Log In

Home
    - Create Journal
    - Update
    - Download

LiveJournal
    - News
    - Paid Accounts
    - Contributors

Customize
    - Customize Journal
    - Create Style
    - Edit Style

Find Users
    - Random!
    - By Region
    - By Interest
    - Search

Edit ...
    - Personal Info &
      Settings
    - Your Friends
    - Old Entries
    - Your Pictures
    - Your Password

Developer Area

Need Help?
    - Lost Password?
    - Freq. Asked
      Questions
    - Support Area



Pip's Sister ([info]pipssister) wrote in [info]fandom_wank,
@ 2003-04-06 22:00:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Current mood:Holier-than-thou

Ideology Wank!
Thomas A. Carder is both a psuedo-movie reviewer and an annoying fundamentalist Christian. He has a website that's dedicated to decoding all of the "bad" or "evil" things in movies such as murder (well, duh!), vomiting (it's a form of hate, apparently) or scary music (which is offensive to God... somehow). This guy is wanky by himself, but some of the fundamentalist "journalists" who defend him are even more hilarious.

Tim Cavanaugh's article, for example, first goes on to extoll the "scientifically proven methodology" of the CAP system. (Ehhh... all right, maybe it make sense mathematically, but I still don't see how vomiting is a form of hate.) Maybe not incredibly wanky, but I think it deserves the label of wank for this line:

Impeccable standards, really. By the CAP methodology, a scene of, say, a doctor merrily performing unnecessary surgery is objectionable regardless of whether it is featured in Doctor Giggles, a Farrelly brothers comedy or a civic-minded exposé of rogue physicians. With a short fuse worthy of John the Baptist, Carder invokes his analysis model against detractors who object, for example, that his abysmal score for Kevin Smith's Dogma missed that film's spiritual message. (In this reporter's view, Carder's disdain for Kevin Smith alone should be enough to get him into Heaven.)

I have no words. But nevermind. If that's not wanky enough, check out this. Roger Ebert apparently called CAPalert "insane." So Carder's sockpuppets... er, The Traditional Values Coalition launches into a GLORIOUS ad-hominem attack on Ebert, basically calling him a big, fat, dumb pornographer whose movie reviews will soon corrupt our children everywhere.

It's all lovely, really.


(Post a new comment)


[info]nita
2003-04-07 05:53 am UTC (link)
Reviewing films from a Christian point of view is their right, I suppose, and not inherently wanky. What makes it so absolutely wanky is the "scientifical proven methodology". Could some one explain to me how the fuck any of this could be scientific?

But gosh, I feel so much better knowing how much they hate one of my favorite movies, "Dogma". I like being one of the sinners.

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]pipssister
2003-04-07 06:24 am UTC (link)
Well, you see... this whole thing is "scientifical" because it is NEVER wrong. They created it X amount of years ago and it has NEVER BEEN WRONG for X amount of years. It's also very much scientifical because it's been right about what's right and wrong and doesn't make the Baby Jesus cry, but rather is approved by the Baby Jesus and thus, through it we can determine that Mary Poppins is the only good movie on earth and South Park: Bigger, Longer and Uncut is straight from hell, and...

Aw, heck. I don't know. :-/

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]nevadafighter
2003-04-07 06:16 am UTC (link)
Yes, friends and neighbors! Welcome to the thirteenth century!

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]gelasius
2003-04-07 09:48 am UTC (link)
Yes, friends and neighbors! Welcome to the thirteenth century!

Hey! That's insensitive slander to the Middle Ages!

*furiously waves Save Mediavalism picket sign*

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]nevadafighter
2003-04-07 10:36 am UTC (link)
Remember the 1340s? We were going a dance called the Catapult.
You always wore brown, the color craze of the decade,
and I was draped in one of those capes that were popular,
the ones with unicorns and pomegranates in needlework.
Everyone would pause for beer and onions in the afternoon,
and at night we would play a game called "Find the Cow."
Everything was hand-lettered then, not like today.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]tempslut
2003-04-07 06:17 am UTC (link)
I just love how "gay bashing/homophobia" is seen as "traditional values" in some circles. Kinda like how "racism" was seen as "states' rights" by the segregationists way back when, you know?

But enough about that. CAP=wank to infinity!

(Reply to this)


[info]daijinryuu
2003-04-07 08:34 am UTC (link)
There is nothing -- and I do mean nothing -- on that site as beautiful as the Kids Page.

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]madamotaku
2003-04-07 09:42 am UTC (link)
Okay, so according to the DON'T TOUCH ME THERE!!! guidlines/diagrams, boys and girls should not let themselves be touched between the waist and knee, but it's okay for them to let someone violate their mouths (and possibly their bellybuttons) as much as they like. A girl can't be touched on the shoulders or chest, but you can twiddle with a boy's nipples as much as you like. Got it.

*runs off to create the DON'T TOUCH ME THERE!!! icon that's crying out to be made*

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Aaaand here it is.
[info]madamotaku
2003-04-07 11:06 am UTC (link)


*jumps into the canyon of sin yelling "YAAAAHOOOHOOOEEE!!!"*

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: Aaaand here it is.
[info]cesare
2003-04-07 01:00 pm UTC (link)
Niiiiiiiiiiice!

(Reply to this)(Parent)

Re: Aaaand here it is.
[info]pipssister
2003-04-07 03:11 pm UTC (link)
*jumps into the canyon of sin yelling "YAAAAHOOOHOOOEEE!!!"*

I think that was MY favorite part. :-)

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]lcsbanana
2003-04-07 06:53 pm UTC (link)
gaaaaaaah.

On the one hand, I'm glad that at least they're emphasizing that it's not the kids' fault if they're molested.

On the other hand, given that this may be the only time these kids ever hear a single direct word spoken about their Private Places (tm), way to instill an utter fear and loathing of all sexual activity!!!

gaaaaaaaaah, I say.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]lcsbanana
2003-04-07 06:56 pm UTC (link)
--should've checked out the second story before posting. The graphics are PRICELESS. The most beautiful excessively-literal depiction of Christ's sufferings on the cross to redeem mankind! And rather theologically misleading, too.

I just love the idea of WALKING ON THE CRUCIFIX. I hope you take Christ's dead body down first, because that is going to be slippery.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]daijinryuu
2003-04-08 01:40 am UTC (link)
I guess the point is to not trip over Christ's rotting corpse, because that'll send you falling into the canyon of sin.

(YAAAAHOOOHOOOEEE)

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]darthtall
2003-04-07 08:43 am UTC (link)
Heeheehee. I, for one, love the use of the phrase "the most foul of the foul words". Especially since my first reaction was "What the fuck is that?"

I'm also terribly fond of the "suggestive eye movement" in the Sex/Homosexuality section.

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]laurar
2003-04-07 09:37 am UTC (link)
*makes suggestive eye movements*

Hmmm. No sex.

Maybe I'm not doing it right...

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]darthtall
2003-04-08 03:52 am UTC (link)
Here, let my icon show you the proper method.

*falls over*

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]telesilla
2003-04-07 09:59 am UTC (link)
I couldn't read anything because I was hypnotized by that "Homosexual Urban Legends --- the series" icon.

Now that's Must See TV.

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]cesare
2003-04-07 12:59 pm UTC (link)
Holy crap, what station is that on? I gotta get cable again!

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]misswindy
2003-04-07 10:06 am UTC (link)
a big, fat, dumb pornographer whose movie reviews will soon corrupt our children everywhere.

I knew there was a reason I liked Roger Ebert.

(Reply to this)


wizzard
2003-04-07 10:09 am UTC (link)
From the website: People can Spiritually survive on a "cake-n-ice cream" diet only so long. Sooner or later they must have "meat-n-veggies."

I'm sorry but mean-n-veggies is too sexually suggestive. He is so going to hell (and not our fandom_wankers special hell either). I totally agree with them that Ebert can't tell the difference between good and evil any more. I mean, he liked Lara Croft: Tomb Raider.

(Reply to this)


[info]lexin
2003-04-07 02:15 pm UTC (link)
That site is funnier than the Landover Baptist one. And that's a pisstake.

(Reply to this)


[info]darkrose
2003-04-07 05:44 pm UTC (link)
Where do I sign up to join the Sodomy Lobby?

(Reply to this)

I could go on for hours.
[info]jerry_ds_girl
2003-04-07 06:55 pm UTC (link)
Anyone catch the review for American Pie? (after he admits he left after the first 40 minutes) "Teenage boys don't masturbate, the film industry just wants you to believe that."

(Reply to this)(Thread)

Re: I could go on for hours.
[info]lcsbanana
2003-04-07 06:58 pm UTC (link)
That's right, moms. The reason those sheets are all sticky and crusty is because the FILM INDUSTRY DEVILS snuck in through the window and lovingly basted them with false semen! DON'T FALL FOR THEIR TRICKS!

(Reply to this)(Parent)

Re: I could go on for hours.
[info]pipssister
2003-04-07 07:37 pm UTC (link)
Bwa-ha-ha-ha! Oh, that's great! That's almost as funny as the time they said the Crusades were not about religion, but about Christians protecting their homes or something.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: I could go on for hours.
[info]phosfate
2003-04-08 12:54 am UTC (link)
Their vacation homes, maybe...

(Reply to this)(Parent)

Oh shit, there's more
[info]jerry_ds_girl
2003-04-07 08:03 pm UTC (link)
If you go to the segment titled "After-School Special" there's a whole list of 'satanic' symbols and their meanings: the Star of David is a 'potent symbol of evil', the eyed pyramid on the dollar bill is a sign of world currency creating a new world order, the Islamic star and crescent signifies Satan being placed above Jesus...this is offensive on -so- many levels--'scuse me, I need to go lie down for a while.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

Re: Oh shit, there's more
[info]pipssister
2003-04-07 08:46 pm UTC (link)
Woah! Woah! Dude... don't take the religious wank in such high levels. I did that once and it led me to flame Carder, but he basically just told me I had a "know-it-all" and "belittiling" attitude and that despite the fact that I was Jewish, I would one day see the light of Christ.

Best just to point and laugh, folks. Take it frome me. :-)

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]pipssister
2003-04-08 02:25 am UTC (link)
Eeek! I don't know why the link to the Tim C. article isn't working but... here you go:
http://www.ojr.org/ojr/ethics/1017782210.php

(Reply to this)

Ahh..yes...
[info]evilgmbethy
2003-04-08 10:12 am UTC (link)
The CAP Alert.. I know it well.

Aside from the aforementioned "suggestive eye movement", my other favorite is "punk dress".

(Reply to this)


[info]diamonde
2003-04-09 09:16 am UTC (link)
As I remember, one of the basic points of the scientific method is that it's impossible to conclusively prove anything. Except possibly that people who talk about ther scientifically proven greatness are gigantic wankers.

Also, the phrase 'scientifically proven methodology' makes me laugh a lot. How exactly does one prove a methodology? And why would science 'prove' a movie rating system anyway? It's a movie review. Just give it three stars and shut up about disrespecting God already. If God didn't want us to say 'fuck' he wouldn't have Created swearing.

Not to mention fucking.

(Reply to this)

  
   
Privacy Policy - COPPA
Legal Disclaimer - Site Map