29 September 2010

English Defence Lulz

Some wag has made a fake facebook for the UAF's Weyman Bennett. It's very revealing. Shall we have a look? (Click for bigger)

So, of course, the first thing you notice about it is the bizarre obsession with not washing [Fig. 1]. Not sure where this whole "the UAF don't use soap or deodorant" thing comes from, unless you can't tell the difference between the smell of soap and the smell of stale lager. I think there might be a hippie in the train of thought somewhere, but really, I'm stumped. You can also see quite clearly that they've not even told their main joke very well. Come on lads, "Soap Dodger in Chief" as a job title would have been almost amusing.

Secondly, the gay joke [Fig. 2]. Don't these pigshit-thick Nazi stooges have an LGBT division? Isn't it specifically our dirty poofs that they want to protect from the militant Asian-looking people? Using "haha ur gay lol" as an insult, well, looks a bit like you've put the queer-bashing on hold so a few slow-witted homosexuals might help with the paki-bashing. Jewish division, take note.

Finally, the chimp [Fig. 3]. Now, I have it on good authority that the EDL is definitely NOT racist, and has no problem with the Blacks and Niggers, just the Pakis. So if they're going to pull off this "Black and White Unite Against Brown" thing, it might help if the light-skinned side of the equation tried not to call the 0.0002% dark-skinned side monkeys.

All in all, my advice to the EDL would be this: If you don't want people to think you're racist, homophobic Nazi dullards using "militant Muslims" as a lightning rod ("militant" here meaning "anyone that looks like"), try not to act like racist, homophobic Nazi dullards. A good start would be cutting out badly-crafted playground taunts aimed at sexual and ethnic minorities. Try it. It might work.

PS report it as fake it if you haven't already.
Update: GONE NOW.

08 September 2010

Burning Books

I've never particularly seen the significance of burning books. It's a symbolic act of destroying information, but the wonderful thing about the written word is that, especially in the digital age, it's not tied to a physical object. Burn as many of a book as you want, and as long as there's one copy left, it can be reproduced exactly. The written word, human language and our capacity to reproduce them are an not only awe-inspiringly beautiful, but astoundingly resilient. The pages and the size and the smell of books are nice and all, but that's really nothing compared to the text itself.

So I think this coming Saturday (the 11th) should be Everybody Burn a Great Book Day.

I think I'll burn 'To Kill a Mockingbird', as I remember sitting in my room, aged sixteen and halfway through my GCSE English Literature, and realising for the first time, during the courtroom passage, that reading great novels isn't just homework. It's interesting, it's gripping, it's thought provoking, it's fun, and that's what they were actually written for. I also have a spare charity-shop copy that only cost 79p. So on Saturday, to show how Harper Lee's words are more than ink and paper and stronger than fire, I will commit a classic of American literature to the sky and ashes.

PS. If you do burn a book on Everybody Burn A Great Book Day, make sure it's one you like, as we'll all assume that's the case.

Edit: PPS. Oh nuts, just realised it conflicts with someone else's book-burning event. I hope this doesn't get awkward.

04 September 2010

William Hague? Really Chris?

A few things spring to mind about the William Hague gay thing.

Firstly, looks-wise, if William Hague is gay with Christopher Myers, he's punching way above his weight, and it's the really other guy who should be making embarrassed denials.

Secondly, he'd have to be a fairly fucking stupid gay. I know, if I was in his gay shoes (and they'd be amazing shoes, because I'd be a gay), the last thing I'd do while trying to conceal my gay affair with a younger man from my female, vagina-having wife, is book a shared room with him. Book a double and a single, say you need the double for your bad back or some such shite. Cheese-on-toast man, you're a politician. A Tory politician no less. You should know how to have an affair.

Finally: again with the gay jokes? I've wondered before, but, with a couple of notable and silly exceptions, why can we not get our head around two men
  • being fond of
  • sleeping in a room with
  • spending more than ten minutes that don't involve drinking, punching or casual misogyny with
each other without assuming anal penetration? We let girls saunter off to the fucking toilet together without assuming one's going to end up on her knees, but if two men so much as hug with insufficient back-slapping, we expect they'll both crack a semi-on. I can almost get that we, as a society, can understand sweaty bareback man-love better than emotionally intimate, platonic man-love. But is tight-fisted, pragmatic man-room-sharing really that hard to grasp?

Edit: I have to confess, I once shared a room with another heterosexual man. For well over a month. To save money. Didn't get so much as a hand-job.