Let's mix things upa little...
So, if you’re a fan of my massive long-form blogs, I’m sorry. I hope you like the new approach starting tomorrow.
Today’s blog post is going to diverge far away from my last blog post’s topic matter. Instead of talking about personal trips and so forth, I’m going to dive directly into a couple of political, religious and cultural topics today.
Let us begin with the small fries, eh? Cultural topics, it is!
Now, most people out there are aware of Mel Gibson’s… issues.
Tug on your beard if you're crazy! đ
Tooootally sober.
This, combined with subtle anti-Semitic shadings in the Passion of the Christ (which is a movie I actually like, btw,) didn’t shine well on Mel Gibson. He subsequently confessed and apologized, but late night jokes and online satire would follow for months. Not much longer than that, Gibson dropped off the scandal map for a while.
That is until a recent gaff that just recently exploded in his face. He’s been known for some time to have an anger streak, and relationship problems. That is more evident now than ever as a recording of an angry tirade involving heavy cursing, misogynist language and racial slurs has broken loose on the internet. I won’t repeat what he said. It’s too disgusting to sully my blog post with. I will, however provide a link for the curious. You can listen to a part of the recordings HERE.
Back in Mr. Gibson’s heyday it would have been pretty darn hard to imagine This Sort of Thing. I love the guys movies, and he has some absolute classics under his belt: Braveheart, the Patriot, Mad Max, The Passion of the Christ (director) and believe it or not, his voice acting in Chicken Run and Pocahontas. The fact that he’s turned out to be just this side of a Ku Klux Klan member is very disappointing. I personally don’t want to have anything to do with his future movies, and thankfully having to pass up something good is looking unlikely now that his Talent Agent Dropped Him Like He’s Hot.
The sad thing is, there’s never only one bad apple in a basket. Mel Gibson is just the guy we know about. I think I would be shocked to find out just who else shares these sorts of views in Hollywood; who’s movies I’m enjoying that doesn’t deserve the money I pay for a theater ticket. In a way, I hope I never have to find out, though they deserve their just rewards, even as Gibson is facing his.
Time to talk gaming. Yeah, gaming is cultural. Don’t give me that look!
Woo!
Besides, I’m not talking about individual games, I’m talking about gaming as a whole. And as is strangely often the case, we’re going to talk about violence in video games.
Why rehash the topic, you may ask? Because I was inspired to do so by an ingeniously titled article over at IGN written by Michael Thompson, âThe Case for More Violent Games.â Now does that title catch your attention or what? When I first read that I was intrigued, curious and somewhat flabbergasted. We live in a world of Gears of War, Grand Theft Auto and Manhunt, after all. Why would we need more violent video game? How could one possible even go about doing such a thing?
Pumpkin Gore!
What I actually found in the article was actually quite fascinating, and I suggest you read it in detail. Thompson isn’t asking for more blood, more gore, or higher body counts. From the way he describes such displays of violent acts, it’s not unlike being the bowling ball to the pins. You just knock them down. There is no guilt. No terror, no fear, no driving purpose or tearing of emotion and uncertainty. Death and violence in most games today mean nothing. That is not violence. When he says he wants more violent video games, he means that he wants violence that matters.
Yes, but does it MEAN anything?
One particular portion of the article that really hit me comes latter on where he describes the first time he ever killed a chicken to eat it. The way he describes the act of killing the creature, the process leading up t the moment, is tense, disturbing and emotional. He was just describing the action and it was amazing, and perhaps on some level terrifying. He merely killed a chicken. This is something that happens every day across the world in villages and in factories, and yet it was intense and impacting. He asks why video game violence can’t tap into that emotional core of killing. If gaming is an art form, he asks, then why doesn’t it plumb the depths of the emotional consequences of the one act gaming is most known for.
She looks like she's having fun. Uh, good for her?
His description of killing that chicken resonated with me. You see, I too have killed a chicken. It was not the deliberate process that Thompson described. It was in many ways an accident. And yet that event had a similar impact on me and my views of killing and death and, ironically, life.
It was night time already, and most of the hens and roosters were packed away inside the little coop that sits next to our garage. It was the middle of summer, and so we knew that predators were out and about, hunting for easy meals. Any chicken left outside of the coop would almost certainly not be there the next morning. Aware of this, we patrolled the fenced area around the coop to make sure all of the wandering hens had indeed found their way indoors. Whenever we found a chicken outside of the fence, we had to go and try to catch it and throw it back inside.
The thing about catching chickens is that it is easier said than done, especially when they are outside of the fence. It is easiest to corner them somewhere between the fence and the garage, but while the junk on another side makes things difficult it isn’t so hard to catch them there either. The third side isn’t so bad, but it is really easy to chase them around to the fourth side of the fence where catching them becomes decidedly difficult. The fourth side of the fence is not on our property. The area is mostly wooded, but the biggest reason for what makes catching a chicken on that side so difficult is that we are fenced off from it. While a chicken can slip through, a person has a much harder time getting there. Once a chicken in on the fourth side of the coop’s fence, it becomes nearly impossible to catch them.
This night there was a chicken outside of the fence on the fourth side. We tried scaring it back to the third side by shaking the fence. We tried calling it, we tried throwing twigs at it, we tried throwing pebbles. Nothing worked. Convinced that we simply weren’t throwing big enough objects, since the pebbles barely made the chicken twitch, I decided to throw over a large rock.
The rock was the size of the chicken itself, and it was heavy. Surely, I thought, this will scare the chicken enough to run around back to the coop. I hefted the stone to my shoulder and took aim for a spot just to the right of the chicken. I pulled back and launched it with all of my might over the fence. In launching the rock I had slightly aimed too far to the left, which would have been alright if the chicken hadn’t moved just to the right. The rock came down hard on the chicken’s back.
A lot of people question or mock those moments in movies where time slows down whenever a character dies. I don’t mock it because I know it for truth.
The rock crushed the chicken to the ground beneath it in slow motion. I could feel the thump through the ground under my feet. The rock rebounded heavily off of the bird’s back to one side, and like a coiled spring the chicken jerked upwards. The image would have been comical under any other circumstances. Just like a cartoon who’s been pancaked by an anvil and springs back up, the chicken lurched into the air, one foot extended off to its side, the other on tiptoes. Its neck extended upwards at an angle and I could see it’s eye, as clear as day, looking at me questioningly. And then it slumped to the ground, dead.
I know chickens to be profoundly stupid creatures. Whatever intelligence I saw in its eyes at the moment of death was likely as not imaginary, and its querying gaze a construct of my mind. But watching the creature die, by my hand as surely as if I had held it down and smashed it with the rock still in my hands, is an experience that has never left me.
Interestingly, I don’t like chickens. In many ways I couldn’t care less if they die. They aren’t much smarter than the crickets they love to eat. They’re vicious, cannibalistic, smelly and thy scare easily. And yet I can’t stand the thought of killing one.
But we’re talking about video games. What does all this chicken killing have to do with anything?
Less meaningful than killing a chicken?
Both Thompson and I want to see the same thing. We want to see a video game in which killing something matters, and not just to the storyline, or to other characters, we want it to matter to the player. Let’s take a possible example from Assassin’s Creed. What would an assassination attempt be like under the conditions I’ve described? Would their target scramble frantically out of bed as he sees you coming through the window? Would his feet get tangled in the sheets as you close in? Would he struggle against you feeble as you grab him by the neck and poise your blade? Would he beg for his life as you pulled his head back by his hair, plead for the sake of his children or wife? Would he sputter and gasp as the blade rams home into his exposed throat? Would you watch as the life goes out of his eyes? How would you manage to reconcile the screams and tears of his family as you flee into the night with the fact that the man had to die for the sake of others?
Instead of... you know... knocking down polygonal bowling pins...
Video games have the potential to make players feel things in ways that movies, books, music and painting can only do marginally. Games can make people question and wonder and see the world in a new light. That is why Thompson wants to see more violent video games, and to be honest, I’m right there with him.
Well, in lieu of further cultural ramblings it’s probably about time I moved on to religious whatnot.
I think pretty much everybody who reads this is in some way familiar with the psychopaths at the Westboro Baptist Church. Well, Mr. Phelps, the leader of the church and ringmaster of crazy town has a rather extensive litter of kiddos. I can only assume he has so many so that there are enough hands to hold up all of his hateful signs at the various protests he stages at the funerals of soldiers, gays and natural disaster victims.
Anyway, there was no telling exactly what hells he puts his family though until recently when one of his runaway children, Nate Phelps, spilled the beans in This Revealing and Disturbing Account.
He describes the mental and physical torture he would put his children through, the horrible things he does to his wife, the way hatred and venom permeates every action he commits. And he also describes how he used religion as justification for it all.
I seriously feel sorry for Nate Phelps and his siblings.
In light of how Nate Phelps was raised, and the crap he was put through in the name of religion, I don’t blame him for his lost faith. In many ways religion, as Christians usually think of it, is ruined for him. He can’t even sit through a sermon without thinking about how much weaker and wimpier other pastors seem in comparison to his father. How could he ever reconcile these Christians who seem to posses such little force of will, but a better message, with his dad who seemed to be driven? How could he not think that Christian theology is all fire and brimstone and hate and that nice pastors are merely watered down versions of the faith?
And sitting on Fred Phelps' desk...
This is what Christians do to Christianity on a regular basis. They misrepresent it. They bring in hate and disparagement and exclusion. The Phelps family is an admittedly extreme example, but it is nevertheless illustrative of the sort of thing that pushes so many people away from Christianity. Sometimes I wonder if its even possible to salvage the name âChristian.â Will future generations of people who follow the will of Christ have to go so far to separate themselves from their dark past as to abandon the name of âChristianityâ altogether?
That is something I don’t have the answer for.
Yeesh, this has gotten dark, hasn’t it? Well then, I guess there’s no harm in jumping into the hilarity that is politics, eh?
Seriously, though. We’re starting things off with the craziest politician I think I’ve ever seen.
So, What’s the number one threat to the American way of life today? Terrorists? Heart-disease? Obesity? Mexicans? Aliens? Americans?
No! None of the above! You want to know? Do ya? It’s…
Too funny not to re-post.
Or so says Paiboon Sunthonchart Jr. of Florida who is running for the Senate. No, I Am Not Making This Up. If you go on to read the full article or his website, you’ll find all sorts of crazy fun facts about whatever world this guy hails from. Everything from the Devil being forgiven, to Sorcerers slashing people’s butts through their toilets and making it look like a natural occurrence.
But if Sorcerers are Terrorist Rapists then that means... oh no...
To top it all off, the man can’t put together a sentence that makes even the barest resemblance to grammatical correctness. But really, in the face of everything else, that’s just being nitpicky.
We are SO Screwed...
I almost can’t tell if it’s just a big joke or not being placed on the news. It’s too amazingly ridiculous. I mean, this is practically a masterpiece of comedic political parody! I wish I could divorce myself from common sense and reality long enough to type up something as gut-busting as this. I mean, really… what more is there to say? Go read it, you’ll thank me later.
Moving on from there, let’s talk really, really briefly about Libertarians. I found this wonderful comedic image that you see below:
If it’s too small to read (I’m pretty sure it is) then go to THIS LINK where you can read it fully blown up. Now, I can see the appeal of certain Libertarian thinking. I like their emphasis on personal rights and so forth. But in the end, I’m really not Libertarian. At all. I’m pretty liberal socially, and I’m more or less moderate economically and militarily, which pretty much makes me the devil in their eyes. But all the same, they’re entitled to their opinions, and I’m entitled to enjoy poking fun at them. If you want the comedic yet truthful lowdown on the different types of Libertarian, then the above image is for you. I’m particularly fond of the âMissionaryâ at the bottom center. I’ve had many a brush with this type over my Bioshock Project.
Okay, nothing tops Mr. SorceryCarRape up above, but I’ve got to say, Harry Reid’s competition in Nevada, Mrs. Sharron Angle, is running in the same race of crazy.
Don't let her face fool y.... well, actually that's not a problem, is it?
Angle has sent a Cease And Desist letter since then claiming copyright violations. In response, Reid’s campaign has taken the site down and moved much of the material to THIS SITE, which unfortunately seemed to be having troubles the last time I saw it. I wish the original site was still up so I could see it, but if what Reid is saying is true, the lady is a verifiable nut job. That is, of course if this is true: âSharron has long believed in killing Social Security, eliminating the Departments of Education and Energy and shipping nuclear waste to Nevada.â
While I am inclined to believe the accusation, politicians on both sides will hyperbolize and even lie flat out, so take it with a grain of salt. Just keep in mind that Angle filed on the grounds of a breached copyright, which means she lays claim to the material and she obviously doesn’t want it viewable. Isn’t this sorta like pleading the fifth, where it just makes you look guilty?
Of course that is really only the tip of the iceberg for this lady. See video below:
And if THAT wasn’t enough, would you believe that her advice to raped young women who become pregnant is that… they should Make lemonade out of Lemons? That it was God’s plan?
When Life Gives You Rape...
I happen to be pro-life in most cases and scenarios. I think that instead of supporting abortion, as a general rule, we should be supporting adoption services and information. But in the case of incest or rape… while I think it’s a laudable decision to still carry a child from a rape, that is ultimately the mother’s decision, same with incest. Forcing a preteen mother to keep the child could very well ruin their lives mentally, physically and financially. The net loss of existence there is too great.
I don’t know if Harry Reid deserves to get back into the senate, but he has to be the lesser of two evils at the very least in this case. If Nevada has any sense, they will not be voting for this crazy, cold-hearted person.
In positive news, it looks like the Oil Spil in the Gulf may Finally Be Winding Down. Of course we’re still a ways out from knowing for sure, and this is BP we’re talking about here. If anyone could keep screwing this up it would be them. Beyond that, the cleanup and recovery will takes years yet and the toll on the coastal economy is still on the horizon. The only thing that’s certain right now is that the spill needs to end and it needs to end now.
And I’m tired of writing about it. Blah.
Briefly on the Arizona front, the administration has said it won’t rule out Suing Arizona over the law a second time if it appears obvious that Racial profiling is going on. In response, Govenor Brewer said, âWhy would they have to hesitate, after all the comments they made, and all the outrage that they made against the bill in regards to racial profiling, that it didn’t show up?â
The answer is fairly simple. Racial Profiling is a serious charge that has to be thoroughly provable in a court of law. If the federal government jumped on it now they wouldn’t have evidence. While I believe profiling is inevitable, it is merely a belief at this point and that isn’t good enough for a court. The feds can’t blow the one chance they’ll get at this. Once a ruling has been made either way it will make subsequent cases that much harder to win, thanks to the system of precedent. It’s all or nothing, folks. But what really gets me is this statement by the governor: “The bottom line is that people in the Southwest, particularly Arizona, we love our diversity. It’s in our DNA. We are almost, I believe, colorblind.” I’m sorry, but âcolorblind?â That is naive. Idealistic and desirable, certainly, but naive. We do not need naive people leading our states.
Okay, okay. I’ve done my ragging on Conservatives for the day. But they are not alone in their ridiculousness. It’s time to even up my criticisms a bit, eh? It’s time to take aim, for the second time on this blog, at Obama.
Shocking I know. I’m a big supporter of the man. I think he’s been a fine President, especially considering the harsh conditions of our nation and politics. But boy has he made a doozy. At least he has in my eyes. Bush’s Patriot Act was terrible, but this is just as bad or worse.
You see, our President, Barack Obama, has Approved The Assassination Of An American Citizen.
Now I must be clear, this citizen is a vociferous anti-American terrorist sympathizer. Anwar al-Awlaki, a radical Muslim cleric who advocates attacks against America.
The face of crazy... and He's American.
âWhy?â You may be asking, âWhat is wrong with killing someone who obviously hates and would harm America and her people?â It is wrong because it sets a dangerous precedent. Americans have rights. Inalienable rights. Rights to due process under the law. We are guaranteed that the government cannot harm us without first being tried in a court of law by a panel of our peers with the right of legal representation. Only once found guilty by a jury can sentences be carried out, whether they be life sentences or death or otherwise. To cast aside this right is to rob American’s of the protection of the law.
To assassinate al-Awlaki would be setting a precedent for âdealing withâ American citizens without having to bow to their rights to protection under the law. I can understand the need. I can understand the expediency. I can understand the desire for an easy win. But this must not be allowed.
But who can say no to Sniper Kitteh?
Some may argue that al-Awlaki is now an enemy combatant, and thus he has forfeited his rights as an American Citizen. First of all, where do these people get the definition for actions that cause you to lose your citizenship? Second of all, al-Awlaki has only been known to support Terrorists, not actually do any combating himself, which is the only way to define the term âenemy combatantâ without widening it to âthose who really dislike Americaâ which is another slippery slope all its own. And Third, the order allows him to be killed on sight, no matter how far away from a battlefield he is (aka not in combat.) This even lets him be killed in front of innocent civilians in the midst of a city. Hardly the killing of a âcombatant.â In the end, al-Awlaki is an American citizen, no matter how bad a citizen he may be, no matter how much it burns us that he is one of us.
Wait for it... wait for it...
You know what? al-Awlaki deserves it. There is amongst no doubt that he deserves to be punished to the full extend of the law for his crimes against America. But I will not approve of the rights of any citizen being surpassed in the name of ease and convenience and security, no matter how much he deserves it. It is easy to say that the slippery slope theory is alarmist. âJust because we’re willing to take out enemies of America who happen to be Americans doesn’t mean this will start happening to just any Joe Shmo.â Yes, well, it sounds alarmist until someone with the blackness of heart and the support to do it steps into the Presidency. Hitler shouldn’t have happened, but he did. He rose to power through legal means. Shenanigans, yes, but legal. There are certain things that cannot, must not, be breached and our rights to a trial are one of them.
Obama, I am ashamed.
Not to mention poor Bongo.
That should satiate all of the Conservatives who read my blog and seethe at me in silence for today. I wish I could end it on a more positive note, but I want this to stick, so… Goodnight everybody!
– Edward L. Cheever II~
Into the Deep 