Actually It's About Ethics In Dinosaur Cloning

I went to see Jurassic World over the weekend. Overall it was good. I suppose. Honestly, I found it hard to totally enjoy it as a fun action film because it was so ridiculously, annoyingly, stupidly, disappointingly sexist. (Spoilers ahoy!)


Sooo, I had a lot of thoughts.

Ok, this is somewhat unrelated, but FIRST OF ALL, if you need to contact your annoying nephews to warn them that they may be about to be eaten by a rampaging dino-monster and the line is so bad that you can't hear each other when you call them, THEN SEND A FUCKING TEXT.

Anyway.

The first shot of Bryce Dallas Howard as Claire, the super efficient manager of Jurassic World, is the age-old pan upwards on the woman's body, get a good look at her there, in her fancy shoes. It's passed off as her arriving in a lift, while Chris Pratt as Owen is introduced being super cool, mid-session with his trained velociraptors, which he "imprinted" on when they were babies, because he's a werewolf from Twilight.

Claire's a cliché no-nonsense career woman with no time for stinkin' kids! She can't remember how old her nephews are and apparently this is TERRIBLE, even though most of the time I need a few minutes to remember how old *I* am.


Also, Claire somehow manages to keep her fancy high heels on while running through an actual jungle after her nephews, and perhaps most ridiculously, while being chased by a T-Rex. It was unfortunate, because the scene was such a great moment, both for her character and as a callback to Jurassic Park, using the red flare, luring the hero T-Rex out of the enclosure to take care of business, and then running ahead of it in a pair of stupid heels. It should have been a brilliant moment, but all I could think was "TAKE YOUR FUCKING SHOES OFF YOU IDIOT".

My overriding thought the whole way through, (in between the ads for Pandora, Coca Cola and Mercedes) was how much cooler and more interesting it would have been to have Chris Pratt play the uptight buzzkill, while Bryce Dallas Howard was the one fixin' bikes and implausibly training velociraptors. Basically, everything needs to be more like Mad Max: Fury Road.

Jurassic Park had Dr. Ellie Sattler, a paleobotanist and Lex Murphy, a pretty annoying kid, yes, but one who knew her way around 90s tech, two core female leads in the ensemble with some excellent scenes. (Those raptors in the kitchen were legit traumatic to watch as a child and the reflection trick that Lex pulls is still total genius.) Whereas Jurassic World just has Claire barely holding the fort for representation in her dumb shoes, being constantly condescended to. If the beginning of your franchise felt more progressive 22 years ago than this summer's blockbuster addition does, then you're doing something wrong.

There's a very definite uterus subplot too, with Claire's disinterest in kids played as a character flaw (the exchange with her sister, where she says "if I have kids" and Karen irritably corrects her with a curt "WHEN" made me fucking furious, to be quite honest) before she visibly comes around to the idea at the end of the film. Maybe it was meant to be a reference to the original where Sam Neill's Dr. Grant was conflicted over having kids at first, but it felt less like a knowing nod and more like the usual oppressive bullshit that insists women should want to bear children, otherwise they're being selfish and weird. A notion that can fuck right off.

If I were her I would have avoided those kids for seven years too, because they're awful. (Also, their parents are apparently getting divorced, a plotline which serves no purpose other than to have Judy Greer cry in pretty much ALL of her very few scenes.)

It wouldn't have killed them to throw in a brother-sister combo again. All they had to do was change up the ages and there could have been something even approaching gender balance within the main cast. Or, GOD FORBID, TWO SISTERS. GASP. It's not as if a film about sisters is one of the highest grossing releases of all time, or anything.

When they first encounter Owen, Claire has just saved his life, but the boys are all "Owen is amazing let's stick with him!" Their aunt just SHOT A PTERODACTYL IN THE FACE, but he's still the cool one. I hate these kids. And their "Your boyfriend is so badass!" line later on in the film made me want them to be eaten by a velociraptor. The little shitheads.

Now, despite all of this giving out, Jurassic World does have lots of great parts to it. It's extremely exciting to see the camera swoop in over the park that Hammond had envisaged all those years ago, and watching Rexes Indominus and Tyrannosaurus bate the heads off each other was hugely entertaining. Nick from New Girl and C.O. Fischer from Orange Is The New Black were great. Chris Pratt has buckets of charisma (despite all the goddamn mansplaining) but it's really no Jurassic Park. It was always going to be near impossible to live up to a film that we fucking loved as kids and have done for the last twenty-odd years, I mean that's a LOT of expectation and build-up. But there are so many ways it could have been better. And it could have used some Jeff Goldblum, but then again, that's true for most things.

Life finds a bae.

Anyway, I think we can all agree that the real hero of the movie was the dude that ran from the flying dinosaur attack while holding two margaritas. Good hustle, mister.

Yes to Progress

On Friday we get to vote in the Marriage Equality referendum, and I for one CAN NOT WAIT. A Yes vote is the kind, decent and truly right thing to do. I'll be voting yes in the Presidential Age referendum too, because if you can run for the Dáil at 21, then have at it I say, but also because I'm half afraid that otherwise my brain will freak out and I'd somehow accidentally end up voting no on marriage equality by accident.

There is genuinely no good reason to vote no in the Marriage Referendum. Once you strip back the arguments of the No campaigners, it all boils down to old fashioned homophobia and them being squicked out at the idea of gay sex. So many masks have slipped in the last few days of the debate, it's hard not to trip over the fuckers strewn all over the floor.

The No side also seem to think that we've all forgotten the fact that they were vehemently opposed to Civil Partnerships, while they now hold it up as some kind of shining beacon of gay rights, rather than a half-assed piece of legislation that they battled tooth and nail against. They use their carefully chosen group names and surnames to try to deflect the fact that it's the usual handful of well funded ultra-conservatives that routinely battle anything approaching progress in this country. And they have the brass-necked fucking nerve to act the victim when people disagree with them, while they are actively campaigning to deny rights to an already marginalised group of people. It is wildly disrespectful, it's disingenuous and it's dishonest.

So let's show these people that they and their awful opinions are soon to be a thing of past and let's make this a better country for all of our LGBT citizens and their families. A high turnout is crucial to a Yes result, so on Friday get out there and vote.

Let's do this thing and do it right.

VOTE YES.

Then A Hero Comes Along...And It's a Guy. Again.

The Incredible Hulk film was on the other night (the good one, with Edward Norton) and as I was watching it, I started to get a bit annoyed. Not because of the film itself really, but because I started thinking about other superhero reboots and how it seemed like the guys get unlimited tries at a franchise, but if a female superhero film isn't any good or doesn't make money, well, too bad, I guess people just don't like lady superheroes.

I also tried to think of films that actually did feature a female superhero, and got as far as Catwoman and Supergirl before drawing a blank. And of course, we already know that Marvel just think girls want to bone superheroes rather than be one. So, I got to wondering...


I looked up the Wikipedia page for American superhero films and did a little bit of counting on the list of live-action ones. I then sprained my ankle like a fucking genius and had a few days trapped on my couch, so I decided to make an infographic of sorts out of the counting I did, in between episodes of Murder She Wrote and 30 Rock. I didn't count any of the superhero films coming out this year, because none of them have been released yet.

So here we go!

Now, I know that the list I'm working off isn't the most exhaustive one, as it's only American films and only live-action, but it's not a bad barometer for the superhero film genre in general.

Also, there are a lot of terrible movies on the list and a lot direct-to-video stuff (The Crow: Wicked Prayer, anyone? Yeah, didn't think so), but they all still count. And the superhero films coming out this year are all about dudes, apart from X-Men: Days of Future Past, which is only mostly about dudes. Brilliant.


(I know that Wonder Woman is going to be in the Man of Steel sequel in 2016, but let's face it, that film is going to be all about Superman and Batman - oh, hello Batman...AGAIN. If they make her into a love interest I'm going to throw my shoes at the goddamn cinema screen.)

Apparently I Need a Hero

So, in case it hasn't been totally clear before now, I kinda fucking love theme parks. The thing is, I usually end up being so busy trying to get on every rollercoaster as often as possible and generally being overexcited and breaking into a run without quite meaning to, that I invariably don't get around to having a proper look in the park shops until it's half an hour before everything closes.

The day we went to Islands of Adventure while in Florida was no different (apart from the almost passing out from the heat and being wheeled to the backstage medical area bit) and this time there were Harry Potter and superhero shops to be frantic in.

While scuttling around the Marvel shop, intent on getting myself a t-shirt, I realised that getting one with, say, the Captain America shield logo or Thor or Storm on it was looking less and less likely. Because the only lady sized t-shirts were these ones:

The fuck, guys? I mean, yes, Wolverine is a big massive ride and all and The Avengers was basically Arm Fest 2012, but surely it wouldn't kill you to throw in a few options that AREN'T about boning superheroes and basically the cotton equivalent of twirling your fucking hair and giggling like a twat.

Oh wait, they did.

LADIES NIGHT? Are you serious? Invisible Woman, Hellcat, Storm and Spiderwoman are already pretty fucking cool and don't actually need a lame caption that makes them sound like a drunk hen party. The worst part is, I was actually half tempted to get it, as it was the only ladies top in the whole place that wouldn't make the wearer sound like a simpering groupie.


It was doubly annoying because the men's t-shirts were really cool but in my case a man's t-shirt + a big rack is not particularly conducive to not looking like a sack of potatoes. Now, I know there's plenty of decent superhero themed ladies tops online and in other places, but I don't think it was unreasonable of me to expect that I'd be able to get something with Jean Grey or literally any other female hero on it, when the outside of the shop looks like this:


Come on! There's a giant, fuck-off, kickass Rogue cutout on the stupid place and they can't even stick her on a t-shirt? BOO. What's worse, when I was looking for pictures for this post of the tops I saw that evening, I ended up on Marvel's official online merchandise shop, to find that they have all of FOUR different t-shirts for women and uh oh, what's that, little girls who like superheros? Oh, I'm sorry, according to MarvelStore.com YOU DON'T EXIST.


Whatever. I got a Gryffindor top and gloves instead.

Thank You, Youth Defence!

No, really! You're reading that post title 100% correctly. I genuinely and for realz am saying a big fluffy THANK YOU to Youth Defence, the Life Institute, the Mother and Child Campaign, prolifeinfo.ie, the Pro-Life Alliance and all the other similar organisations that don't happen to reside in 60a Capel Street.

You see, for quite some time, I thought it was ridiculous that as a country we just exported the issue of abortion, thanks to Ryanair and our handy proximity to England. However, since Youth Defence's anti-choice poster campaign invaded Dublin city last summer, I've realised that it's completely, unacceptably and fucking infuriatingly ridiculous that we export the issue and pretend like it doesn't happen.

Because of Youth Defence, I'm more vocally and fucking furiously pro-choice than I have ever been in my entire life.

Because of Youth Defence, I attended vigils for Savita Halappanavar on Kildare Street in the bollock-freezing cold last year despite a fractured ankle and a leg encased in a plaster cast.

Because of Youth Defence, I am never, ever in my life going to give my vote to any politician or organisation that would claim to describe themselves as "pro-life". I'd rather unwittingly step barefoot on upturned plugs for a year, than have that happen.

Because of Youth Defence, I now take an interest in their activities, along with those of the Pro Life Campaign, the Iona Institute, EWTN and their assorted cohorts, and revel in taking the unrelenting piss out of them here and writing angry, pro-choice blog posts for Beaut.ie.

Because of Youth Defence, for a while there my walk to and from work included keeping an eye out for and ripping down bright yellow stickers that bore a vapidly smiling shamrock on them as well as the insidious slogan "Proud to be Irish, Proud to be Pro Life".

Because of Youth Defence and their underhanded, manipulative, fuckweasel tactics, I'm planning on making a big-ass go-fuck-yourself sign with which to march at the Action on X rally at 4 o'clock on Saturday the 18th and I hope as many people as possible do too.


So seriously, you guys! Thank you for making me absolutely certain that women should have the right to choose what happens to our bodies, our lives and our mental wellbeing.

Thank you. You unbelievable cunts.

Smiley face!

The Not So Wonderful Witches of Oz

***

HERE BE SPOILERS! 

If you haven't seen Oz The Great and Powerful and don't want to know what happens, then I suggest skipping this post. Have a read of some Sweet Valley High recaps instead. Be grand.

***

I went to see Oz The Great and Powerful last week. I had heard good things about it, but the Bear had heard the opposite, so we decided to go and make our own minds up. Going into it I thought: "This has LOADS of female characters! Hooray!" However, coming out of the cinema that thought had changed to: "Well that had loads of female characters. And they all sucked."


I love witches and things about witches. When I was finishing my graphic design degree in college, I somehow managed to get away with writing a thesis about the portrayal of witches in art and pop culture and how the image of the witch has evolved over time. It was LOADS of fun to write, and despite my design lecturers looking confused as to what the hell I was up to when they asked what my topic was, my History of Art lecturer loved it. Witches are endlessly brilliant and interesting characters to write about.

So I had been really looking forward to seeing how the three witches in Oz would turn out, as SURELY they'd be powerful, independent and wickedly fun to watch, yes? SURELY they won't spend the entire film telling James Franco's con-man wizard Oscar how fucking brilliant he is, be riddled with daddy issues or appear to be utterly useless until a non-magical dude comes along to chance his arm at fixing everything, YES? Oh. Apparently not.

I liked James Franco in it, I know his character is meant to be a cad, a rogue, a bounder and whatnot and I'm entertained by the fact that every time he smiled in this film he looked like he was high as fuck.

Did someone say nachos?

But he was pretty much ALL the female characters talked about for the entire thing and the few times they weren't talking about him, the conversation was all about the previous wizard, i.e. Glinda's father. This film has THREE important and potentially awesome women in it, two of which are sisters and it doesn't even pass the Bechdel Test, a result which is quite frankly pathetic.


So what's the deal with these witches? Well, firstly there's Theodora, played by lovely Mila Kunis, who wears sexy leather pants and immediately falls for Oscar and his rapscallion charm when he initially bumbles his way into the land of Oz. Fair enough, he's got a routine for the pretty ladies, which involves a seemingly infinite supply of cheap music boxes, and it works. But he quickly ditches her and this alone is apparently enough reason for her to abandon all hope and become the green-skinned Wicked Witch of the West. Over a dude she literally JUST MET.

You used to be cool, man.

The film essentially boiled down the backstory of one of the most iconic villains of all time to a bitter, shrieking ex-girlfriend, which just seems incredibly insulting. The whole thing just reeked of "bitches be trippin', AMIRITE?" Fuck that noise.


The second witch in question, Evanora (Theodora's sister) has deceitfully taken over the throne of the Emerald City by killing Glinda's father and convincing the people of Oz that Glinda was responsible, resulting in her being banished and therefore out of Evanora's way. On paper she sounds like an excellent villain, but in reality, Evanora just wasn't that interesting. (Although to be fair, she's probably the least objectionable of the three witches in the film.) She wasn't as wicked as her sister turned out to be, but was sort of bad, without being complex or gripping or anything, probably not helped by the fact that she was so busy banging on about the wizard all the fucking time. To paraphrase Dr. Evil, she's the Diet Coke of evil. Just one calorie, not evil enough.

There was also the fact that it was revealed that she was using a magic necklace to disguise her true appearance, which was that of a hideous old crone, just in case we haven't been beaten over the head with the ugly = bad trope enough in the last while. Her dress was deadly though.


Finally, there was Glinda. Glinda the simpering good witch, who appears to have been instructed by her father's prophecy to wait for a man to come along and claim the throne that should actually be hers by rights. So she does fuck all except hang around spooky graveyards in a dark cloak for reasons that are never actually explained and not bother clearing her name or organising a resistance on her own (which she would be more than capable of, seeing as SHE'S MAGIC and knows the people and terrain, but whatever) until some idiot crashes his hot air balloon into a tornado. Sound.

As my friend Billy pointed out, when she brings Oscar to her fancy castle in order to begin coordinating the rebellion, it looks like she might boot camp his ass into a fighting wizard commander, but instead we get an insipid "oh look, she's falling for him" scene. She knows that Oscar doesn't have any powers like he pretends to and that he lies and tricks his way through life, but hey, it's ok, he should be in charge now because he's sort of good and WE MUST BLINDLY ABIDE BY THE PROPHECY.

Be a good girl and look after the kids instead. Bake a few cakes while you're at it, sure power and agency is for the menfolk, after all.

At this point she's also become a mammy of sorts to the porcelain girl that's been accompanying Oscar on his travels around Oz, offering to tuck her into bed and what have you because maternal women are automatically the good ones and women with no maternal inclinations whatsoever (Evanora, Theodora, me) are villains, obviously.

To me, Glinda just seemed like a fucking sap and ends up little more than a shimmery trophy wife for Oscar at the end, even though she proves herself to be more than a match for Evanora's magic. Boo and indeed hiss.

The producer of the film has been quoted in The Huffington Post saying QUITE SERIOUSLY that:

"...a fairy tale with a male protagonist is very hard to come by. But with the origin story of the Wizard of Oz, here was a fairy tale story with a natural male protagonist. Which is why I knew that this was an idea for a movie that was genuinely worth pursuing."

Because that's exactly what the movie industry is lacking in! STORIES ABOUT MEN! My GOD, when will all those lady bitches in charge of Hollywood WISE UP and realise that dudes are TOTALLY BEING MARGINALISED. I'M SUPER SERIAL YOU GUYS.

Get. To. Fuck.

The thing is, there were plenty of bits that I did like in the film, there were loads of fun little references to the 1939 film, some really well done CGI and the little porcelain girl was actually quite cool for the most part, but all of the above points just bothered me so much that by the time the film was over, the whole thing was decidedly meh.

It mostly just made me wish that they'd make a film version of Wicked, where the witches are actually layered, complex, interesting, funny, smart characters. Someone make that film already, goddammit.

Terms and Conditions Tear Your Ads Apart

In something of a detour from my recent barrage of posts in which I have fun tearing Fifty Shades of Grey a new one, I'm writing a post about Youth Defence. I previously wrote about them and their offensive, obnoxious billboard campaign on Beaut.ie, a post which inspired my friend, V For Vendetta, to do a bit of sleuthing and inform me of a discovery he had made.


The girl in their billboards whose life is supposedly being "torn apart" is from iStockphoto, which you might say is all well and good, until you have a look at their terms and conditions. Namely, their Content License Agreement and the list of prohibited uses.

One of which is as follows:

use or display any Content that features a model or person in a manner (a) that would lead a reasonable person to think that such person uses or personally endorses any business, product, service, cause, association or other endeavour; or (b) except where accompanied by a statement that indicates that the Content is being used for illustrative purposes only and any person depicted in the Content is a model, that depicts such person in a potentially sensitive subject matter, including, but not limited to mental and physical health issues, social issues, sexual or implied sexual activity or preferences, substance abuse, crime, physical or mental abuse or ailments, or any other subject matter that would be reasonably likely to be offensive or unflattering to any person reflected in the Content, unless the Content itself clearly and undisputedly reflects the model or person in such potentially sensitive subject matter in which case the Content may be used or displayed in a manner that portrays the model or person in the same context and to the same degree depicted in the Content itself

I don't know about you, but I certainly don't see a disclaimer anywhere on that billboard.

So V For Vendetta contacted the photographer to let him know that his work was being used in a way that violated iStockphoto's terms and conditions, as well as the rights of his model. The photographer replied, thanking him and agreed that his work should not be used in this manner, also saying that he would get in touch with iStockphoto to see what they could do about the situation.

This news in turn inspired the Bear and I to get all Jessica Fletcher on the other two ads being paraded around the city. So here's what we found.


Well hello you! Yet another iStock image, also violating the site's terms and conditions. There was no contact information for the photographer in this case, so I contacted iStock directly to let them know and got this reply:

Thank you for contacting us.

Please know that we take the rights of our contributors and their models very seriously. We are aware of this situation and are currently working on it. We sincerely appreciate you taking the time to send this our way.

It was signed off by a woman from a department called "Compliance Enforcement", which I LOVE the sound of. In my head she goes around kicking doors down and shouting "COMPLY OR DIE, BITCHES!" at nefarious types. Anyway, this leaves the third and final ad. And guess what? We found that photo too!


In this case, the photo in question is the work of an award-winning Swedish photographer and scientist called Lennart Nilsson. Here's an interesting fact about his work that appears on his Wikipedia page:

Although claiming to show the living fetus, Nilsson actually photographed aborted material obtained from women who terminated their pregnancies under Swedish law. Working with dead embryos allowed Nilsson to experiment with lighting, background and positions, such as placing the thumb into the fetus’ mouth. But the origin of the pictures was rarely mentioned, even by 'pro-life' activists, who in the 1970s appropriated these icons.

It doesn't necessarily mean that the photo above is from a terminated pregnancy, but in fairness, it makes it a pretty strong possibility. We got in touch with the Scandanavian photo agency that handles the rights and sale of Nilsson's work, with a link to the above ad using his photo and here's the reply we got:

Thank you very much for sharing this information with us
I look into this and will contact the company because we have not made this sales.

Shazam, motherfuckers!

Of course, we haven't heard anything since, as it's between the photo agencies and Youth Defence now. At the very least, I imagine that YD are going to get landed with a massive bill for this, and the Nilsson photo in particular, as I somehow doubt that the work of a world famous photographer comes cheap. I know that they're a ridiculously well funded group, what with their connections to big anti-choice entities in the US, but the fact that we might have managed to cost them a chunk of their money while they peddle misinformation and lies makes me very happy indeed.

The Walking Women

***

AOOGA! SPOILER ALERT! 

If you haven't already seen series one and two of The Walking Dead and don't want it ruined for you then I suggest you skip this post. There's other ones there in the circles on the sidebar a bit further down that are about girls jumping out of cakes and Catwoman and fashion in Star Trek and all kinds of other stuff. Try some of those instead!

***

As you probably know by now, I quite enjoy a zombie tale or two, even though they scare the actual pants off me. I've been voraciously tearing my way through The Walking Dead comic series, whispering "Oh noooo!" to myself and quietly whimpering in fear as I turn the next page. If it was a pop-up book I'd probably have a heart attack. So naturally, the Bear and I watched the first two seasons of the TV show. Which I also enjoyed quite a lot, and yet there was something bothering me. Something other than Carl aka The Dumbest Child in the World aka "For Fuck's SAKE Carl!", who, incidentally is actually kind of cool and not the least bit annoying in the comic.


The something in question here is the bloody rampant sexism in the show. It's something that creeps into the comics too, which I have to say I didn't really notice while reading, but looking back on it there are quite a few instances of patriarchal bullshit. Such as Glenn remarking that there's "not that many women to go around". What the hell, Glenn? Women to go around? The women you speak of are participants in surviving the goddamn zombie apocalypse, just like you, not inanimate supplies or tins of beans to be distributed amongst the menfolk, you fuck. And I actually like Glenn. Most of the time. Although in the TV show, he did ask Dale if all the (understandably frazzled - what with the impending threat of zombies wanting to eat their faces) women were on their period at the same time, because, y'know, bitches be crazy and all.

Shut up Glenn.

Among those women survivors is Lori Grimes, wife of group leader Rick and mother to "For Fuck's SAKE Carl!". Comic book Lori undergoes something of a transformation, as at first she looks to be decidedly Native American but eventually morphs into a more Caucasian version of herself.


She's Rick's voice of reason and while she's not a particularly stand out character, she's not even half as awful as TV show Lori. TV show Lori is nagging, self righteous and generally an allstar pain in the hole. She gets up in everyone else's business and berates Andrea for having the cheek to not do all the washing up, childminding and laundry with all the other wimmin and wanting to guard the camp and shoot zombies in the face. Because it's not like EVERY DAMN PERSON in the camp should be learning to defend themselves and evenly dividing the group's duties between them. Oh no, according to Lori "the men can handle it anyway, they don’t need you". Go fuck yourself, Lori.


Andrea's a total badass in the comic books. She becomes the best shot in the group and keeps them all safe in her role as a superhero sniper. However, in the TV show, she has Dale confiscate her gun because he's decided she can't be trusted not to top herself, while For Fuck's Sake Carl!, a ten year old idiot, is allowed to carry a gun. She has angry sex with Shane, who is the kind of person who tried to rape Lori earlier on in the first series and then she shoots Darryl after mistaking him for a zombie. OH THAT SILLY WOMAN.

Further instances of the TV show females being lame include Carol clinging to her abusive husband and once he's killed off, clinging onto Darryl like a barnacle with very short grey hair and opts out of making any sort of decision when the group is trying to vote on what to do with their prisoner. Maggie entered the show swinging a baseball bat at the undead while galloping along on horseback, like a zombie-slaying superstar and now she's a hysterical mess, flinging Lori's morning after pills at her in in a rage shouting "Here's your abortion pills!" as part of a grim little pro-life slant. I mean, yes, she and Glenn got jumped by an undead bastard while on their run to the chemist, but that outburst and subsequent storyline (Rick being super angry at Lori for even considering the abortion attempt) rang pro-life to me. And if a zombie apocalypse isn't reason enough not to go through with a pregnancy then I'm fucked if I know what is.

There IS a ray of hope though. A katana-wielding, bandana-wearing, stone cold ass-kicking ray of hope. When Andrea was scrambling through the woods in the finale of the second series, she was saved from being an imminent zombie snack (zombie bag of Tayto, perhaps) by a mysterious hooded figure leading two armless, jawless walkers with chains around their necks. The hooded figure in question here is Michonne, and her entrance is super exciting, as she and Andrea are easily the strongest female characters in the comic series.


Danai Gurira has been cast in the role, so hopefully she'll be able to pull off Michonne's immesurably cool and devastating approach to zombie chopping and generally taking care of business.

Because this here on the left is how awesome Michonne is.

Somehow I don't see Lori lecturing Michonne on how she's supposed to be washing socks with her and Carol instead being amazing at decaptitating walkers. All that being said, I really do enjoy the show, the zombies are brilliantly done and spectacularly scary and I do like the fact that the storyline veers away from the comics from time to time, otherwise there'd be no surprises for the readers. I just wish the writers would cop the fuck on when it comes to the female characters and with Michonne and her giant can of whoop-ass, hopefully that's what will happen.

Stop SOPA Ireland

An Open Letter to Sean Sherlock TD 
Courtesy of Boob.ie and Pop Culture Monster

Dear Mr Sherlock,

Further to the recent debate on January 31st at Dáil Éireann, we are presenting to you this letter as an appeal for you to reconsider your Statutory Instrument on Copyright in Ireland.

Before we go any further we are not what you have deemed us to be. We are not “keyboard warriors”, shouting blindly that any new proposed copyright law goes straight to the bin, because we don’t feel that way. We are concerned citizens of Ireland. And we feel we are not being treated as such.

Stating that the Statutory Instrument would be signed regardless of the 80,000 signatures from the general public in opposition and regardless of the issues and concerns voiced by your peers in office at today’s debate is demoralising. It forces us to believe that our voices, the voices of the people who put you where you are today, are not being heard. It forces us to believe that we are being ignored. It forces us to believe that you simply do not care. Surely the outcome of a Dáil debate, and subsequent vote, should determine whether or not the subject either goes forward for signing, back to the drawing board, or into the bin.

Let me assure you that we are all for protecting copyrighted material. We believe that all copyright holders should be compensated for the work and effort put into making their material. What we don’t believe in, however, is the manner in which this law is being proposed and put through. It’s undemocratic to believe using secondary legislation loopholes to push through a bill that is the best way to go about this.

We are not opposed to changing legislation. What we are opposed to is the vague wording of the legislation, leaving the net cast far too wide for interpretation and abuse.

As Junior Minister for Jobs, Enterprise, Innovation and Research it might be advisable, Mr Sherlock, to put some real research into a new law. Find out how to narrow it, so that situations where it is open to abuse cannot arise. You assured us today that despite the vague wording, it would not be abused. My question to you is, why word it so that it can be abused, and therefore have to assure us it will not? Why not rather reword it so that it cannot and therefore will not be abused?

And by doing so you might just implement a law that can be followed, enforced and adhered to in the manner for which it was intended. If that is achieved then perhaps it would help, instead of hinder (or indeed terminate) the creation of employment in this country. Particularly in a sector that is world renowned in providing highly qualified and innovative people.

There’s the word, Minister. Innovation. Let’s be innovative about this.

We are not calling for the copyright laws to remain the way they are, as they are presently being changed regardless of your Statutory Instrument. There is no point denying that the copyright laws currently in place have to change.

Simply stating that a party can apply for a court injunction if they feel an infringement has taken place will cause nothing more than a backlog in the courts, major costs to the tax payer and a fear that anyone with a blog, forum or website will be subject to attack from a party with deeper pockets.

Will a website be taken down for linking to a video on YouTube if the copyright holder seeks an injunction against YouTube? With this new legislation amendment, linking to copyright infringement is no less a crime than handling a stolen television set.

Will a website be blocked for using a freely available picture? If the main social players on the internet such as Google and YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter decide not to get involved in such disputes, will it block their sites from being used by anyone in Ireland? Will it block our websites, blogs, forums and other media from partnering for advertising or linking within their platforms?

Or will they just write off their investment in this country and move their headquarters to a state that isn’t run by corporate lobbyists, taking their jobs with them?

The fallout from DELL leaving under the old government was devastating. The fallout from the potentially dangerous legislation you’re proposing to implement is inconceivable. No doubt, it would end with you and your party being disgraced.

Many websites are under threat from this new legislation. Young websites that were established by people trying to make a way for themselves; people hoping to gain employment in national or international media; and people hoping to become self-employed and self-reliant. Websites that at this time do not have advertising budgets and rely on the free media of Facebook, Twitter, and a host of other social networking websites.

You mentioned a national online forum today (boards.ie) who have stated that they will not be able to support themselves in legal fees should they be taken to court under your new legislation. It’s not just boards.ie who could be forced to shut down, give up and walk away or start from scratch. It’s potentially millions of website owners. With your new legislation, you are affecting millions of Internet users. You are threatening millions of people’s livelihoods and sources of income.

This legislation has to have its wording tightened, because to put it bluntly Minister, it feels like this is EMI using you to push this through. After all, Eircom currently blocks its customers from using The Pirate Bay. So targeting UPC is the next way to go, we suppose.

If the law is there to protect the big companies from losing revenue due to illegal downloading, then by all means state that outright in the wording of the legislation.

We implore you bring it back to the drawing board, research it and come up with something that is concise and not so wide open to interpretation.

What we need now is for you to wait, patiently. The new copyright laws are being drawn up. Wait for them. And integrate a narrower and more focused version of your Statutory Instrument that doesn’t curb and limit freedom on the Internet; that won’t force businesses to take themselves elsewhere; that won’t limit creativity; and that won’t give rights of censorship by large bull-headed businesses.

We who operate on the internet on a daily basis understand how it works. We understand what’s frowned upon and what is downright illegal.

We understand that most of those who create original content want credit over compensation. Those lobbying you for this law are only concerned with the compensation, and that’s business, that’s fair enough. It shouldn’t however, prevent the (largely) self policing internet from doing what it does best - providing a platform for millions to express creativity and even free advertising for the big businesses in some cases. (Surely they don’t want to have their cake and eat it too?)

It’s those who do not understand the differences that this law is required for. Sad that it’s the same people who were slow to understand and grasp how much the internet would change their business. Sad that instead of embracing it and trying to understand how to integrate it into their business, they want to try and stop it altogether.

The videogame industry is constantly coming up with ways to combat piracy, and they’re beginning to work. But EMI et al, don’t need us to point that out to them. After all, their material is licensed on thousands of video game titles worldwide.

Perhaps if the record companies were proactive in their fight against piracy they might just discover an innovative way of doing so themselves.

And there that word is again, Minister.

Minister, we are a group of concerned bloggers, writers, artists, columnists and professionals who understand the need for greater copyright protection, but are fearful of the cloak and dagger way you seem to be attempting to implement it.

Protection of the people is the job of the government, something our Taoiseach has no problem telling us when there’s more bad financial news on the way. Protecting business is another, and we get that.

It just needs to be handled a lot better than it has been.

In closing, Mr Sherlock, what we’re looking for is full disclosure and due process all the way. You and your colleagues in government were elected for change and this behaviour is something that reeks of your predecessors. What we want is protection for the small operator and not just for the big business, who can afford their protection regardless of the cost or effort.

We don’t expect you to answer or even acknowledge this letter Mr Sherlock, but we do call on you to acknowledge that there are people at your disposal who can help you with this law and legislation.

Please don’t do what we fear you’re doing, and run this through thinking you know what you’re at.

Sincerely,

Ireland’s Internet Community

Puts The Sexism Into Tea

There's a certain ad campaign of late that manages to instill a huge amount of annoyance and anger in me. It's not Ivan Answer (this time) and it's not even that awful, insipid "I love shopping.ie" radio jingle, even though that does send me into a panicked lunge for the mute button with a speed that could only be matched by my haste for the remote when the Hollyoaks theme tune starts.

But I digress somewhat. It's the most recent Lyons Tea tv and radio ads. Their whole "Richer Talk" campaign was all fine by me up until the point that they decided to air ads with such a passive-aggressively misogynist undercurrent that every encounter with them results in me thinking "FUCK YOU, LYONS TEA. FUCK YOU RIGHT IN THE EAR".



This is one of the tv ads in question. There's another one where the HILARIOUS Dad character makes a crack about his wife having the utter cheek to spend money on her hair. HA HA HA. Sure don't women only care about shoes and hair anyway! And if someone does decide to get her hair done, then OF COURSE she should be undermined in front of her child for doing so. HA HA FUCKING HA.

Fuckface.

Even worse is the radio ad that begins with Hilaro-Dad reading Mary Had A Little Lamb to his daughter, which prompts him to wistfully lament the fact that his white Ireland away jersey is now pink because "your mother" put it in the wash with red socks. Hey Mr. Dad, here's a revolutionary thought: why don't you do your own fucking washing in the first place and maybe then you won't be so traumatised you COCK.

In short, fuck you Lyons Tea Man.

Gotham City Girls

When Eli Mordino pointed out earlier today on Twitter that the Joker in the poster for the upcoming Batman Live stage show was channeling a serious Caesar Romero vibe, it reminded me that I had been meaning to investigate Catwoman's costume for the same event. You're probably aware by now that I'm pretty gay for this particular slinky villain, what with the big rambling post I've previously written, which detailed all her different incarnations since her first appearance. So naturally, I had to know what this production went for, especially after being so very underwhelmed by the recent image of Anne Hathaway's costume from The Dark Knight Rises.

Ehh, Anne, I don't know if you realise this, but your costume is seriously lacking a pair of kitty ears and y'know, A GENERAL AIR OF AWESOMENESS.

However, I was rather glad to see that the live tour has gone for the current comic book outfit of a shiny black catsuit and a pair of feline goggles, giving the look a tiny tasty lick of steampunk.

While I was happy enough with Catwoman, I'm not quite sold on Poison Ivy's costume, in that she looks more like a vaguely garden-themed stripper rather than an alluring, albeit demented scientist/eco-terrorist with dominion over all plant life.

That being said, however nonplussed I might have been with Poison Ivy, the absolute STATE they made of Harley Quinn's costume is nothing short of disastrous. Allow me to remind you how brilliant and amazing and kickass Harley Quinn usually looks.

Now, have a look at the manky, monstrous, Pippi Longstocking-runs-away-with-the-circus atrocity they've inflicted on her for the live show:

I hate the pigtails, I hate the stupid skirt and I hate that she's not all red and black or wearing her jester hat. In essence, I've got a bag full of NO especially reserved for this thing. Just...no. NO!

Tanora No More-a

Things are afoot in the Irish soft drinks industry. Very bad things. Club Orange's dopey boobfest ad has outraged and irritated everyone with at least the smallest ounce of cop on, but there's much more sinister developments that have gotten underway. It began as a rumour. Rumblings of recipe changes. Worries aired on Twitter that something wasn't quite right. However, the worst has indeed happened.

TANORA HAVE CHANGED THEIR RECIPE AND RUINED IT FOREVER.

I've previously extolled the virtues of Tanora and the very special association it has with Christmas for everyone in my family back home in Waterford. However, due to pernickety EU regulations and some top class fuckwittery, they've removed the artificial colouring that gave it it's tangerine power, rendering it useless and manky and reportedly no longer tasting like happiness, Yuletide or otherwise. I say reportedly as I haven't tasted it myself (nor do I have any intention to) but I do have it on good authority from cousins who know what they're talking about. Cousins who have since developed a thousand yard stare at the mere mention of new Tanora. One of them gravely warned me not to drink the new concoction as it will (and I QUOTE): "ruin Christmas for you". Those are not words to be taken lightly, people. Not one little bit.

Not content with having decimated the drink itself, they've also gone and fucked with the packaging, making it look like some nasty brand of Irn Bru from the eighties. The only good thing about the new label is that it distinguishes the classic delicious drink from the new muck.

The new one is on the left by the way, in case you're not familiar. And now you never will be. Waaah! Also, the old bottle shown here was swiftly added to the trolley seconds after this picture was taken. Obviously.

Members of my family are stalking the aisles of supermarkets across the county and buying up any stray remaining bottles of REAL Tanora in desperation. My mother currently has seven two-litre bottles of it stashed away at home for Christmas (seriously), seeing as it'll be the last artificially tangerine-flavoured one we will ever have.

My aunt actually rang them to complain. Furious Facebook users have descended on the Tanora fan page, reporting that the standard response to their complaints is:

"Tanora - Cork’s favourite Tangerine-flavoured sparkling drink – has recently been enhanced to make it 100% natural. As part of this, an artificial colouring has been replaced by a natural variant."

Yeah, if by "enhanced" you mean "pooed in". BASTARDS.

So. To summarise:



Not cool, guys. Not cool AT ALL.

Tick Tock Toe

The footpaths round our way have taken on the appearance of a spraypainted game of noughts and crosses of late. I say noughts and crosses only because I can't find a satisfactory way of either punctuating or spelling exs and ohs/x's and o's/xes and os. (See? None of them look right.) I'm presuming it's all part of the "sealing up every little thing in the ground that could possibly be opened" process in anticipation of Herself and the visit that's going to make getting anywhere eleven times more difficult for everyone next week. The Bear wisely suggested that they're nervously checking out all the sewers as a preventative measure against Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles.

Over on the Southside, the area around Grafton and Nassau Street seems to be playing host to some manner of footpath Cluedo.


Twitchy Gardaí have been hovering two by two around the Holy Mary blue gates of the Garden of Remembrance for the last two weeks, with the place eventually being closed altogether "until further notice". She's swinging by my place of work on Wednesday, so I'm rather interested to see how much of the paranoid security measures I'll encounter when in her general vicinity. Personally I'm looking forward to it all being over with and her safely ensconced back in her fancy palace so everyone can chill the fuck out.

Limp Biscuits

Is everyone else as bewildered by the new Jacob's Mallows ad as I am? It kicks off with the fuzzy and familiar "Kimberly, Mikado and Coconut Creams" jingle, but before it ever gets a chance to lull the unsuspecting viewer into a false sense of security, we're assaulted with some sort of R&B auto tune disaster and a watered down Pussycat Doll rejects crashing the Mad Hatter's Tea-Party acid trip. Watch it below, if you dare.



It's bizarre. I'm all for rebranding and trying out a new approach for something, but personifying biscuits that are automatically associated with licking and sucking (easy, now) as a tacky girlband just feels incredibly inappropriate.

Genuine biscuit girls in your area, call now on 1800 69 69 69.

The whole Alice In Wonderland schtick falls flat and anyway it's been done to death at this stage. Even Harvey Norman ads at the beginning of the month were beating us over the head with Mad March Hare rubbish, and back in 2004 Gwen Stefani did it infinitely better in her What You Waiting For? music video. Their costumes, which are meant to represent their respective biscuits have the look of a lame Katy Perry rip-off, and just wait till you hear about their oh-so-diverse personalites. Apparently "Kim" is spicy and fun, "Mika" is naughty and mischievous and "Coco" is ditzy and fluffy. Reader, I'll rely on you to roll your eyes here for me, because if I roll mine any more they're going to clean fall out of my head at this rate.

Gwen and Katy give a far superior cutesy Wonderland vibe.

Kim, Mika and Coco even have a Facebook page where they inform us that they live together, which is all a bit Biscuit Girls of the Playboy Mansion, or y'know, a brothel run by Mr. Kipling. All their flirty winking and finger licking comes off as rather cheap and desperate, and I know ads are always using sex and tits to flog stuff, but some just pull it off (har har) better than others, like this Virgin Airlines ad.

Blow-job faces a go-go. Or as the Bear more succinctly put it when I showed him these photos, "insert cock here".

I honestly don't know what Jacob's were thinking. I know it's all meant to be a bit of light-hearted fun, but I find it jarring and unsuitable for what's been a family-favourite style product for as long as I can remember. There's also an excruciating two and a half minute music video that's an extended version of the ad, containing such lyrical dynamite as "I'm hip, I'm hot, I'm everything you're not" and "I'm a naughty girl and it's making me hot". You can watch it here, but you probably shouldn't, unless you're the type of person who gets a kick out of burning themselves with candle wax or poking their bruises. You have been warned.