated me about the British system. It's slightly soul-destroying to know that if someone broke into my house and took my property/threatened me, all they would've gotten was a strong word and a slap on the wrist. Call me an idiot, but I don't think this does anything to deter anyone from doing the same. I'm not saying we should allow people to go on public rampages killing every criminal since they 'deserve' it, I'm saying that while the act is happening the victim should have the priority of action.

In the face of possible comments that I am privileged and thus unable to empathize in any way with the impoverished, I would argue that one of my closest friends used to be in a gang when he was younger. I have no problem with seeing the perpetrator as human, they are. My argument is that though they are, we shouldn't be a fucking soft touch on them. Instead we should look at where the problems really start, and that ultimately lies with society as a whole. We should focus on reducing social inequality, on guaranteeing a good education to people of every background and social status. That is the productive way of reducing crime.

We shouldn't just fucking sit and pity criminals, giving them soft allowances for their actions just because some of us have a guilty conscience. Because at the end of the day that's all pity does; it doesn't alleviate their standard of living, it doesn't make their lives any better, it just enhances our ability to feel good about ourselves because we're able to 'sympathise' with the Other. Bullshit. All this leads to is people thinking they can get away with committing atrocious acts, while leaving their victims to feel helpless and frustrated at their inability to protect their own rights under the eyes of the law.

Get off your fucking high horse I say, and start looking constructively at the situation. 

[picture taken from I'm the Goddamn Batman! or The moral flexibility of the depiction of Batman as defined by the alignment classification of Dungeons and Dragons. Fuckin A.]