Lucrezia Magazine


  • Photobucket

Sponsors



The Cozy Spot



8 posts categorized "Political Correctness Gone Mad"

August 20, 2008

I'd Rather Wear Fur and Be Naked Underneath...

Paltrow_fur I always wonder about groups that pretend they're nice, when they're the contrary. PETA is one group that gets under my skin. They may as well be called stalkers with the way they go on and on. If you're not a celebrity, you're lucky. These groups are mean, bitchy and stoop to the lowest insult to get their view out to  the media.
Gwyneth Paltrow is their latest target. An unnamed (yes, unnamed) PETA spokesperson was quoted with the following:

"We've written to her many times, and sent her videos showing how animals suffer for fur, but have never received a response.

"Apparently her beauty really is only skin deep. Gwyneth Paltrow won't be the apple of her daughter's eye if she continues to flaunt fur. It's a terrible example to set for a young child."

Can people be more nasty?

Mark Glover, of Respect for Animals (at least he had the balls to give his name) said:

"Gwyneth Paltrow should be ashamed. I can only assume that Paltrow either is ignorant of the facts or lacks human decency and compassion."

But even though he gave his name, it doesn't reduce the nastiness, you see if these groups catch anyone wearing leather, fur or any other animal product, groups like PETA stalk their target:

"We've written to her many times, and sent her videos showing how animals suffer for fur, but have never received a response."

I'd call the above - unsolicited barrage - stalking. Wouldn't anyone? If any group started mailing someone film, without their permission, it could be considered harassment. I'm beginning to think that one cannot be a high profile individual and live in the United States without a) being approached by these groups to 'donate'/support their causes and b) being harassed if one is 'caught' wearing fur or leather. Then again, the ad campaign Gwyneth Paltrow appears on is for a luxury Italian label but with information technology and the globalization of everything, wear mink in Paris, and some PETA freak will find out. For all we know, this organization probably pays private dicks to follow celebrities.

Now the thing is PETA can't picket places like KFC or McDonalds during the lunch peak, otherwise they'd be physically removed by diners (forget the police), so they do the next best thing -they harass celebrities in the hope that ordinary folk like you or me will stop wearing fur or leather. I personally don't wear fur, I don't need it in Australia, but if I lived in a colder climate I probably would. But I do buy leather products, and they puff and blow all they like, I'm not going to stop buying leather products due to their stupid campaigns that use female nudity to grab attention. Some of the known female models they've used for their 'I'd rather go naked than wear fur,' campaigns ultimately swapped teams when the money was right, and they were offered huge sums by fashion houses. One would think that they'd change tack, but they're as nasty as ever. Imagine, bringing a child (Gwyneth's baby daughter) into the issue. How low can PETA go? Plenty. They're like Captain Nemo - 20,000 leagues isn't enough for them.

July 26, 2008

Political Correctness & Nudes

DdThe painting on the right is a nude, yes? It was initially considered controversial when it was first purchased in 1947 and controversy still lingers, not for the nudity, but something else....

Yes, she has a cigarette in her right hand. It's quite silly. Does this mean that there is a possibility that all content with cigarettes will be censored or feature a black strip? Will Breakfast at Tiffany's be altered or have Audrey Hepburn's cigarette holder removed by image software? A few years ago, Hanna Barbera cartoons were edited for the same reason.

July 09, 2008

Post PC Society

The politically correct era, and all its supposedly advantageous work policies (EEO, anti-discrimination, etc) has ushered in a new era in the workplace. It may seem ideal to have formal policies however once complaints are made the process can be lengthy, formal and unproductive. I sometimes think the era before political correctness was healthier. It was the era where you'd express yourself to a co-worker and be heard (whether they liked it or not) and you wouldn't be penalized or reprimanded for it. Forget all the bullshit and hyped up scenarios in the Gordon Ramsay shows. If such behavior existed in today's workplaces in Australia, chefs like Gordon Ramsay would be spending more time consulting lawyers for anti-discrimination, bullying and victimization. Gordon may make many valid points but I doubt that he utilizes the same techniques in real life. You simply cannot call someone a 'fucking lazy pig,' in a workplace, not unless you want someone to take legal action against you, and this is why I think Ramsay popular. His television shows tend to remind us of how life was before the idiocy of political correctness.
I recently watched The Bucket List (Jack Nicholson and Morgan Freeman) and a scene unfolded that had me laughing. Jack Nicholson plays a mega wealthy individual, complete with a personal assistant, and in the scene he says (to his assistant), "No one really cares what you think!" I found it hilarious because it was a typical scenario. It seems that wealthy characters (or real life people) feel more comfortable speaking their mind because of the financial perception. Take Ramsay, he is a multi-millionaire, whose forthcoming annual profit will near a hundred million. People who are 'poorer' than this seem to think that they have no right to voice their opinion or act like wealthy 'upstarts.' Being assertive and vocal isn't related to money. We seem to have distinct labels in society. The forthright and assertive individual is always portrayed (in film and reality television) as a wealthier individual and the underdog is always the struggling battler. What would happen if the battler altered their attitude and simply pretended to be a zillionaire? What then? It's not as difficult as it seems.

The most recent story highlighting work victimization is terribly sad. The short version: a female paramedic hung herself a couple of years ago because she couldn't bear the treatment she received within her workplace. The case is unfolding now. The longer version can be read in the Sydney Morning Herald article. It's a tragic story. Christine Hodder almost finished her nursing degree at the time of her suicide, and felt like her male colleagues who allegedly teased her about her appearance and other things, never accepted her and she even wrote a five-page complaint detailing the bullying. She went on stress leave twice. She endured this situation for six years and is quoted, "In the past six years I have been badly treated as other staff members collectively bullied, belittled and intimidated me," she said.
"The staff in this station has constantly alienated and attacked my character and physical appearance since my arrival."

Continue reading "Post PC Society" »

June 03, 2008

PETA Goes Nude in Sydney

Stupidity can be defined in numerous ways. One way, is to protest about bullfighting in Sydney. Yes, in Sydney, near the Sydney Opera House.

We don't have bullfighting in Australia.

What interests me about this protest is the use of naked women to draw attention to whatever cause PETA wishes to publicize, causes that - mind you - aren't existent in the nation of the protest. Why don't they take their nude protest to Spain? Bullfighting is a cultural centerpiece in Spain, and PETA's actions only act to create more friction. If they took their protest to Spain, they would be turfed out on their ear: that is how much courage PETA has. None.

Who knows the lengths this nutty group will go to. They'll probably work on protesting against lamb on a spit (a popular Greek custom during Easter) next. It's strange how they don't protest in front of McDonalds, eh?

Then there is the other fantasy I have (warning: it's depraved):

Nude PETA protesters going on about bullfighting, meet extreme Christian groups in a head-to-head fight. The Christians are protesting about the female nudity and the use of 'nudity/obscenity' to further a cause, as the PETA clan go on about bullfights, for the entire debacle to get ugly. Christian protesters thwacking nude PETA protesters with their placards, and PETA protesters pressing on, wiggling their naked jiggly bits, to further incense the extreme Christian protesters, for police squads to move in with water cannons.

Now that would be television!



June 02, 2008

Slutbucks

Sometimes I think that those with the dirtiest minds, are those who read more into images, logos and literature. It's as though they spend the bulk of their time looking for the dirt, or transforming something into an obscenity. Christian groups tend to have a higher frequency of complaining about something (and creating pornographic interpretations of just about everything nude or erotic - even a nipple can be downright offensive), and making a huge federal case about things that are legal. A good example is the story about a Pennsylvania Sex Shop facing religious groups/protests.

The latest target is Starbucks and its new logo. The topless maid, according to Resistance's spokesman and president, "has a naked woman on it with her legs spread like a prostitute." Mark Dice gets more creative, referring to Starbucks as Slutbucks and it can only make one wonder: who has a dirtier mind? The religious nutjob or the average coffee drinker? Mark confuses the mermaid tails. He sees them as spread legs, and he equates the image to that of a prostitute. Who has a dirty mind...Mark?

His group has called for a worldwide Starbucks boycott. Yep, based on the ''obscene'' image.

May 30, 2008

The Scarf Kerfuffle Hits Bondi

Yesterday I blogged about the conservative freak out over the keffiyeh that saw Dunkin Donuts drop an advert due to a scarf and conservative blogging chanteuse Michelle Malkin milking the topic, now the aftershock has hit Bondi in Sydney. Who says that Australia is a galaxy away from everything?

A bottle shop worker in Bondi was interrogated by a Palestinian customer. She was asked if she was wearing her scarf for political reasons or as a fashion statement. The poor 20 year old woman had no clue about the politics behind the scarf, and that confirms the obvious. Many young Australian women aren't obsessed about politics. They, justifiably so, live their life and enjoy their life and don't waste endless hours analyzing the life of glorified idiots (politicians) and psychos (terrorists).

The bottle shop worker chose the scarf because it matched her uniform: it was the only color choice she could wear. And then the drama unfolds. The Palestinian customer called to complain, two days after visiting the store, and then the ultimate complaint arrived from Jewish customers, which prompted the store manager to request removing the scarf. Talk about a two-pronged complaint: first from the Palestinian customer, followed by Jewish customers.

They ought to add a warning on all tourist literature relating to Bondi and Bondi Beach, and hand Australian customs an international fashion update: "Please consider the sensitivities of Bondi residents, please have your scarf analyzed before wearing it in our area."

The Keffiyeh Kerfuffle...




May 29, 2008

Conservative Absurdity

There are two things we don't have in Australia: Dunkin Donuts and uber conservatives. I'm currently baffled by the occupation known as 'conservative commentator.' I think it's an occupation filled by conservative columnists and bloggers, one of those bullshit occupations. Many columnists are often Dunkin_absurdity egotists of the highest caliber: their opinion somehow 'matters' and they create issues that may not exist in the first instance. Columnists or 'commentators' don't bother me much because I don't bother reading them on a regular basis. They're entitled to their opinion but they are as special as psychic - bullshit - channelers who proclaim to hold the knowledge of the cosmos.

Thus, if a fashion designer 'abroad', meaning a designer who isn't an American citizen, designs something that is far too ethnic or has ethnic undertones, that some conservative columnists or xenophobes can't figure out, then the item is labeled in accordance to some personal paranoia or agenda. Such as Michelle Malkin's opinion on the scarf:

"Anti-American fashion designers abroad and at home have mainstreamed and adapted the scarves as generic pro-Palestinian jihad or anti-war statements."

In other words, designers who design scarves that remind conservative bloggers or 'commentators/columnists' of extreme Islamic groups are to be labeled as 'anti-American.'  Who knows? One can expect anything in the insane (and global) precinct of political correctness. The reader comments in the Telegraph are interesting to read. Hardly any one noticed the 'implications' of the scarf, so is Malkin a tad paranoid? The reader comment below is hilarious, but a valid observation about conservative (and paranoid) absurdity:

"How weird. Am I now to think twice about wearing my mohair tartan scarf on a cold winter's day because some PC individual may think I'm assisting terrorism? The world has become madder than I thought."

The above relates to the latest absurdity I read about in an ordinary newspaper relating to the removal of an online ad for Dunkin Donuts. Was the ad sexually explicit? Was it obscene in any way? Of course not, but many conservative pundits or 'commentators' thought that the scarf worn by the celebrity chef in the picture promoted Islamist terrorism. All right, the scarf pattern may symbolize something (resistance) in one part of the world, but in other parts of the world it is viewed as a scarf pattern.
 

Go figure huh? Talk about paranoia.

Me? I just saw a scarf. The design on the scarf was later confirmed to be paisley. So does this mean that all paisley prints are to be banned? Someone ought to inform Vogue:

Paisley is OUT.

It's funny. All the pro-democracy nations rave on about democracy, but if people are caught wearing things that organizations like PETA abhor, then it's not all right:

Wear leather or fur, and you're a murderer.

Wear Australian wool, and you're evil.

Eat steak, and omfg!

It goes on and on. Is there such a thing as democracy or is it all a huge wank?

May 09, 2008

Nudity is the Anti-Christ & Will End the World As We Know It?

There, I've finally done it. I've created a new category titled 'Political Correctness Gone Mad,' and the only reason I do this is because a woman has been dismissed from her job for appearing nude in a woman's magazine. The image on the right, as anyone can see, isn't pornographic. It is nowhere near X Tziolas_couple rated or R rated. But the article within Cleo magazine, about the couple's intimate life, probably set off alarm bells for the department of education.

What has been more surprising is the feedback to the Daily Telegraph's article; there are people who are clearly divided. One person says that tattoos should disqualify anyone from being a teacher. Another bright commenter said, 'Don't worry, Lynne, as there's plenty of work for you out there, I'm sure. In fact, my little boy needs some private tutoring. He's a smart kid, but, due to his pattern baldness and generally middle-aged appearance, he doesn't get along with the other kids at school. Late nights are good for him, if you're interested.'

Thing is this. Publications offer people the option of looking at adult content, and by adult, I don't mean pornographic. In Australia, nudity is considered adult content and is usually contained within a sealed section of the magazine in question. And even when people are given all the politically correct options 'not to look,' they still complain and they still make fantastic assumptions about a person's professional ability to perform on the job.

The positive development within this story is the support this teacher has received from parents, who have signed a petition for her to be reinstated.

Lynne Tziolas has begun legal action against the NSW Education department, and so she should because it is as though they have made her out to be a potential threat or predator, when she hasn't distributed any inappropriate content to primary school children and appeared in a woman's magazine – not Barbie or Girlfriend magazine.

It's amazing. We begin life without clothes, and by the time we become adults, nudity is hijacked, manipulated and distorted by PC social groups and religious animals, who turn it into some demonic, socially subversive quantity.

This department of Education scenario makes me recall one of  J K Rowling's characters, Dolores Umbridge who enters Hogwarts and starts issuing all these decrees, to become a High Inquisitor. That role can be played – in drag – by peninsula education director Maurice Brunning who said, in his letter to Mrs Tziolas:

"I refer to an article in the magazine Cleo in which your photograph appears accompanied by an article about your personal lifestyle.I have concerns that this will seriously impact on your continued employment at Narraweena Public School. I wish to advise that your temporary engagement at Narraweena PS will cease from May 2.'

It gives me immense comfort to know that dinosaurs are running the department of Education here in New South Wales, but I'm not surprised.

Image: Daily Telegraph/ACP

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Sponsor - Bondara.co.uk

Premium Space





Shop-Tastic



Visits n Things





  • Readers Online

  • eXTReMe Tracker

  • Photobucket

  • Personal Blogs - Blog Top Sites

Categories

Reviewed By...

© Anastasia Mavromatis 2005 - 2008