🐱 Interesting clickbait, op-eds, fluff pieces and other smaller stories

CatParty
102943266-caitlyn.530x298.jpg


http://www.cnbc.com/2015/08/24/caitlyn-jenner-halloween-costume-sparks-social-media-outrage-.html

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/ne...een-costume-labeled-817515?utm_source=twitter

It's nowhere near October, but one ensemble is already on track to be named the most controversial Halloween costume of 2015.

Social media users were out in full force on Monday criticizing several Halloween retailers for offering a Caitlyn Jenner costume reminiscent of the former-athlete's Vanity Fair cover earlier this year.

While Jenner's supporters condemned the costume as "transphobic" and "disgusting" on Twitter, Spirit Halloween, a retailer that carries the costume, defended the getup.

"At Spirit Halloween, we create a wide range of costumes that are often based upon celebrities, public figures, heroes and superheroes," said Lisa Barr, senior director of marking at Spirit Halloween. "We feel that Caitlyn Jenner is all of the above and that she should be celebrated. The Caitlyn Jenner costume reflects just that."
Click to expand...
 
  • Winner
  • Like
  • Feels
Reactions: poggies123_, Retreaded Tire, Cereal Killer and 24 others
Click to expand...
  • Agree
Reactions: Azafran90, Male Idiot, Jewelsmakerguy and 1 other person
http://junkee.com/tony-abbott-waluigi-australian-politics/123371

What makes an effective opponent? Determination, doggedness, consistency? A strand of slightly inhuman villainy? Ultimately, an effective opponent runs on denial: they play the game reactively, existing solely for the backhand volley. If it looks like they are about to lose they threaten to upend the board or rip out the cartridge.

To them, winning isn’t enough. You must lose. Hence, victory never satisfies them. They love to fire the blue shell, dodging it is something else entirely.

Defined by negation: can an effective opponent have substance? Can you make them appealing? Do they serve any other purpose other than to oppose?

Ijiwaru: Bad Luigi
“Waaaa-luigi time! Waluigi win!” – Waluigi

This was the question that faced Fumihide Aoke in 2000 when production company Camelot Games was tasked with creating Super Mario Tennis for the N64.

Designed as a showcase for the console’s 4 player couch co-op capabilities, the game featured a cast of tennis doubles teams from Nintendo’s iconic character roster. Mario had a decent rival in his stocky garlic-guzzling nemesis Wario, but what of his brother (and doubles partner) Luigi? And so, Aoke created Waluigi: a lanky mix of Luigi, Dick Dastardly, and gamer rage.

WaluigiMP8a-660x574.png

Waluigi is an enigmatic figure in the Nintendo-verse. He is only ever playable in their sports games: Mario Tennis, Mario Kart, Mario and Sonic at the Olympics, Mario Strikers Charged etc. In Super Smash Brothers (Brawl and WiiU/3DS) he is relegated to the side-bench, a trophy summon who shin-kicks and curb-stomps other fighters. He functions as the uninvited guest — the turd in the punchbowl. He lacks the clarity of purpose possessed by Bowser (wants: Princess Peach) and Wario (wants: treasure).

Waluigi’s name in Japanese is Waruīji: ‘warui’ meaning ‘bad’, ‘Luigi’ meaning, well, ‘Luigi’. But it’s also a pun on the Japanese word Ijiwaru, meaning ill-tempered or cruel. Waluigi is nothing but an alternate of Luigi, who is an alternate of Mario — created to be Wario’s (the perversion of Mario) partner in crime. His design (his cap bares an upside down ‘L’) denotes his role as a signifier created solely to reflect another signifier — a black-mirror, a shadow of a shadow. Waluigi is a triple negative, a man outside himself, a man built to fill a void by functioning as one.

Waluigi is also Tony Abbott.

The Shape Of An L On His Forehead
“If you’ve got something to say to me, then step right up!” – Waluigi

Yes: they look similar. Phrenologists and game-designers alike should sit and marvel at the shared features of Waluigi and Tony Abbott, their skulls similarly pinched and jagged. Both are gangly athletes with smiles which sit like scowls.

Screen-Shot-2017-09-14-at-11.37.44-AM.png

Their parallel aesthetics grow more disquieting the harder you look. Abbott was criticised by left and right alike for the “crassness” of his presentation, namely in his insistence on presenting his crotch bulge to the public. There is almost no reference to sex or sexuality in the 30-year span of the Mario brand, other than vaguely offensive hints that Luigi may be homosexual. There is just one recognition of sex or genitals within the franchise, and it’s delivered by none other than Waluigi.

In Super Mario Strikers, Waluigi runs towards the camera enthusiastically crotch-chopping whenever he scores a goal.

In this victory lap there is something quintessentially Tony.

But if it were simply a matter of looks, I would have written on Joe Hockey and Morton Koopa Jr five years ago, and who knows where we’d be as a nation if things were ever so simple.

tumblr_of5fjbHZ4t1urhjfwo5_400.gif

Junkyard Dogs
“Hey! I always give it everything I’ve got, but even I have off days. Just watch, I’ll be the next champion!” – Waluigi

‘The Mad Monk’ has a reputation for comic oafishness. The onion-chomper, the stuttering polemicist, budgie-smuggling sleaze, the supermarket “dickhead” – the L on Abbott’s forehead is, like Waluigi’s, one reflective of chronic loserdom.

Abbott is in a way a product of his own ‘Camelot Games’; his tenure as prime minister is probably best embodied by his disastrous decision to knight a Prince.

Tony Abbott has always been a wrecker. From his ribald time as a student politician and journalist, to his truncated time as prime minister, Abbott has long been known for his ability to counter, block, and destroy the work and progress of others. From spearheading the erosion of student unions to spearheading the ‘No’ campaign against an Australian republic, Tony Abbott, like Waluigi, exists to deny others what he sees as his, or more rightly, as not being theirs.

Peter Costello once described Abbott as “A Don Quixote willing to take on lost causes and fight for great principles”. Every stitch of Abbott’s tapestry has him tilting at windmills. The Smash Bros Melee description of Waluigi’s trophy reads: “Waluigi reportedly spent a lot of time training for his debut in Mario Tennis by honing his ability to antagonise the Mario brothers.” Abbott wasn’t much different. His Mario Brothers were student Trotskyites, later superseded by environmental groups and his colleagues in the federal parliament.

How do both men go chase popularity? Tantrums, red shells, and bob-ombs.

Abbott’s popularity — what there was of it — was the result of his rabid obstruction of the Gillard government’s agenda. He was the Mario Party player who dragged everyone through the more tedious mini-games; not to win the game, but to make other players want to quit.

Yet this was a man who saw himself as destined to be prime minister, going back as far as childhood, where his parents and sisters spoke of it is as an inevitability. Like any would-be PM, at the core of Abbott is a deep desire to be popular, which for him requires the impossible balance antagonism and likability. The manual for Mario Tennis states that Waluigi’s motivation is to become as beloved as the Mario Brothers.

How do both men go about it, however? Tantrums, red shells, and bob-ombs.

WaluigiMP9.png

Near the start of his fantastic Quarterly Essay Political Animal, David Marr states: “Australia never wanted Tony Abbott, we never have”. Abbott once remarked that “the beauty of being leader is you are freer to be yourself.” Five years later, after 18 months of being himself, he was rolled.

The prime ministership of Tony Abbott is widely regarded as a mistake.

Nintendo has never released a title with Waluigi as headliner.

Assassins’ Knives and Red Shells
“Aw, everybody cheating!” – Waluigi, when finished in 7th place or lower in Mario Kart.

Self-pity is where Waluigi and Tony Abbott truly eclipse one another.

Waluigi’s voice actor Charles Martinet (who voices all the Mario/Wario bros) said that “self-pity” was the “cornerstone of Waluigi’s character”. In another interview he said that he finds voicing Waluigi with a conceited and self-hating tone “better exemplifies his character”.

tony-abbott-660x440.jpg

When Waluigi loses a match — be it Tennis or Olympic triathlon — his histrionics go beyond that of all his peers, even Bowser. He stomps, he sobs, he accuses. He oscillates between statements like “Oh! Too bad! I get you next time, cheaters!” and “they hate us”. In defeat, he is both dejected and filled with rage.

In 1977 a maddened Abbott allegedly came up to a fellow student politician “within an inch of her nose, and punched the wall on either side of her head”. In parliament in 2012 he echoed shock-jock Alan Jones’ claim that Julia Gillard’s father had “died of shame”. Again in 1977, Abbott and his student conservative comrades were accused of “rough-house tactics and wrecking that they couldn’t control”. A prominent Sydney lawyer who has known Abbott since his student politics days said: “my lasting impression [of him] is of negativity and destruction.”

Wreckers do not take well to defeat. A headline once penned by a young Abbott read: “I ACCUSE: Phoney Student Thugs Use Spit and Abuse to Create Terror”. These are men who attack, even in repose. “You might be gettin’ better, but nobody cheats better than me! You got that?” says Waluigi in Mario Golf: Toadstool Tour.

Wreckers do not take well to defeat.

They see themselves as perpetual victims. After Abbott was turfed as PM, Marr wrote that he “sees himself as he always has: surrounded, indeed white-anted, by enemies”. This anxiety brings with it grandly paranoiac proclamations. “Refuse to connive at dishonour by acting as the assassin’s knife,” Abbott once pleaded with his backbenchers and the media.

“If you’ve got something to say to me, then step right up!” Waluigi says to the other players in Mario Party 3.

When Abbott strode up to that podium to concede the prime ministership, he let out what was his version of Waluigi’s iconic ‘waaaaaahhhhh’. He said: “Poll-driven panic has produced a revolving door prime ministership which can’t be good for our country, and a febrile media culture has developed that rewards treachery.” For Abbott, darling of the Murdoch media empire, the other players were using hacks.

But for Tony Abbott defeat is not a thing. Defeat is a glitch. Remove the cartridge, blow, and reset the game. “Ah, Waluigi lose!?” Abbott may say to himself, “impossible!”

Fan Art
“Watch out…for me!” – Waluigi (after getting a Star or Mega Mushroom, Mario Kart Wii)

In my research for this piece I came across a number of similar YouTube videos with titles including “what’s up with Waluigi?”, “Waluigi IS NOT a loser!” and “is Waluigi REALLY a villain?”. There is, ultimately, something oddly appealing about the mustache twirling twerp.

His persistent nastiness makes him stand out in the Marioverse. The internet is littered with videos of pop-songs as sung by Waluigi, Waluigi edited into other games, Waluigi fan-films, even Waluigi hentai… The catchphrase “it’s Waluigi time” is ubiquitous on Tumblr.

Waluigi revisionism is very real, but ultimately harmless.

Less can be said for the revisionist rebrand of Waluigi’s tulpa, Tony Abbott. 2017 has seen “the junkyard dog” chomp firmly onto the bullbar of Australian discourse yet again. He’s everywhere: the TV, the papers, the radio — dribbling snide jabs at the men who turfed him, and proselytising on behalf of heteronormative country club arm-chair NRL coaches everywhere.

Unlike Waluigi, his ‘popularity’ is less enigmatic. As Waluigi exists purely to partner with Wario, Abbott now exists purely to partner with Turnbull (who, like Wario, loves treasure). He is the meaner, scrappier fighter to Turnbull’s gold-coin focussed avarice. Like Waluigi, Abbott is an assist trophy, bursting out to shin-kick far-right talking points into a national discourse the prime minister dislikes engaging with, for fear of sending ripples though the “respectful debate” that are yet to be run through focus groups.

And, as with Waluigi, those stanning for Abbott seem to be odd-tempered failsons with access to a mic, a camera, and a small yet vocal audience. They are yet to release an Abbott accapella version of ‘Uptown Funk’, but with the newspapers pivoting to video, anything is possible.

Split Screen
You can say that a long-read binding an ex-prime minister to a second-tier Nintendo character is indicative of our crumbling national conversation, sure. I’d say it’s a vital cheat code to help us understand a man whose chronic doddery has scuttled Australian progress for over 30 years.

It’s Australia’s most infamous Rhodes’ Scholar intersecting with Nintendo’s infamous chode scholar. As Abbott throws banana peels out on the tarmac of Australian history in the vain hope of causing all those chasing him to skid and crash, it is vital that we look to Waluigi — not for comfort, but for understanding.

After all, both only exist to be opposed.

I’ll just leave you with this:

“Little white lies can get you in trouble, you know. Be happy. You earned it.”

Who said it?

Waluigi, or Tony Abbott?
Click to expand...
 
  • Winner
  • Agree
  • Semper Fidelis
Reactions: DuskEngine, Splendid, Burgers in the ass and 3 others
panko said:
Welp, some white dude hassling trannies in LA got killed (is probably dying right now.) Just happened.
Two of Ice Poseidon's off shoot / stream sniper / leech streaming friends (BurgerPlanet and HamptonBrandon) ran across it.

It's turning into the typical NIGGERS!!! vs HE ASKED FOR IT!!! kind of discourse.

This shit is gonna be on the news tonight, there's so much footage. I'll be watching to see how literal execution being livestreamed news pops up.

Edit: here's fuller footage & mirroring on Liveleak: https://www.liveleak.com/view?i=2ea_1505693154
Click to expand...
Make an actual thread of this-- I'm not seeing much coverage of it at all-- and if Kiwi needs to be the one covering it, so be it. This is fucking insane, and I can't believe it's not swarming the news. Well.. I CAN believe it, but I dont want to believe it.
 
  • Informative
  • Agree
  • Feels
Reactions: panko, Coconut Gun and Male Idiot
DESIGNATED
JOGGING?
STREETS

So if they caught the woman in the act and give a description to police and this woman routinely jogs up that street catching her should be no problem. I think what we have here is an exhibitionist with bowel issues.
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
Reactions: Burgers in the ass, Marvin, Randy Lahey and 4 others
XYZpdq said:
Wasn't that lazy fuck planet supposed to kill everybody like ten years ago or some shit?
Click to expand...
It's just being lazy to fuck with the theorists.

If it hasn't happened before, it sure as shit won't now. Even better is that even the supporters are starting to backtrack from the "rapture" thing.
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
Reactions: FierceBrosnan
Funnybone said:
Make an actual thread of this-- I'm not seeing much coverage of it at all-- and if Kiwi needs to be the one covering it, so be it. This is fucking insane, and I can't believe it's not swarming the news. Well.. I CAN believe it, but I dont want to believe it.
Click to expand...

You think it would be okay to do so? I have some more information on it.
I'll go do that now & move things over. :)

Thread created: https://kiwifarms.net/threads/2-liv...ttempted-murder-on-hollywood-boulevard.34486/
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Male Idiot
Tucker Carlson Calls Issa Rae ‘Divisive’ for Saying ‘I’m Rooting for Everybody Black’ at Emmys

https://www.mediaite.com/tv/tucker-...ying-im-rooting-for-everybody-black-at-emmys/

Tucker Carlson panned the Emmy Awards Monday night and singled out one actress in particular for criticism over comments she made he deemed “divisive.”

“Even by the usual standards of show business,” he said, “last night’s show was a remarkable triumph of identity politics over art and entertainment.”

He invoked Issa Rae, creator and star of HBO’s Insecure, for telling a reporter, “I’m rooting for everybody black.”

Carlson told viewers that the remark was Rae “planning to judge the nominees solely on the basis of their skin color without reference to their talent or achievement.”

He played the clip of Rae’s comment, followed by Donald Glover joking about Trump “making black people number one on the most oppressed list,” before saying, “Those comments didn’t seem to raise an eyebrow, but of course they didn’t. It’s 2017, and so we’re used to open race hostility from the left.”

As for the Emmys themselves, Carlson said they veered closer to “political indoctrination than entertainment” and the whole thing showed “contempt” for middle Americans.

“Politics never improves art,” he said, “it only corrupts art.”

He circled back to Rae’s comments a bit later and said if someone said they were rooting for white people, “I would say that’s disgusting.”
Click to expand...

He's right though. It's racist. And if someone said "I'm only rooting for white nominees" they'd be raked over the coals for being racist and their career would be damaged. If you just want black people to win because they look like you then that's just as bad and if you can't recognise that... Bitch you a ignorant heffa.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Marvin
Straight Black Men Are the White People of Black People

It feels counterintuitive to suggest that straight black men as a whole possess any sort of privilege—particularly the type of privilege created for and protected by whiteness. In America, we are near or at the bottom in every relevant metric determining quality of life. Our arrest and incarceration rates, our likelihood of dying a violent death, our likelihood of graduating high school and attending college, our employment rates, our average net worth, our likelihood of surviving past 70 — I could continue, but the point is clear.

But assessing our privilege (or lack thereof) on these facts only considers our relationship with whiteness and with America. Intraracially, however, our relationship to and with black women is not unlike whiteness’s relationship to us. In fact, it’s eerily similar. We’re the ones who the first black president created an entire initiative to assist and uplift. We’re the ones whose beatings and deaths at the hands of the police galvanize the community in a way that the beatings and sexual assaults and deaths suffered by black women by those same police do not. We’re the ones whose mistreatment inspired a boycott of the NFL, despite the NFL’s long history of mishandling and outright ignoring far worse crimes against black women. We are the ones who get the biggest seat at the table, and the biggest piece of chicken at the table, despite making the smallest contribution to the meal.

And nowhere is this more evident than when considering the collective danger we pose to black women, and our collective lack of willingness to accept and make amends for that truth. It’s a damning and depressing paradox. When speaking about race and racism, we want our concerns and our worries and our fears to be acknowledged. We want white people to at least make an effort to understand that our reality is different from their’s, and that white supremacy is a vital and inextricable part of America’s foundation, and we grow frustrated when they refuse to acknowledge their role — historically and presently — in propagating it. When the racism isn’t blatant or doesn’t appear to exist at all, we want them to give us the benefit of the doubt. Because we’ve trained ourselves to be able to sense it — even in minute and barely perceptible amounts — because our safety depends on our recognition of it. We share how it feels to be stopped by a police officer, or perhaps to walk into an all-white bar and have each eye trained on you, or perhaps to jaunt down a street in an all-white neighborhood, and we want them to understand how words and gestures they consider to be innocuous can be threatening, even if there’s no intention of malice. Although we recognize that not all white people are actively racist, we want them to accept that all benefit from racism, and we become annoyed when individual whites take personal exception and center themselves in any conversation about race; claiming to be one of the “good ones” and wishing for us to stop and acknowledge their goodness.

But when black women share that we pose the same existential and literaldanger to them that whiteness does to us; and when black women ask us to give them the benefit of the doubt about street harassment and sexual assault and other forms of harassment and violence we might not personally witness; and when black women tell us that allowing our cousins and brothers and co-workers and niggas to use misogynistic language propagates that culture of danger; and when black women admit how scary it can be to get followed and approached by a man while waiting for a bus or walking home from work; and when black women articulate how hurtful it is for our reactions to domestic abuse and their rapes and murders to be “what women need to do differently to prevent this from happening to them” instead of “what we (men) need to do differently to prevent us from doing this to them”, their words are met with resistance and outright pushback. After demanding from white people that we’re listened to and believed and that our livelihoods are considered, our ears shut off and hearts shut down when black women are pleading with us.

Making things worse is that black women and girls are also Black people in America; a fact we seem to forget whenever possessing a bad memory is convenient. The effects of racism — metaphysical and literal — and the existential dreads and dangers felt while existing while black are not exclusive to black men and boys. They face the same racisms we do, the same doubts from whites about whether the racism actually exists that we do, and then they’re forced to attempt to convince their brothers and partners and friends and fathers and cousins and lovers of the dangers of existing as a black woman, and they’re met with the same doubts. The same resistance. The same questions. They are not believed in the (predominately white) world or in their (predominately black) communities. And we (black men) remain either uninterested in sincerely addressing and destructing this culture of danger and pervasive doubt or refusing to admit it even exists.

I’m not quite sure where I first heard “straight black men are the white people of black people.” I know I read a version of it recently in Saki Benibo’s The 4:44 Effect. Mela Machinko tweeted “Cishet black men are the white people of black people” over a year ago, and apparently received so much criticism for it that she temporarily locked her account. But, in a conversation earlier today, she shared that her tweet was actually a revision of another tweet she’d read. (A month after Mela’s tweet, it was revised and refreshed again by Rodimusprime.) I also know that I’ve read pieces and been a part of conversations connecting our (black men) relationships with black women to the relationships we have with white people, but never quite heard it articulated this way.

Either way, that statement and that phrasing and what it suggests is shocking and succinct; simple, subtle, summarizing, and fucking scary.

And it’s true.
Click to expand...

https://archive.is/02qQM
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back