Have you seen that before? If you have, you will probably know that this was written about a year ago and it may be old news to you, but, it's the internet. It's still out there and people are still reading it. If you haven't seen that before, it was written by Mark Ruffalo on his official tumblr. You can see it on his tumblr for yourself here.
The reason I am doing a post on it is because so many people have seen it and there are so many things wrong with it that I can't just sit here and let him write an extremely rude, ignorance filled post aimed at people who disagree with him, such as myself. This post may be a bit long, so let's get right into it.
First, if you're not sure what he is responding to, a few months before he posted this, there was something going around the internet where people were responding to the modern feminist movement by taking pictures of themselves holding signs explaining why they were not feminists and posting them on the internet, as seen in the following photos.
Here are a few examples to what Mr. Ruffalo was responding to, though there are plenty more out there if you are interested in looking. In his own words, he thinks all these women are "ignorant little jerks" because they don't agree with him. Strong, independent women who don't believe they are oppressed or weak are jerks, according to him. Not very pro modern feminism if you ask me. But that's just the beginning.
This is the first thing he wrote and he's already lost my respect and shown he's just a typical liberal feminist. The first thing they do when someone disagrees with them is say we have no idea what we're talking about and refuse to explain it to us. I've had several of these people tell me I don't know what a word means, don't understand what something is because my opinion is different from theirs, don't know what feminism, racism, sexism, etc is but have yet to have one single person give me a definition.
They are quick to say we don't know what something is, but refuse to define anything so we can make sure we are on the same page. They prefer to just call names and say we are stupid. But, you know, when someone tells me I don't know what something is just because I don't share their viewpoint and then refuse to explain what they think I'm ignorant of, my first thought is they themselves don't know what it means. If I am in a discussion with someone and want to validate my position, if you don't seem to know what the issue even is, the first thing I am going to do is explain it to you so we can have a rational discussion and both know exactly what we are talking about. I will not say you clearly don't know what the basic foundation of this discussion is and I'm not going to tell you but here's my opinion on it.
Elementary mistake here. He won't define his terms (which you should always do when speaking on a topic this broad), but he'll rant on about how stupid we are for disagreeing with him when he hasn't even explained what it is I'm supposed to disagree with! He didn't define what he meant by feminism so how does he know we disagree with it? This makes me think Mr. Ruffalo doesn't know what feminism is because he won't (can't?) explain it.
So, google it. Great advice. Google is the ultimate authority on things like this because whatever results you get from google are automatically correct. If you don't know what feminism is, google it, because that will clear everything up. That's obviously what Mark Ruffalo did before writing this stupid rant. And I'm not "the liberal babysitter" but I'm going to define my terms anyway because that's what we do in a rational discussion/debate.
That being the case, since Mark uses google to as his resource, I will use it to look up feminism as he suggested so that we all know what we're talking about. Since he suggested we google it, I'm assuming he is basing his rant off of the definition provided by google which is:
Feminism: the advocacy of women's rights on the grounds of political, social, and economic equality to men. Now that we all know what feminism is, let's move on.
Wow, just wow. It's now obvious that Mark Ruffalo doesn't know what feminism is. And he is loudly showing off his ignorance on the matter. I don't see how of the signs the women made saying why they didn't need feminism showed how they were for or against any of these things.
He is saying because I don't believe being cat called is oppression and leads to rape, that I don't want women to have access to birth control and that I don't want domestic violence to be a crime. Because I don't believe we live in a rape culture I am against voting rights for women and I'm not against marital rape. Because I don't appreciate modern day feminism, I support work place harassment.
That is quite the attack. He is making a lot of serious accusations towards a lot of people, including many women. And he is not even talking about what the movement has become, he's talking about what it was when there were real inequality problems such as women not having the right to vote. But that's not what feminism is today. Feminism today is so petty and the problems aren't real. They blow things out of proportion all the time. A woman can be CEO today or President. How is there a war on women? How are they oppressed? Women today just want to be able to walk down the street naked and pretend it's going to stop rape. And that's what feminism today. It seems to me that Mark has this all backwards. In my opinion, to be a modern day feminist and whine because you of the questions you get asked in interviews or female movie stars who make millions of dollars a year saying it's not enough because men make more is an insult to the feminists who came before you. It's an insult to the women who fought for your right to vote and to work outside the home. What they fought for was equal rights, what you're fighting for is entitlement.
As we saw in the definition, feminism is about equality of men and women, not the empowerment of women. And all feminists do nowadays is talk about bad things are for women and you never hear them say anything about the problems men face. Men get raped. Men face sexism. But all feminists care about is how things are for women. And that's why I'm not a feminist. I want equality for both sexes, not entitlement for one. And that doesn't mean I don't think women should vote and I don't appreciate rape crisis centers or support domestic violence as the ignorant Mark Ruffalo would have you believe.
Then, once again, he tells us that we don't know what we're talking about and tries to minimize a whole belief by referring to the pictures as "cutsey signs". You know, there are hundreds of people out there who held "cutsey signs" saying why they needed feminism and posted a picture on the internet but Mr. Ruffalo didn't say anything about them. Apparently, if the signs are pro feminist, they are a good way to spread the word and help women everywhere, but if they are anti-feminist, they are "cutsey".
Mark goes on to say because we don't agree with the liberal idea of feminism that we are spitting in the face of the feminist movement of hundreds of years ago that brought equal rights to women which is complete crap. Just because I disagree with you, doesn't mean I don't know what I'm talking about or that I support violence against women. In fact, it is because I know what feminism is that I disagree with you. Not the other way around.
Ah, there it is. It just wouldn't be a good ignorant liberal argument without the name calling thrown in there somewhere. Good thing he got it in there at the end, though. But, yeah, anyone who dare disagree with him (when he won't even tell us what he's talking about) is an "ignorant little jerk." Well, Mr. Ruffalo, I say you are an ignorant enormous jerk. And I am not saying that because I disagree with you on feminism. I am saying that because of the rude, demeaning, unresearched, idiotic, accusatory way you presented your pathetically weak argument. You intentionally insulted thousands of men and women because they don't agree with your idea of feminism. You just told all of us that because our opinion is different from yours we are insulting, undermining, degrading and spitting on the movement that helped violence against women, that gave us voting rights and jobs. You have told us that because we don't agree with you, we are okay with rape.
It is you, Mark, who is the one who is being insulting, undermining and degrading. You are the ignorant one in this scenario. I don't mind being called a jerk by someone whose opinion of me I couldn't care less about - Mark Ruffalo is not important to me in the slightest. But I do mind you saying that everyone who disagrees with you is undermining rape, sexual assault, marital rape, voting rights, and access to birth control just because we want men and women to be equal and don't think cat calling warrants a public protest.
I'm warning you now that what I'm posting about today is something that has made me very angry, so if you don't want to read a post that seems like there is anger and frustration flowing throughout it, it might be best for you not to read this one. I'm going to try to contain myself but I'm not making any promises because once I get my thoughts flowing I never know what's going to happen.
I don't know if you've ever heard of Nicole Arbour, but she is basically a Jenna Marbles wannabe youtuber. She's pretty irrelevant in the world of youtube and I've only just learned about her existence myself because of a video of hers that has gone viral. This video, as you may or may not have heard about or seen, is entitled Dear Fat People. And it only gets worse from there.
I am going to post the video here, not because I want people to watch it or because I want to give her views, but because, if you choose, you can see what I'm talking about and form your own opinion and I also believe it will help me give a better response and enable you to follow along better. So many people have already seen this video. It has millions of views and, honestly, I believe she is quite pleased with the views it has and I truly believe that at this point, since it has so many views already, not watching it isn't really going to make that much of a difference. What is going to make a difference is speaking out.
Before I dive into everything wrong with what she did in that video, let me tell you something about her. She thinks she is quite the comedian. She is constantly reminding us in her videos, in her bio, on twitter (I only know this because I've seen her everywhere the past few days, not because I follow her, which I don't and won't) that what she does is comedy because she is a comedian. Even if she wasn't a horrific bully that right there would make me dislike her. First off, she knows nothing about comedy or being a comedian. If you have to constantly remind people that you're a comedian, you're doing something wrong. Secondly, she's not funny. If you're not funny, you're not a comedian. And she likes to tell people that if we get offended or don't find her humorous, the problem is that we don't have a sense of humor or get jokes and are trying to kill comedy. It couldn't possibly that she's just not funny. At all. And I know a lot of what is and is not funny is subjective, but if you are at the point where you are calling yourself a comedian, that's saying a lot. People who are comedians don't just wake up one day and decide they are a comedian. It's a career that takes work. People have to learn how to do a comedy routine. They have to learn how to present jokes and what is and is not good and appropriate material. It's a lot of work. You can't just proclaim yourself a comedian because you think you're funny and make stupid youtube videos. A few people here and there might find her horrific "jokes" funny and she may think she's the bees knees but that doesn't make her a comedian and I think it's insulting to real comedians that she considers herself one of them. And, really, if you look around, more people hate her than are entertained by her. Doesn't sound too great for someone who is such an awesome comedian.
So, this post will probably take a while because I found basically every sentence disgusting and drowning in ignorance and I want to address as many of them as I can. And, as will you notice, I am paraphrasing most of the sentences just to show what I am responding to because I don't think it's necessary for me to write her script word for word, especially since I have posted the video itself.
1. Dear fat people....some people are already really mad about this video. What are you going to do fat people? Chase me? It's going to be like f------- Frankenstein.* Not so fast. Zombies have apparently gotten faster....
This is a poor intro for various reasons but the flaws that are most obvious to me is starting out with a statement that she knows is offensive, acknowledges that she knows it's offensive and then, instead of continuing with the point of the video, added insult to injury and mocked the physical abilities of overweight people. Then, she dramatically veered off topic talking about Frankenstein and zombies for no reason whatsoever. So, here's the thing about that, that is an incredibly poor introduction for someone who considers themselves a comedian and I think real comedians would cringe at it. Not just because it was in poor taste, but because its's a very bad way to begin a comedy routine. You don't begin something with an inflammatory statement, tell people you know they are mad, use the very next sentence to mock them and then get distracted and start talking about a TV show. That's not how you engage an audience, that's how you enrage an audience. So far, all you have done is said some cruel words at their expense and then rambled on about nothing, completely disregarding anything your audience may be feeling at the moment. So you're video has barely started and everyone pretty much already hates you and it's your own fault.
2. Fat shaming is not a thing. Fat people made that up. That's the race card with no race. Fat shaming is not a thing? How low does your I.Q. have to be to actually believe that people can't be made to feel ashamed of their weight if they are being mocked and belittled because of it? I'm sure you've heard of body shaming? How does this not fall into that? You are mocking someone because of the way their body is. If you are bullying someone because you think they are fat, that's fat shaming. You are shaming them for being fat. The definition is in the phrase. You can be shamed for anything and everything. All that has to happen for it to be a thing is for someone to do it and Nicole Arbour just proved fat shaming is definitely a thing. And now she brings race into it? There is no reason to compare the two because they are both separate issues.
3. ...That means you're too fat. You should stop eating.
This next point is very important. Never ever tell people to stop eating. Nicole Arbour is the poster child for ignorance of physical health. She is telling people who are overweight that the reason they are overweight is because they eat too much and the way to fix that is to stop eating. She is literally telling them to be skinny, not healthy. I don't care how overweight you are or what the reason for it is, but not eating is the worst advice you can give to anyone about losing weight. You should never stop eating in order to lose weight. That is not how you lose weight. It's actually a very dangerous way to try and lose weight and if Nicole Arbour wasn't an idiot and had done even the tiniest amount of research before uploading her video, she would know that. And it's almost worse that she calls this a joke. Nicole, this "joke" could end up causing people to put themselves in danger. Calling it a joke doesn't make it okay to say. Jokes can be cruel, as you have shown us.
4. There's a race card, a disability card and a gay card because gay people are discriminated against and wrongfully so.
Now she's bringing gay rights into it. She's jumping all over the place, touching on a lot of important, controversial social issues and making little to no sense. Everything she says is grounded in embarrassing ignorance. I don't even know what she means by "a card". She's trying to show she's for equality while belittling and dehumanizing an entire body type. So, according to her, it's not okay to mock and laugh at people because of their sexuality and race, but it's totally okay to do that if they're fat because it's "comedy"? This girl does not get to pick who does and does not get a "card" based on who she decides is discriminated against. This is where we get to see what a hypocrite she is because if someone made a video like this about any of the those types of people she mentioned above, she would think that was mean and in poor taste and absolutely inappropriate. But I say if people like Nicole Arbour are going to treat people like this and talk about them that way because of their weight, they absolutely get a card despite anything this ignorant bully says. She has no idea what she's talking about. She knows nothing about discrimination or health and is proud of it.
5. Are you going to tell the doctor that they're being "mean" and "fat shaming" you when they tell you have heart disease?
Wow. She is literally parading around her stupidity and proud of it. I hardly know where to begin with this. For one thing, no one is accusing doctors of fat shaming. We're accusing her of fat shaming. What she is doing and what doctors do are completely different. I don't even know why she brought them up. It doesn't justify what she's doing at all. If a doctor tells you that you have heart disease, that's not mocking and belittling you because they think you're fat. They are informing you of a health condition. She is mocking and belittle people for being fat. So, Nicole, despite what doctors do, YOU are fat shaming. You aren't informing people they have heart disease after performing a medical exam. You haven't spent years studying in medical school and are therefore qualified to make a diagnosis. You made a video where you dehumanize and viciously mock people for being overweight and then call it satire. So, no, Nicole, I would not say a doctor would be mean or fat shaming by informing someone they have heart disease. I would say you are mean and fat shaming for casting shame on people who are overweight and assume the only possible reason is eating too much food. It's like you never matured past the age of 14.
6. If there's people watching this with a specific health condition, this is not aimed at you. I'm talking about the 35% of North Americans who are obese
Oh, she's not talking about people with specific health conditions? Oh, good! Wow, she really redeemed herself here! I was thinking she was bullying all fat people, even people who have health conditions that cause them to gain weight. But as long as she is only bullying people who are overweight and don't have health conditions, then I am totally fine with that. Because it doesn't matter that you are bullying people, it only matters who you are bullying. If people are fat not because of a health condition it's absolutely okay to bully them.
Nicole, I don't know how else to phrase this except for that you're an idiot. You literally just took a jab at people with heart disease and then in the very next sentence said you weren't talking about them. But you were just aiming your cruel words at people with heart disease! You can't tell why a person is overweight just by looking at them. You are assuming most people are fat because they overeat but if you cared to educate yourself on this just a little bit (and you really should) you would find that most people do not become obese because they are greedy and gluttonous. There are a million things that can cause weight gain and if a big part of it is eating, eating that much food is usually a symptom of a deeper problem that is probably psychological and taking away food won't fix it. So shut up you ignorant jerk before you do some real damage.
7. Big boned isn't a thing. How stupid do I look?
Um, actually Nicole, big boned IS a thing. It's not a medical term and the only difference it would make in weight is a couple of pounds, but it's real. No, it doesn't cause people to be overweight but it absolutely exists. And it's not about how stupid you look, it's about how stupid you actually are. You are literally the least educated person I've seen on physical health and you are doing a video acting like you're some expert. But every word out of your mouth is based in error and narrow minded thinking and your reasoning is extremely weak and dramatically flawed.
8. Yes, shame people who have bad habits until they stop. If we offend you so much that you lose weight, I'm okay with that. Shame people who have bad habits until they stop. Is this girl for real? So, Nicole, if I shame you for your bad habit of bullying people and calling it comedy, will you stop? Didn't think so. You know why? Because as most people understand, shaming the way someone looks doesn't do anything helpful! If you shame people for being fat, that doesn't help them become healthy. In fact, as studies have shown and just basically living on earth, when you shame people for being fat, it actually causes them to become even more unhealthy and gain more weight. You are not helping, you are hurting. Bullying people has never helped anyone get better. Mocking someone is not how you help them stop a certain behavior. And even if someone did lose weight because they were mocked about it so much, I would be concerned. There are healthy and unhealthy ways to lose weight. Even if you are overweight it matters how you lose it and people who are typically shamed and bullied into losing weight do not do it in healthy ways and that's dangerous. You are not helping people be healthy this way. All you are doing is going to make them more unhealthy by either gaining weight or losing it in a way that hazardous to their health. But what do you care as long you don't have to look at their fat, right? You goal should not be to offend people into losing weight. That is disgusting. When people hear others mocking and laughing at them because of their weight, they aren't inspired to lose weight and be healthy. They just hate themselves and think of themselves as garbage. You just said if you bully people so much that they lose weight, not caring how or why it's done as long as they lose weight, then you're okay with that. You shouldn't be okay with that.
9. Obesity is a disease? Yeah, so is being a shopaholic but I don't get a parking pass. Fat people parking spots should at the back of the parking lot. Walk to the door and lose some calories.
Wow, wrong again. Obesity is a disease and being a shopaholic is not. I can barely stand the ignorance of this woman. If you knew anything, you would know that obesity is not just caused by overeating and can't be cured by just burning calories. You are literally hurting people with your ignorance. There are no "fat people" parking spots. There are handicapped parking spots for people who have all sorts of different handicaps. Obesity can be considered a handicap because, chances are, if you are obese, there are probably some other health issues going on there that Nicole, if she wasn't an idiot, would know can't be fixed by not eating and losing calories.
10. ...plus your family and friends crying because they lost you too soon because you needed to have a coke plus fries.
Once again assuming that obesity is caused by nothing more than disregarding healthy eating habits. Once again, showing off how dumb she is.
11. The most obese person got to the front of the line because they said their knees were hurting. I only came an hour early like I was supposed to but you overeat let me help you.
Remember when I said you can't tell why someone is overweight by looking at them? Yeah, that's still true. So, everyone, if you have a health condition, she's not talking to you but if she sees you on the street, she's going to assume you overeat and internally mock and judge you. What a jerk. And then she proceeds to describe their fat in the most inconsiderate, cruel terms she can think of. All in an effort to make people laugh. Ha. Ha.
12. So I wait an extra ten, fifteen, twenty minutes. Now I'm not going to have time to get Starbucks.
You poor, mistreated individual. An extra twenty minutes? No Starbucks? I can't imagine what you must be going through right now. 13. Now I'm getting felt up by security because I'm always selected. Brown people, it's me and you on that.
Yeah, in case you're not enough of a jerk already, why don't you racially profile brown people?
14. So I'm finally in my seat and then the stewardess asks me "hi we have a disabled passenger would you mind switching seats?" And because I'm not an asshole I'm like "oh yes of course." Oh look, it's fat family. Jabba the son sits right beside me.
Wait, how are you not an asshole? This whole video all you have done is be an asshole. You mean you're not an asshole unless the person is fat? Sorry, but that makes you a legitimate asshole. Because now you are picking on fat children. You are the poster child for assholes.
15. His fat was on my lap. It was actually on my lap. I took the handle and I squished it down and said "my seat, your seat." I actually took his fat and pushed it into his seat and I held it. He was fine. He was just fat.
HOW DO YOU KNOW? DID HE GIVE YOU A RECORD OF HIS MEDICAL HISTORY? And this is coming from someone who just said she wasn't an asshole. Man, if this what you're like when you think you're not an asshole, I'd hate to see what you're like when you think you are one.
16. Yes, genetics plays a part in things to a degree, of course.
Oh, please don't get into genetics like you know anything about them. You clearly have no knowledge of this whatsoever and everything you say is just clouded in error. Don't go into genetics. You don't want to give people another reason to think you're an idiot. We have plenty of reasons already. 17. And I'm not saying all this to be an asshole, I'm saying this because your friends should be saying it to you.
No, your friends should not be saying this to you and if they are, they're not your friends. And I don't care why she thinks she's saying it, all she is doing is being an asshole. That's it.
18. The truth is I will actually love you no matter what.
Yeah, actions speak louder than words, asshole. And you just showed us that you won't.
19. I really hope this bomb of truth exploding into your face...will seep into your soul and makes you want to be healthier so we can enjoy you as human beings longer on this planet.
I hate this ending so much. And here's why: this is not a bomb of truth! This is a bomb of cruelty and ignorance. She said no truth whatsoever. All she said in this video is that you're fat because you eat too much and there's no such thing as bullying fat people. What kind of truth is that? And bullying does not make people want to be healthier. It never has and it never will.
I really could have delved more into it and I skipped a lot of things she said. Mostly I just skipped her comparing to fat to things that make no sense and crappy act outs but I think I got the most important things in there.
But now I want to say Nicole is, understandably, receiving a lot of backlash for this hateful video and she is trying to mask what it is really doing and excuse it by calling it comedy. Bullying people for entertainment reasons doesn't make it okay. I don't care if you think it's comedy. This comedy sucks and is inappropriate. Calling it a joke doesn't make it any better. You can't mask atrocious hate by saying you are only hating on people because you care about them. That's a load of crap. What you did in that video was not caring and since we aren't idiots like you are, we're not falling for it.
And then she says she doesn't care what we think or if we are offended but that's not true. Know why? Because she disabled the comments on this video and made another video to tell us all how much she doesn't care that we are offended. But if you take so much time telling people how much you don't care, it kinda seems like you do care. A lot. And you should care. You are trying to entertain an audience, right? Trying to make people laugh? Well if you don't care how your audience is receiving your "comedy" you aren't going to have much of an audience. I hope you continue "not caring" because eventually you'll have to delete your channel because nobody watches it and we won't be subjected to your embarrassing ignorance anymore. And she is learning that disabling comments doesn't keep people from speaking out.
But those are my thoughts and Nicole Arbour and her video, scattered though they may be. I just could not keep silent after seeing something as awful as that. When you put a video on youtube, anyone can see it, including children. And no, she's not responsible for what children see, but she is responsible for bullying them.
*I wanted to address this Frankenstein nonsense. Nicole is clearly an idiot and getting this literary reference wrong doesn't help her case. She tries to mock fat people by saying they run like Frankenstein. But what she would know if she wasn't stupid is that Frankenstein is not the monster. Frankenstein is the doctor who created the monster. So I don't know why she thinks he runs slowly. And his monster is not a zombie. She can't even get the parts where she's trying to be funny right.
So unless you live under a rock, you probably know that 50 Shades of Grey is a big deal right now seeing as the movie is about to come out. Everyone else is writing about it because it's quite controversial so I figured I would too.
*Disclaimer: I have not read any of the books nor do I plan to and I won't be watching the movie. If you feel this disqualifies me from having an opinion, then so be it. But despite not actually having read them, I do know about them and the story contained within its pages. I am not writing this full of ignorance. I will only write about those aspects of the story I know to be true. Do with that what you will.
I have to admit, I know very little about the author of the books, E.L James. I've seen her do a couple of interviews and know that she was inspired to write the 50 Shades of Grey books after reading Twilight by Stephanie Meyer.....that in itself is a warning sign to me not to read 50 Shades of Grey (I will most likely do a post about my feelings for Twilight later).
But the next thing that makes me not want to read it is the synopsis: When literature student
Anastasia Steele goes to interview young entrepreneur Christian Grey,
she encounters a man who is beautiful, brilliant, and intimidating. The
unworldly, innocent Ana is startled to realize she wants this man and,
despite his enigmatic reserve, finds she is desperate to get close to
him. Unable to resist Ana’s quiet beauty, wit, and independent spirit,
Grey admits he wants her, too—but on his own terms.
Shocked yet
thrilled by Grey’s singular erotic tastes, Ana hesitates. For all the
trappings of success—his multinational businesses, his vast wealth, his
loving family—Grey is a man tormented by demons and consumed by the need
to control. When the couple embarks on a daring, passionately physical
affair, Ana discovers Christian Grey’s secrets and explores her own dark
desires. (taken from Goodreads)
To me, that doesn't really sound like porn, just something I'm personally not interested in reading. But the more I learned about it, the more I started thinking: why is anyone reading this? Because the truth is, it's not just porn as so many have deemed it. Sure, there is tons of porn in it, but this book is not just porn. It is much, much worse than porn.
There are a million reasons not to waste your time and money with this piece of garbage and no reasons I can see to actually pick it up and read it.
For starters, it's just bad literature. It's poorly written. Here are some of the actual lines from the book:
"And from a very tiny, underused part of my brain - probably
located at the base of my medulla oblongata near where my subconscious
dwells - comes the thought: He's here to see you."
"The orange juice tastes divine. It's thirst-quenching and refreshing."
"My very small inner goddess sways in a gentle victorious samba."
"I had no idea giving pleasure could be such a turn-on, watching
him writhe subtly with carnal longing. My inner goddess is doing the
merengue with some salsa moves."
"Now I know what all the fuss is about. Two orgasms… coming apart at the seams, like the spin cycle on a washing machine, wow."
"I'm all deer/headlights, moth/flame, bird/snake … and he knows exactly what he's doing to me."
"He's my very own Christian Grey popsicle.'
I don't know about you, but I think these lines are absolutely ridiculous. Completely pathetic. She certainly chooses to use some interesting metaphors and similes to describe certain things. And, really, it just looks like a thesaurus threw up. And this is only a small sampling from a book filled with such lines. These are lines from a bestselling novel. It's amazing what passes for a good book these days. People will read absolutely anything. It's disgusting. But, unfortunately, the crappy writing is the least of the book's problems.
The biggest problem is this piece of filth is a story of abuse and degradation disguised as a love story and people are falling for it.
Christian Grey is exactly the kind of person you do not want to be caught in relationship with, and yet is portrayed as the ideal man. 1. He's a possessive stalker
So the jerk thinks he owns Ana before they are even in a relationship. If this doesn't send up red flags I don't know what does. Nobody cares to mention that he doesn't own her and never will, even in a relationship. He gets mad if she merely speaks to a man that is not him. He tries to control her schedule and when she can and can't see her mother. He tracks her phone, knows where she lives (and Ana isn't sure how he knows this), and shows up at her workplace. She called him from a bar when she was drunk and told him she didn't want to go home and wouldn't share her location. So he did what anyone would do: tracked her phone and came and got her anyway. They are not a couple at this point, nor have they begun their physical relationship. At this point, he is just a creepy stalker.
Later, he actually has the nerve to say to her, "If you were mine, you wouldn't be able to sit down for a week after the stunt you pulled yesterday" (the "stunt" being drinking with her friends). And let me just say that at this point in the story, there has been no talk of BDSM. Nope. He is just threatening to hit her but apparently we are all going to ignore that. I cannot emphasize enough that this stuff is not romantic. It's abusive.
2. He doesn't care about Ana's mental/physical well-being
Ana is a virgin when this story begins. And apparently she is quite naive about sex. Christian Grey doesn't care. He proceeds to have sex with her without preparing her for what is about to happen, without fully explaining what they are about to do and you can bet if she is pretty ignorant of sex, she is even less clueless about BDSM. But he doesn't care. He takes her virginity without a second thought, though she is crying out and it's clearly too rough for her. If he was even a little bit decent, he would care that this was her first time but he's not so he doesn't. He doesn't respect her wishes. If she mentions anything she wants, he dismisses it and makes sure his desires are being met instead. She doesn't want to leave the room? Too bad. Christian does and even if they don't he's going to make advances on her anyway when she clearly doesn't want them. The point is, he will do whatever he wants to Ana whenever, wherever he wants and Ana's feelings and desires couldn't matter less to him. It's all about Christian. He doesn't love her. He loves sex.
3. Rape
Unless you are lying to yourself, you have to admit that Christian rapes Ana. It's just a fact.However you try to slice it, the bottom line is that if your partner says no, they don't want to have sex, and you force it upon them anyway, it's rape. They have a safe word, but that's pretty pointless in this story because Grey ignores it. Which makes it rape. There are literally times she says to him, "No. Please no. I can't do this right now." And does he stop like anyone who is not a rapist would? No. He ignores her and continues because it's what he wants. Try to justify it all you want but the fact of the matter is if someone tells you no, in any way shape or form, if you are aware they don't want to have sex, and you have it with them anyway, you are raping them. I'm talking to you Christian. Even if you believe they want it and just don't know it, it doesn't matter. If they tell you no, that makes it rape. No loopholes here. Some people say "no, it's consensual because there's a contract." And apparently there is. Somewhere near the beginning of their physical relationship, Christian has Ana sign a contract which he says means that he won't do anything to her that she doesn't want. BUT IF YOU IGNORE THE CONTRACT IT'S RAPE. Especially if she verbally says, "no, I can't do this right now" and you do it anyway. How are we okay with this?
4. He's a jerk, plain and simple
I really have a problem with Christian Grey's character being romanticized becauseeven without all the above stuff, he's just a jerk. The way he treats Ana is controlling and unfair. He doesn't see her as a human being, he sees her as an object that he owns. He legit beat her in non-BDSM way, meaning it was just violence and blamed her for not using the safe word and she admits she forgot it in the midst of the violent beating, that means she can't be trusted. Are you kidding me? She broke up with after this beating and then he bought the company she worked for so he could "protect her." He bought the company his ex-girlfriend worked for. He picks her up and lifts her over his shoulder in public when she refused to go with him. This girl has zero choices about anything. He arranges for her birth control without talking to her. What kind of jerk does that?
I could go on and on about Christian and how he's an abusive, possessive stalker, but I think it's been made pretty clear.
The one good thing about all of this is I don't really care what's happening to either of these characters because they aren't real. This is a work of fiction and none of it actually happened. It's a crappy work of fiction that glorifies abuse, but it is fiction nonetheless. The problem is that people are reading this work that misrepresents BDSM and normalizes stalking and abusive relationships. Some are even using it as a sex guide. Something is very wrong with that and that's why I'm writing about it. To have this horrible, horrible, book be so influential that women are looking for a Christian Grey of their own and taking it as a guide is a big, big, problem. To makes things worse, the movie is being released on Valentine's Day. What is wrong with the world? This is not a romantic film!!!! This is a film about a girl stuck in an abusive relationship with a guy that is obsessed with sex and doesn't give a crap about her. It's disgusting!!! Why are we trying to tell people this is a romantic relationship that we should strive for?
I watched an interview with E.L. James and the interviewer mentioned that there was a lot of sex in the book. James thought for a moment and then responded, "well, it's a love story. Isn't that what people do when they're in love?" Oh. My. Gosh. Disgusting. It's clearly not a love story and it's even worse that the author is calling it one. She obviously has no clue what love is or means because apparently, in her mind, being in love = sex. And I guess it means abusive sex to her. She is wrong on so many levels! Sex doesn't equal love. It's not "what people do" when they are in love. Gosh. Sex is supposed to be an act of love, but, unfortunately, it's not always and it's definitely not an act of love in these books. Stop calling it love. There is zero love between the characters in this book. It's porn is what it is.
If you look around online, you can find reason after reason not to read these book, but it's much harder to find reasons why you should. I saw a list of reasons why you should read it and not one of them was about the book. It was basically saying you should read it so you can understand society's obsession with it. Read it so you can understand the parodies and why grey tie sales have gone up. Those are literally the worst reasons I have ever heard for reading a book. Not even people who want you to read can give you any reasons why. They also suggested you read it to get some new ideas for the bedroom. BUT THAT IS EXACTLY WHY YOU SHOULDN'T READ IT!!! It's misleading about BDSM and you don't want to try those things. No, no, no! If you read it, do not try out the methods they use. It's fiction, not a sex guide and it's really important you don't use it as one.
I really hope people will take off their blindfolds and see this story for what it really is. I mean it's so bad, no one really even needs to read it. Your money is better spent elsewhere. Like donating to help women who lived this kind of relationship instead of reading a book that convinces women that being abused is a wonderful thing.
Tom Milsom
Mike Lombardo
Alex Day
Ed Blann
Tom McLean
Josh Macedo
Kelly Montoya
Danny Hooper
Alex Carpenter
Adam Roach
Luke Conard
Corey Vidal
Travis Neumeyer
Alex Odam
Gregory Jackson
Stephen Purcell
Bryon Beaubien
Harry Gilliat
Ricky Richards
Sam Pepper
Jason Viohni Sampson
Neil Johnson
Destery Smith
King Russell
Know any of these names? I know it's a lot, but are any of them familiar? These are all youtubers, some of them very prominent. And all of them have been accused of sexual assault, some by multiple people. And many of these allegations have turned out to be true.
These assaults have been going on for years, but for some reason, the stories are just coming out this year. I've seen videos created about early as March and as late as a week ago. But no matter when the stories came out, even if it was old news, this is something we should never forget and never stop talking about because a good number of these criminals are still walking free! Some not even under investigation and they are still uploading videos on their youtube channels with fans and supporters. It's disgusting.
I know the story about Mike Lombardo happened in 2012. I watched a video made by a girl he was being sexually inappropriate to when she was a minor and the FBI found tons of child pornography on his computer and he is now serving five years in prison. So yay for that, but what about these other guys? This isn't over, people. These guys have been doing this for years to fans, fans-to-friends, and close friends and some of them are still doing it. They must be stopped.
Video about Mike Lombardo
All these stories came to light basically because of Sam Pepper and the "prank" video he made. Don't know what I'm talking about? I don't really want to take the time to explain because I have a lot say so watch this:
Anyway, I don't for one second believe this was "social experiment" as Sam claims. You don't sexually assault people to bring awareness to sexual assault. That's just not how it's done. As you heard if you watched the video (and if you didn't then you may not know) after he came out (after his video was taken down by youtube and people were calling him out on sexual assault) and said it was a "social experiment" many, many, many girls, some very young (13, 14, 15) came forward and said that they had been sexually abused, harassed and assaulted by him on various occasions.
I don't know if you watched any of the testimonials from girls about Sam Pepper that lacigreen linked to in her video, but you really should. Here are a couple of them:
This last video I am leaving as a link because it is much more explicit than these other three, but it is so, so, so, so, so important that these stories are heard and spread around until Sam Pepper and these other abusers are behind bars and even after that because this issue needs to be taken more seriously. Sam Pepper is abusing, and in some cases violently raping underage girls, fans of his. This has to stop. He is a criminal and being a youtube star/celebrity does not excuse him from being a rapist.
So, when all these allegations started coming out about Sam Pepper, other girls came forward with sexual assault allegations against all these other youtubers as well. Tons and tons of stories were coming in, some turned out to be false, but many did not.
Here is a masterpost that was created many of the allegations and responses and was continually updated as more information was discovered:
Take some time to look through that if you want and see what you think.
To me, this was overwhelming as I was learning all this information within a couple of days. Some of these youtubers I subscribed to and really liked and I was shocked to discover all this. I know some of them made responses to these allegations. The ones I have read/watched so far are Alex Day and Luke Conard. They can be found in the masterpost but if you don't feel like searching through it, here you go:
So, as is quite obvious, Alex has had a bit more to say than Luke and I have yet to go through all the other posts. I started with these because they are the two I was most familiar with. If you've read those responses/defenses I suggest you next take a look at this post. It was written by a probation officer who works "almost exclusively" with domestic violence cases and her insight is invaluable in this area. There is one part of her post I want to draw your attention to, and it is where she describes how perpetrators of domestic violence typically defend themselves:
When confronted with the full details of their actions - which
sometimes include my summarizing it back to them, or even, if warranted,
reading it to them from the police report, most of my offenders have
reacted with disgust and repulsion - not at themselves, but at the
suggestion that they would be capable of doing any what I had described.
This is because of a mis perception of their own actions. They tend to
honestly believe that what they are doing was warranted, fair, and not
wrong. I don’t doubt that every person who walks into my office
sincerely believes or believed at one point that what they were doing is
okay. THE BELIEF DOES NOT MAKE IT SO
Most offenders know better than to directly blame the victim in my
office. But these are some examples of some of the things that I’ve
heard:
"People make mistakes."
"There are two sides to every story."
"Not every relationship works."
"I know how terrible [being dumped/abused/heartbroken] feels"
"[Name of victim] is important to me."
"[Their conviction, the fact that they were charged] is confusing" (because they’ve done nothing to warrant it)
"I wish they had said something to me" about the abuse, how the abuse made them feel, etcetera.
They will also dwell on small details (the miscommunications prior to
the event, for example, rather than the assault itself), rationalize
behaviour by claiming that they didn’t understand it was abuse, and
apologizing for ‘misunderstanding’ rather than for ‘doing.’
If you hadn't noticed, pretty much every single one of the things she mentioned can be found between both Luke's and Alex's "apologies". Almost word for word. And if you watched Alex Day's 30-minute video about "his side of the story" there is an excellent video response that I think everyone should see.
The bottom line about these responses is that they are avoiding the real issue, avoiding accepting responsibility and trying to manipulate us, the public, to believe their ignorant innocence. And let's be honest, some of them sound very genuine. But these guys weren't able to manipulate people into sex because they are bad at manipulation.
But if you watch the video above (and I highly suggest you do) it really helps to show how insincere Alex's video is and how is he's definitely not saying he didn't manipulate or coerce people into doing sexual things. I mean, even without this response to Alex, we can see in these peoples' own words that these things happened and their only mistake was they "didn't understand it was wrong" or that the person "didn't want to."
And that really aggravates me. Alex Day and Luke Conard are not the only perpetrators coming out with responses but they are all very similar in nature. Let's talk about that.
None of these men were under 21 when they initially targeted these girls, many of whom were under 16 when the relationships began. And that right there, even if nothing else happened, is enough to get you arrested. You are adults dating children and you don't have to be a genius to know it's wrong and disgusting. But let's pretend for a minute that all these relationships are perfectly consensual and the girls aren't manipulated or pressured into anything. Even in this scenario, if the girl is a minor, she cannot legally give you consent. Which means if she consents and you engage in sexual acts then you are committing statutory rape and you should go to jail. But that's just a hypothetical situation to illustrate that even if these experiences had been consensual, most of you would still be guilty.
It sickens me to hear these men say they didn't realize they were being manipulative or that the girls felt pressured. That's a load of crap. I hope you read the post Alex Day wrote about consent because there are some specific things he wrote in there that I would like to address.
*Warning: As I am taking these passages directly from Alex's post, there will be some language
Until yesterday, I thought that I had had only appropriate,
though occasionally manipulative relationships with women. However, the
model of consent that I followed, not that I specifically thought about
it at the time - was that only “no” meant “no.” That is not what consent
is.
The result of that belief that ‘only no means no’, is that I spent a
long part of my life doing shitty things to good people and barely ever
realising or acknowledging that I was doing the shitty things.
I don't really want to spend the time to pick every little thing apart, but I really feel it's important that everyone see what Alex is saying here.Honestly, the very first sentence makes no sens to me: "I had had only appropriate,
though occasionally manipulative relationships with women". This sentence is contradicting itself. "only appropriate though occasionally manipulative"? It can't be appropriate and manipulative. Manipulative cancels appropriate out. If you had only appropriate relationships, they would never have been manipulative so I don't understand what he means by that.
The next part I want to address is where, in the above paragraph, he states "However, the
model of consent that I followed was that only “no” meant “no.” That is not what consent
is." So basically Alex figured that if a girl clearly didn't want to have sex with him but didn't say the word no, then she was consenting. I'm not buying it. He was an adult at the time of these assaults, he knew they didn't want it and he did it anyway. And now he's admitting that his warped and disgusting view of consent wasn't consent as if saying it was all a misunderstanding makes it okay. That is unacceptable. If you don't know what consent is, you should not be having sex. Period.
"The result of that belief that ‘only no means no’, is that I spent a
long part of my life doing shitty things to good people and barely ever
realising or acknowledging that I was doing the shitty things." Right here, he's basically admitting that he sexually assaulted lots of women. Because he says right here that the result of him ignoring the laws of consent is that I spent a
long part of my life doing shitty things to good people and barely ever
realising or acknowledging that I was doing the shitty things. If you hurt people as a result of ignoring what sexual consent is, then that means you are pressuring people into sexual situations that they don't want to be a part of.
So, really, the first paragraph of his post is an admission of guilt and enough to get him arrested. That's really all we need to see but he goes on, digging his own grave.
In my sexual experiences with people, nobody ever outright told me
“NO, STOP” or pushed me away, or I’d immediately have stopped doing
whatever we were doing
So, to Alex, simply not wanting to do it isn't enough. They need to outright say, "NO, STOP" or push him away for him to take their discomfort/resistance seriously. And notices he phrases it like "I would have immediately stopped doing whatever WE were doing." If the girl is saying "NO, STOP" or pushing you away, what in the world makes you believe that this is something you two are doing together and not something you are forcing upon her?
Either way, Alex, if you are old enough for sex, you are absolutely old enough to know that the absence of a no is not consent. A woman is not an object you can just do anything you want to unless she says no. She must give you permission before anything is done.
But there were clearly times where I would try to initiate
something, because I thought the other person wanted it, and I trusted
my own read of the situation (“they agreed to stay over/they said they
wanted it earlier/etc”) rather than paying attention to what the other
person was doing and saying in that moment. That’s where I massively fucked up.
Again, practically admitting he committed sexual assault. This paragraph makes me seriously angry. He is telling us that he violated these women and trying to make it sound like he just make a little mistake but now knows better for next time. "I would try to initiate
something, because I thought the other person wanted it". There are several things wrong with that sentence. You never, never, never initiate sex because you thinkthe other person wants it. You make sure the other person wants it by askingthem. And, most importantly, you RESPECT THEIR ANSWER! And it's just common sense that we can't judge what other people want, especially if we don't take the time to find it out.
"I trusted
my own read of the situation (“they agreed to stay over/they said they
wanted it earlier/etc”) rather than paying attention to what the other
person was doing and saying in that moment." Agreeing to stay over is not consenting to have sex. Saying earlier that they want it is not consenting to have sex, or saying go ahead whenever you're ready. The part he ignored was the only part that mattered! If the other person does not agree in that moment, then they are not consenting. And if you ignore what they are saying in that moment, it is sexual assault. And by Alex's own words, that's what he did.
"That’s where I massively fucked up." Uh, yeah, to put it lightly. But, in actuality, that's where you committed sexual assault. That's where you violated young women. That's where you did something illegal. That's where you committed a crime that should put you in jail. That's where you pressured young women into sexual situations they were uncomfortable with and emotionally damaged them and some of them are still dealing with it. You can't make it less important or less of a sexual assault by saying, "whoops, my bad."
I know it seems like I'm mostly targeting Alex Day here, but he is the only one who wrote a post on consent to try and defend himself. His view of consent was basically if he could convince himself that the girl wanted it, despite what she said or how she behaved, then that was consent. That is disgusting and just what I would expect someone who commits sexual assault to say.
And just to make something clear here, when talking about consent, because apparently it's confusing to understand that it's only consent if the person agrees in the moment, it doesn't make it consent just because they don't say no. You don't automatically have the right to touch someone sexually unless they tell you not to. You automatically do not have consent. Consent is something you are given by the other person, it's not something you have unless otherwise stated.
For people who don't understand, if someone says they don't want to have sex, they don't want to have sex. End of story. There's no secret desire, they're not saying no because they want you to keep asking them until you wear them down. No is no and that's that. Even if you think the other person wants it but they just don't know it, you leave them alone. Consent isn't wanting it, it's agreeing to it. Even if someone does secretly want it, if they tell you no, you don't have consent. And if you try to convince someone they want it, that's sexual harassment. If you have to convince someone tp have sex with you, that's not consent. And if they agree only after you've been harassing them, that doesn't mean you unlocked their secret desire, it means you pressured and manipulated them until they felt they didn't have a choice anymore.
If someone is uncomfortable with it and clearly doesn't want it, then that means you don't have consent and it's not happening. No matter what you think you know about them. You see, with consent, it doesn't matter what you "know", it doesn't matter what you want, it matters what they tell you. And if you don't pay attention to that and go ahead and do what you wanted to do anyway, that's sexual assault.
One of the other youtubers who were accused is Jason Viohni Sampson and I believe his youtube channel is Veeoneye. When he was 20 he got a 15 year old girl drunk and then had sex with her. As I said before, that's statutory rape. He made a video where he admitted this.
Jason admitting to rape
In this video he is excusing it by saying he was young and immature, he made some mistakes just like everybody does, no one ever told him rape was wrong, blah, blah, blah. If you rape someone, you're not making an honest mistake that anyone would make, you're committing a violent crime which is a conscious decision. Rape is not something you shrug off as a mistake. You sexually violated a child and that "mistake" should put you in prison for life because you are a sex offender and a criminal. I don't believe for one second you didn't know rape was wrong. You were 20 years old. Anyone with half a brain knows it's wrong. No one ever straight out told me rape was wrong either but that's just something you know because you live in a world with people. My parents never sat me down and said, "Rape is wrong." But I didn't need them to. I figured it out on my own. It's not that hard. But even if you don't know it's wrong, that doesn't make you innocent or less guilty of rape. Rape is rape and he deserves to be in jail.
Not understanding consent doesn't make you innocent of assault. And many of these youtubers have come forward saying they made a mistake. No, no you did not "make a mistake." Sexual assault is not a mistake. Rape is not a mistake. It's a crime. You knew what you were doing. You knew you didn't have consent. That's a choice. Don't try to minimize the massive wrong you did by calling it a mistake.
The last thing I want to say is that there are so many victims of the crimes these men committed and many of them were 15 year old girls. This has been going on for years and people are only coming forward this year to tell people what these adult men did to them. And it's because they are afraid. They are afraid of being judged and blamed by us. And I understand why they are afraid because victim shaming is a real thing. And it's awful. We need to be after the men who violated these girls rather than the girls who got violated. They are not to blame for the actions of others. They are not to blame for being sexually assaulted. The one to blame is the one who committed the crime.
Please don't grow silent about this. These men need to be put behind bars where they belong.
I'm sorry that I'm not sorry that I don't like Frozen. I may be the only person in the world who feels this way about it, but, seriously, I don't get all the hype about it. It was worse than your average film.
I don't know about the rest of you, but I had high expectations for this film what with it being referred to as "the greatest Disney film since The Lion King." - The Daily Beast. That's certainly saying something, so why wouldn't I have high expectations? Before I saw it, I hadn't heard a single bad word about it. EVERYONE absolutely loved it. Let It Go was being parodied and covered everyday. My Facebook account was going crazy with everyone saying what a good film it was. My family adores it. I love Disney, so why wouldn't I see it?
I was pretty excited to see it, actually. Really looking forward to it. I think that's the main reason I dislike it so much. I was expecting a really great film and I got Frozen. Frozen is pretty bad for a Disney movie. I mean, I know what Disney is capable of and Frozen isn't up to their standards.
And, though, logically, I know there must be at least one other person out there who doesn't like Frozen, it feels like I'm the only person in the world who missed what made it such an amazing movie. And it's not like I just don't like it. I have my reasons.
1. Plot, Plot, Plot
The plot in Frozen is weak, to say the least. It unfolds so clumsily, hopping from scene to scene as if the filmmakers forgot about the concept of transitions. Every scene is a movie is supposed to advance the plot in some way. If it doesn't advance the plot, it needs to be thrown out and Frozen had several scenes that could have been kept out. It was a sloppy movie and had random action sequences, not because it made sense with the plot, but because the movie needed some action.
2. Who's the Villain, Again?
Did anyone else notice Frozen had no villain song? Think about it. A Disney movie with no villain song! And, no Love is an Open Door does not count even though Kristen Anderson-Lopez and Robert Lopez say it's the villain song disguised as a love song. All that says to me is that "We didn't feel like writing another song so we're just going to put two songs into one." No way is Love is an Open Door a villain song. Even if there are different ways to interpret some of the lines. So, sorry kids. No bad guy song. I'm sorry, but squishing two songs together is just lazy. But, I guess, to be honest, there's no real villain in the movie anyway. And now you're all saying "Of course there is! Prince Hans is the villain, duh!" Um, okay. He's the villain for the last ten minutes of the movie but if was really a villain, there should have been some foreshadowing, some sort of hint, some kind of something leading up to this plot twist! At first, we're led to believe that Elsa's powers are the antagonist of the film, then we start thinking that maybe this goofy duke guy is our villain, but no, just a goofy duke. Then, surprise, it's Hans! At the end of the movie, we get our villain. But it didn't seem planned. It seemed like the movie makers realized they didn't have a villain and had to squeeze one in somewhere. And I'm sure it was the plan the whole time, but it just didn't look that way. It should have been more obvious to us viewers that something was up with Hans.
3. Kristoff
Kristoff is a nice enough characterbut completely unessential to the plot. Usually that means you need to get rid of the character. I mean, all he did was help Anna through a couple of situations, but, let's be honest, if he hadn't been there, she still would have been fine. He served no purpose other than to be the love interest. If they really wanted to keep him in the movie, they should have made his role significant to the over-all plot. As it is, he was just kind of there most of the time.
4. Could You Please Make it a Little More Obvious That Frozen is a Progressive Film?
Hopefully, you caught the sarcasm in that. Frozen is shoving in our faces how progressive they are, making almost no effort with the story and plot just to make sure we all get that they're saying "women don't need no man." Give your audience some credit. We get what you're saying without spelling it out for us. Tangled is a progressive film with a strong female character who can obviously take care of herself but the movie is so much better because they didn't shove it in our face.
5. The Music
Everyone is going absolutely crazy over the music in this film and it's not even that great! Compare the music with any other Disney film and hopefully you'll see what I mean. The music had less effort and just wasn't great. It was just basically pop and it wasn't memorable. Let it Go was the best song in the film, sure, but that's not saying much. Let it Go is overrated and doesn't hold a candle to other Disney songs. Are we really going to say Let it Go is up there with Part of Your World, I Just Can't Wait to Be King and A Whole New World?
6. What is up With Elsa? The character of Elsa is just a big huge mess. I mean, what happened there? So she hurts her sister once when they are kids and the only solution is to lock herself in her room for ten years, completely ignoring her sister's existence? Anyone else think that was a bit dramatic? Her family could have worked on trying to control the power, but, no, they just lock their seven or eight year old daughter in her room and let her deal with it. And then, ten years later, she comes out for the coronation, and is absolutely no better at controlling her power. It's even worse than when she was young, so obviously, living inside her room and ignoring her sister isn't the solution (and where did these powers come from, anyway?) Then stuff happens and she has to run away and build herself an ice castle high up on a mountain. She must be really self absorbed because she didn't even realize she froze over the entire kingdom and when she did find out, she didn't care much. I thought the whole reason she was locking herself away from her sister is that she didn't want to hurt her, but she obviously doesn't mind casting her out into the cold, high up on a mountain where she is likely to freeze to death or sending her to live in a kingdom where she'll freeze to death. She also creates like a ten foot monster to throw her out which could easily have killed her. I don't get the thought process here.
7. Cliché Ending
This movie made me role my eyes at the ending. They were so busy trying not to be cliché and their ending couldn't have been any more cliché. What's more cliché than love being the answer? "Love" will control her power. Elsa literally laughs when she realizes love is the solution as if she's saying, "Duh! Of course it's love! How did I not figure that out?" Which means the whole movie didn't even need to exist. It took her ten years to find out love was the answer. And then it's just "Of course! I guess I didn't have to hide in my room and ignore my sister for ten years, or run away and build myself an ice castle." It's so annoyingly simple you wonder why it took them that long to get it. I guess everyone in the movie is just dumb. And then, get this, her entire life she hasn't had any control over these powers of hers and now that she realizes love is the answer (to what question, I'm not sure) she has perfect control. No practice necessary. Trying hard to control them her whole life with no success. Was she just an unloving person until the realization hit her? She didn't seem very unloving to me. I just don't get it.
Well, those are my main reasons for Frozen being a terrible Disney movie. And, like I said, I know most people don't feel this way, but I honestly can't stand to hear another person say how great it is without putting my opinion out there. It makes me want to tear my hair out to hear people calling it the greatest Disney movie ever. And I really haven't had an opportunity to share my distaste for the film because everyone I know loves it and no one wants to hear a film they love be criticized like this. But now I've done it and getting it off my chest feels nice.
The All Women's Talk website posted an article about why Frozen is the best Disney movie ever made and, I kid you not, these are the reasons:
1. There are tear jerking moments
2. The visuals are perfect
3. Olaf is hilarious
4. Anna is relatable
5. There is a lesson to be learned
6. The plot is engaging
7. The music is catchy
Really? Those sound like reasons you personally like the movie, not why it tops every other Disney movie ever made. If I hadn't said it wasn't talking about Frozen, would you even know? What Disney movie does that list not describe?
I could use this exact same list and apply it to any other Disney film. Watch. This is my argument for why The Lion King is the best Disney movie ever made.
1. There are tear jerking moments
2. The visuals are perfect
3. Timon and Pumbaa are hilarious
4. Simba is relatable
5. There is a lesson to be learned
6. The plot is engaging
7. The music is catchy
So how does this list, when applied to Frozen, make it better than other Disney movie? That's quite a claim, backed up very poorly.
But, anyway, you are free to think what you want, but don't call it the best Disney movie ever made unless you have better reasons why.
Wow, Justin Bieber was arrested. Anyone surprised by this? I'm not. Not one bit. The little tyke was bound to be arrested sooner or later what with the behavior he's been exhibiting recently. It's usually the type of behavior that ends up getting people arrested. Guess he's learning celebrities aren't above the law.
Guys, I'm not a fan of Justin Bieber. Never have been, never will be. I don't follow stories about him because I don't care for him. I only know about this arrest because the internet has been blowing up about it. I don't know if this is his first or second arrest, but I do know he deserved the arrest.
Anyone who drives drunk, resists arrest, drives without a valid license, and is racing his vehicle deserves to be arrested. I don't care how much money they have or how famous they are. Not to mention he was on drugs at the time.
He and his racing partner were driving at least 30 miles above the speed limit in a residential area! That is dangerous and stupid.
So now that we got that covered and we all understand it's a bad thing to do, let's move on to what I'm really talking about: our reaction. That's right, folks. The way we have reacted to this not shocking news is ridiculous.
So this photo has made lot of people angry. Does it make you angry? People are upset he had the guts to compare himself to Michael Jackson. But, is he he really? Does posting a photo of him and MJ mean he's comparing their music? Not really. If anything, he's comparing their release from prison. And everyone's whining about it! They're mad he "compared" himself to Michael Jackson who was being released from prison for charges of child molestation.
Honestly, I think it's silly to be mad about this. Who really cares? This is hardly important.
Here's a picture of his mugshot, though, where he's giving us all a big old grin. Now, I don't want to judge or anything, maybe the kid is just used to smiling in front of a camera and did so without thinking....but, still. It's a mugshot. He is guilty of endangering the lives of others and he's grinning about it.
Bieber does such a great job of showing how not to behave when getting arrested and how to not to pose when getting a mugshot. I wonder what's going through his mind. Is he trying to show us all he doesn't care? Because he absolutely should care and learn a very important from all this.
One of the worst parts of this whole mess is the beliebers. It's really disgusting how they've reacted to this, coming out and vowing to support him no matter what. Look kids, you can be a fan of this dude's music as long as you want, but we do not ever support drunk driving no matter who is doing it! And we don't support people's decisions to be a jerk, either.
There were was a horrible tweet by @justegirlthings "joking'" about how they would always support him even to the day he decided to shoot up a school. Absolutely disgusting. It's bad enough to support someone for driving drunk but when you go as far to even "joke" about supporting them when they shoot up a school, there's a real problem. #FreeBieber was actually a trending topic. You beliebers just don't get it.
Justin Bieber did something wrong. It was very bad and extremely dangerous. We don't want to free people who do those things. We want them to be arrested so they don't kill anyone. I don't care if he's your favorite singer, he's subject to the same laws you and I are and he must abide by them.
Let me put it this way for those of you who still don't get it: If my favorite celebrity did something as stupid as drunk driving, I might still enjoy their talent, but I would definitely not support their decision. I would want them to be arrested and to accept the harsh and rightfully deserved consequences of doing something so dangerous.
You're free to listen to his music, but do you really want to support drunk driving? What does that say about you?
Thank god he's quitting music, though. I've had enough of him. Just wanted to throw that in there.
