Thank You For Your Service
May 25, 2014
May 18, 2014
An Austrian Drag Queen Wins Eurovision
In the wee hours of Sunday morning, this year’s Eurovision Song Contest—a pop extravaganza founded in 1956 with the purpose of fostering good relations between neighbors after the violence of the Second World War—drew to a close.Many have called it the most political Eurovision ever: over the course of the evening, which was watched by a hundred and twenty million people, the blonde, teen-aged twins representing Russia, where they are widely touted as virgins, were booed—a first in the history of the contest. Televotes from Crimea had been counted, according to Eurovision decree, as Ukrainian. (They went to Sweden.) The Russians had, as usual, awarded high points to Belarus, whose song was about cheesecake.
But the crowning statement was yet to come. As the last of the thirty-seven participating countries weighed in (Israel, the Netherlands, Iceland, Slovenia), a dark-horse winner emerged: Conchita Wurst. A glamorous drag queen, the Austrian candidate was decked out in a long, glittering dress and sported a full beard. The crowd in Copenhagen went wild. “This night is dedicated to everyone who believes in peace and freedom,” Wurst said, brandishing the glass trophy. “You know who you are. We are unity, and we are unstoppable.” Later, in a press conference, she addressed the same message directly to Vladimir Putin.
Conchita Wurst is the alter ego of the twenty-five-year-old Tom Neuwirth, who created Wurst in response to the discrimination he faced growing up gay in a small Austrian town. (Wurst means both “sausage” and “it’s all the same” in German, and stands, in Neuwirth’s lexicon, for acceptance: “It’s all the same, at the end of the day, how you look or where you come from, because the only thing that counts is the person you are.”) Though she is Eurovision’s first bearded woman, Wurst is by no means the first gender-bending act to do well in the competition; in 1998, the transgender Israeli singer Dana International won. But, against the current political backdrop, the singer’s resounding victory can be read as a statement about Europe’s commitment to progressive ideals.
“It’s a firm and clear rebuke against Putin’s anti-L.G.B.T. legislation and people who support it,” William Lee Adams, the editor-in-chief of WiwiBloggs.com, the Internet’s most-read Eurovision Web site, said. Adams added that the passage of anti-gay-propaganda laws in Russia, in combination with the Sochi Olympics, the annexation of Crimea, and the ongoing fighting in Ukraine, gave Wurst’s act, which one journalist described as “James Bond/Adelle/Sheena Easton-style,” the emotional weight it might not otherwise have had. “She’s singing about rising like a phoenix,” Adams said. “She’s been burned.”
Certainly, Wurst’s path to Eurovision victory has not been easy. A petition against her circulated in Austria after she was chosen as this year’s national candidate. Subsequent petitions in Belarus and Russia objected that Wurst’s participation would turn Eurovision into a hotbed of sodomy. Some people—including Russian politicians—demanded that Russian television edit out her act. (This is against Eurovision rules and was not pursued by any stations, a Eurovision spokesperson said.) Jan Feddersen, an editor at the German newspaper TAZ and a longtime Eurovision reporter, said Austria’s win indicates that there is less of a cultural divide in Europe than is widely thought: Wurst garnered nearly as many votes from Southern and Eastern European countries, like Italy and Slovenia, as from traditionally left-leaning countries like the Netherlands. “There’s the idea that Eastern Europe is homophobic, and this proves it’s not true,” Feddersen said. “Conchita Wurst is a success of liberal, democratic Europe.”
Eurovision scores are comprised of rankings made by appointed jury members in combination with a popular televote. Wurst’s popular ranking held additional surprises: in Armenia, a country that recently considered instituting Russian-style laws against so-called gay propaganda, the public ranked Wurst second. In Russia, Wurst was televoters’ third-favorite act. Yury Gavrikov, the leader of the Russian L.G.B.T. organization Equality, said that this was remarkable. “The Russian people, who are under really aggressive government propaganda in the past couple of years, in spite of all of this they voted for the Austrian with a great percentage,” he said. “They gave him or her bronze.”
Indeed, Eurovision can be seen as a measure of Russia’s changing attitudes toward homosexuality: in 2003, Russia sent t.A.T.u., a carefully choreographed faux-lesbian duo described by one journalist as “the biggest Russian export after oil and gas.” In 2007, Russia awarded the Ukrainian drag performer Verka Serduchk’s song, whose refrain included a nonsense phrase that sounded like “Russia goodbye,” the highest score possible. “The difference is that, in seven years, we have the idea of ‘an enemy’ recreated by the Kremlin and Putin,” Gavrikov said, adding that the Russian L.G.B.T. community is happy with Wurst’s win. “It’s a great compensation, you know, for all the history of the past couple of months. I think it will invite a new process of thinking for people.”
This seemed to be true for this year’s Armenian finalist, Aram Mp3. He apologized to Wurst after saying publicly that his team would help her figure out if she is a man or a woman and that he drives as fast as he can through the gay district in Yerevan. Wurst accepted his apology; before long, according to media reports, they were on hugging terms. Wurst sees herself as a catalyst for discussion about terms like “other” and “normal,” and an embodiment of the idea that you shouldn’t be judged because you are different. Adams, who called her “the goddess of tolerance,” agreed. But, he added, Wurst has also proved to be a surprisingly unifying figure. “People talk about the splintered European Union, about the U.K. pulling out,” he said. “But, last night, everyone got behind an Austrian drag queen.” -The New Yorker
Zac Efron Open To Doing Full-Frontal Nudity: “They Could Probably Get Me To Do Anything”
 |
| Zac Efron |
Noting his recent interest in dildos and the growing popularity of his impeccable body, Hollywood dreamboat Zac Efron announced in an interview with E! this week that he’s not opposed to doing full-frontal nudity.
The muscled twink, who was most recently dubbed “The Sexiest Motherf*cker Alive” after receiving a mimed blowjob from Dave Franco, says a full-blown package shot is not far off. He also admits he came dangerously close to flashing peen during that now-infamous, full-body (and ass) shot in That Awkward Moment.
At the well-received premiere for his latest movie Neighbors in LA last night, Efron said the film’s excessive dildo and dick jokes warmed him up to the idea of baring all. “Dildos are pretty funny,” he said, referring to the scene where he shoves a rubber dildo down Seth Rogen’s throat.
“I was worried about how many dick jokes there were,” he continued. “I was like, ‘Guys, we’re going overboard.’ There were…a lot of them in the movie. Turns out you can get a movie through with a lot of dick jokes.”
You know what else would make a great movie, Zac? Your penis. A 90-minute static shot of your penis.
When confronted with the idea, Efron said “Full frontal? I don’t know, man. This movie makes me concerned because they could probably get me to do anything if they ask. Who knows? I’m not going to say yes or no yet.”
Here’s hoping it happens in a gay sex scene! -Queerty
Brunei’s Shari‘a Law Irks Hollywood Stars, Triggers Boycotts
Hollywood businesses and celebrities have vowed to boycott the Dorchester Collection, a luxury hotel chain owned by the state-run Brunei Investment Agency, after the country implemented a strict Shari'a codeJay Leno, Richard Branson and the Motion Picture & Television Fund have slammed Brunei’s decision to implement an ultraorthodox form of Shari‘a law last week and have called for boycotts against hotels owned by the oil-rich state.
The new criminal code will allow courts to amputate the limbs of thieves, stone convicted adulterers and levy harsh punishments for abortions and homosexuality.
“The decision to implement the [Shari‘a penal code] is not for fun but is to obey Allah’s command as written in the Quran,” said the country’s billionaire leader Sultan Hassanal Bolkiah last week, according to the Associated Press.
The new criminal codes can also be applied to the Southeast Asian nation’s non-Muslim residents, who make up approximately one-third of the tiny country’s population.
On Monday former late-night talk-show host Jay Leno led a protest in front of the iconic Beverly Hills Hotel, which is part of the Dorchester Collection owned by the state-run Brunei Investment Agency.
“What is this, Berlin 1933? This doesn’t seem far off what happened in the Holocaust,” said Leno, according to AFP. “Come on, people, it’s 2014. Evil flourishes when good people do nothing.”
The Feminist Majority Foundation, which is co-chaired by Leno and his wife Mavis, announced this week that its annual Global Women’s Rights Awards scheduled to take place at the Beverly Hills Hotel would be moved to another venue.
Over the weekend, Virgin Group’s founder Richard Branson took to Twitter to rail against the Sultan’s open disregard for human rights. –Time
Why Neil deGrasse Tyson Has Creationists Flipping Out
 |
| Neil deGrasse Tyson |
With each passing episode, "Cosmos" is cementing its host as Christian fundamentalists' new public enemy No. 1
Neil deGrasse Tyson is keeping creationists up at night.
Almost a month after the premiere episode of Cosmos on Fox, the leading creationist organization, Ken Ham’s Answers in Genesis (AiG) is still upset that Tyson dared suggest life on earth started without the help of God. Tyson honestly stated that the very origins of life are not yet understood. That field of science, called abiogenesis, is searching for these answers. Because abiogenesis has yet to turn up any verifiable results—not that they have claimed any are verifiable—AiG is calling that evidence of a clear flaw. What’s clear is that Tyson isn’t just a threat to creationists. Their big target is the reputation of science.
Scientists consider the origins of life one of the great mysteries of our time and are looking for answers with great excitement; however, according to AiG this mystery will not be solved until, “[…] They acknowledge God’s eyewitness account of the origin of life in the Bible.”
AiG continues in an attempt to discredit the science, saying:
“Abiogenesis has never been observed in experimental biology and violates the most fundamental law in biology, the law of biogenesis. Nevertheless, the authors of the review are confident there was a naturalistic chemical origin for life.” [Biogenesis is the natural law that life comes from reproduction by living things].
The jaw-dropping irony of these statements is lost on these creationists. To claim abiogenesis has not been observed (an honest statement), and then to say this proves their creation story is something that would raise the eyebrows of a first-grader.
Secondly, and maybe more importantly, the claim that abiogenesis breaks the law of biogenesis is simply dishonest. The law of biogenesis, attributed to Louis Pasteur, states that life cannot come from non-life, yet Pasteur did not demonstrate that this is impossible, only that it does not happen in everyday life, and that life around us was more connected than people thought. Pasteur argued this before we had any understanding of genetics and he would have realized just how connected we are and the simple fact all life derives from a single source, a common ancestor.
The assumption that their audience lacks basic scientific understanding gives AiG permission to be “fact-free.” Neil deGrasse Tyson gives viewers a naturalist’s explanation for the world, and when he says science does not yet know something, this is not a sign of the failures of science, but instead a powerful example of the necessary honesty in which science thrives. The very fact that AiG sees the words “I don’t know” as a weakness shows the lengths of intellectual dishonesty they are willing to go to pull the wool over their followers’ eyes.
This reaction from AiG shows their new position of pure panic. Neil deGrasse Tyson has become their biggest fear, public enemy number one. Not only does Tyson make science accessible to people; he is likeable and non-controversial. And he does not self-identify as an atheist, meaning his reach across both sides of the aisle is greater than that of Dawkins and Ham.
Millions of viewers each week are inviting Tyson into their home and listening and watching as he explains the magnificence of the world we live in. If the population begins to understand the living world and realizes it originated from natural events with no help from any supernatural forces, this causes the creationists a serious problem. Not that people will walk away from their faith, but that people will walk away from creationism. That would stop lining the pockets of AiG’s Ken Ham and push his creation museum into further financial despair.
Tyson has become the creationist scapegoat as they watch an intellectual world move right on by them. Their attempts to paint him in a dishonest light may convince their most loyal of followers into staying on board, yet will do nothing to expand the foundation they are trying to build off of.
Tyson’s honesty and sense of wonder makes science feel cool again, just like Carl Sagan, his predecessor in the Cosmos series, once did. He is helping to revive America’s love of science—and nothing scares the religious fundamentalists more. –Salon
Neil deGrasse Tyson is keeping creationists up at night.
Almost a month after the premiere episode of Cosmos on Fox, the leading creationist organization, Ken Ham’s Answers in Genesis (AiG) is still upset that Tyson dared suggest life on earth started without the help of God. Tyson honestly stated that the very origins of life are not yet understood. That field of science, called abiogenesis, is searching for these answers. Because abiogenesis has yet to turn up any verifiable results—not that they have claimed any are verifiable—AiG is calling that evidence of a clear flaw. What’s clear is that Tyson isn’t just a threat to creationists. Their big target is the reputation of science.
Scientists consider the origins of life one of the great mysteries of our time and are looking for answers with great excitement; however, according to AiG this mystery will not be solved until, “[…] They acknowledge God’s eyewitness account of the origin of life in the Bible.”
AiG continues in an attempt to discredit the science, saying:
“Abiogenesis has never been observed in experimental biology and violates the most fundamental law in biology, the law of biogenesis. Nevertheless, the authors of the review are confident there was a naturalistic chemical origin for life.” [Biogenesis is the natural law that life comes from reproduction by living things].
The jaw-dropping irony of these statements is lost on these creationists. To claim abiogenesis has not been observed (an honest statement), and then to say this proves their creation story is something that would raise the eyebrows of a first-grader.
Secondly, and maybe more importantly, the claim that abiogenesis breaks the law of biogenesis is simply dishonest. The law of biogenesis, attributed to Louis Pasteur, states that life cannot come from non-life, yet Pasteur did not demonstrate that this is impossible, only that it does not happen in everyday life, and that life around us was more connected than people thought. Pasteur argued this before we had any understanding of genetics and he would have realized just how connected we are and the simple fact all life derives from a single source, a common ancestor.
The assumption that their audience lacks basic scientific understanding gives AiG permission to be “fact-free.” Neil deGrasse Tyson gives viewers a naturalist’s explanation for the world, and when he says science does not yet know something, this is not a sign of the failures of science, but instead a powerful example of the necessary honesty in which science thrives. The very fact that AiG sees the words “I don’t know” as a weakness shows the lengths of intellectual dishonesty they are willing to go to pull the wool over their followers’ eyes.
This reaction from AiG shows their new position of pure panic. Neil deGrasse Tyson has become their biggest fear, public enemy number one. Not only does Tyson make science accessible to people; he is likeable and non-controversial. And he does not self-identify as an atheist, meaning his reach across both sides of the aisle is greater than that of Dawkins and Ham.
Millions of viewers each week are inviting Tyson into their home and listening and watching as he explains the magnificence of the world we live in. If the population begins to understand the living world and realizes it originated from natural events with no help from any supernatural forces, this causes the creationists a serious problem. Not that people will walk away from their faith, but that people will walk away from creationism. That would stop lining the pockets of AiG’s Ken Ham and push his creation museum into further financial despair.
Tyson has become the creationist scapegoat as they watch an intellectual world move right on by them. Their attempts to paint him in a dishonest light may convince their most loyal of followers into staying on board, yet will do nothing to expand the foundation they are trying to build off of.
Tyson’s honesty and sense of wonder makes science feel cool again, just like Carl Sagan, his predecessor in the Cosmos series, once did. He is helping to revive America’s love of science—and nothing scares the religious fundamentalists more. –Salon
K-Pop Group Twerks To The (Really) Oldies In First Classical Music Video Ever
Dvořák you can dance to By Alfred Maskeroni
Belgium's B-Classic music festival, whose mission is to "give classical music the same recognition as pop and rock music," brings us a rather interesting sensory collision in the form of the music video below, promoting its "Classic Comeback" competition.
Korean pop-dance group Waveya interprets the godfather of Slavonik dance music (and Brahm's brosef) Antonín Leopold Dvořák in the three-minute synchronized bump-'n'-grind-gyration-twerk-fest set to "Symphony No. 9 Allegro con fuoco."
The video, shot by Raf Reyntjens in South Korea, is cleverly edited and choreographed, albeit shameless in its attempts at drawing in a younger demographic. See, the organizers of the festival believe "the kids" simply need more access to classical music.
Music videos, they believe, are the best way to do this.
In a short documentary also posted below, Frank Peters, a Dutch classical pianist and spokesperson for B-Classic, says he's "not convinced that youth are uninterested in classical music. I think that it's simply more difficult for them to discover."
Chereen Gayadin, a senior music programmer at MTV, adds, "I think that this is the first video in which one listens to classical music without being aware that it is classical music." -Adweek
Belgium's B-Classic music festival, whose mission is to "give classical music the same recognition as pop and rock music," brings us a rather interesting sensory collision in the form of the music video below, promoting its "Classic Comeback" competition.
Korean pop-dance group Waveya interprets the godfather of Slavonik dance music (and Brahm's brosef) Antonín Leopold Dvořák in the three-minute synchronized bump-'n'-grind-gyration-twerk-fest set to "Symphony No. 9 Allegro con fuoco."
The video, shot by Raf Reyntjens in South Korea, is cleverly edited and choreographed, albeit shameless in its attempts at drawing in a younger demographic. See, the organizers of the festival believe "the kids" simply need more access to classical music.
Music videos, they believe, are the best way to do this.
In a short documentary also posted below, Frank Peters, a Dutch classical pianist and spokesperson for B-Classic, says he's "not convinced that youth are uninterested in classical music. I think that it's simply more difficult for them to discover."
Chereen Gayadin, a senior music programmer at MTV, adds, "I think that this is the first video in which one listens to classical music without being aware that it is classical music." -Adweek
May 4, 2014
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)