Because deleting my own memory is not an option

November 28, 2007 3:59 AM

Please, for the love of humanity, erase this MeFi user from my brain.

Yes, it is this week's buzzword, but this post is beyond offensive.

I realise that people's accounts get hijacked, that people fall off the wagon, and that crack is both cheap and easy to buy, so on the off chance, I took a quick look at the OP's recent MeFi activity. There is a string of charming offensive comments, but this recent post is just beyond the pale.

I'm posting this under etiquette/policy because there isn't a [VomitFilter] category, but if crap like this is OK at MeFi, then we have no etiquette and the policy is seriously broken.

posted by DarlingBri to etiquette/policy at 3:59 AM (134 comments total)

What, exactly, are you asking for? For the post to be ulled, the user banned, free drinks to erase your tragic memory, what?

Also, while you certainly have a right to your feelings/thoughts, presenting them in this dramatic way perhaps encourages dramatic responses as opposed to rational ones.

and yeah, for the record, I didn't find the post that offensive.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 4:12 AM on November 28, 2007

I predict this will go well.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 4:17 AM on November 28, 2007 [2 favorites]

while you certainly have a right to your feelings/thoughts, presenting them in this dramatic way perhaps encourages dramatic responses as opposed to rational ones.

Seconded. I really don't want to watch the vids so I'm not going to comment on the post but you do yourself and any legitimacy this callout has a disservice by going all scattergun emotive. You might like to drop IronLizard a mefimail if you haven't already. No doubt jessamyn or cortex will be up soon and will give some response.
posted by peacay at 4:21 AM on November 28, 2007

In a free speech–based democracy, one has the right to protest at being offended. One does not, however, have the right to not be offended.
posted by chrismear at 4:27 AM on November 28, 2007 [6 favorites]

Please. IronLizard was practically begging for a callout.
posted by Reggie Digest at 4:34 AM on November 28, 2007

The last Youtube link in that post is an ad, and a double from at least two years ago.
posted by emelenjr at 4:35 AM on November 28, 2007

I didn't find it all that offensive, but definitely not worthy of an FPP.
posted by BrotherCaine at 4:41 AM on November 28, 2007

I haven't watched any of the videos (the post looks kinda farktastic, so I ignored it), but if there's actual animal cruelty going on here, then it sounds like a pretty good callout to me.
posted by kittens for breakfast at 4:42 AM on November 28, 2007

Ooo, she's being "dramatic" and "emotive"! Time to break out the new flag.
posted by smackfu at 4:47 AM on November 28, 2007 [1 favorite]

... beyond offensive

Negatron.

Also, there seem to be no real grounds for you to cast aspersions on this person's Mefi activity. In this case, the quick look clearly has not sufficed.
posted by rudster at 5:05 AM on November 28, 2007

"Earthy" is the word that springs to mind when I read his comments. "Offensive" not so much. I have always been lowbrow though, so ymmv.

if crap like this is OK at MeFi, then we have no etiquette and the policy is seriously broken.

Crap like this is OK to the extent that it should be redeemed by a diamond in the muck occasionally. My posting history is a stream of semi amusing snarks redeemed only by the fact that one out of 20 of them are actually helpful or illuminating, (or not sweary.)

If you glance at ironlizard's posting history, you'll see the same thing I think. Like I said: earthy.
posted by Jofus at 5:05 AM on November 28, 2007

And then I saw the "That's some huge tits" comment...
posted by Jofus at 5:07 AM on November 28, 2007

I flagged it as "other" just for being a piss poor FPP. It's so naively unironically offensive, that I didn't really find it offensive. There is no actual animal cruelty or dwarf cruelty that I could find, although the grouping of links does make it kind of W00T! animal cruelty.
posted by roofus at 5:08 AM on November 28, 2007

I don't see how posting these links is endorsing any of these activities.

In fact most of this came out of a rather innocent conversation on irc.
posted by gomichild at 5:12 AM on November 28, 2007

I haven't watched any of the videos..........

Well, stop right there. Look for yourself, then comment.
posted by Jakey at 5:16 AM on November 28, 2007 [1 favorite]

if there's actual animal cruelty going on here, then it sounds like a pretty good callout to me.

posted by kittens for breakfast at 4:42 AM

Does it work to say "Eponysterical" here?

I'm still learning.
posted by game warden to the events rhino at 5:21 AM on November 28, 2007 [4 favorites]

Dear lord that's a stupid post. It should be deleted as a stupid post. Not that this is a good callout or anything.
posted by Skorgu at 5:27 AM on November 28, 2007

OMG!!! Discussing the tossing of other living things might make people actually do it!!!!! This must be banned!!!!!!

I think you are getting worked up over very little DarlingBri. Crap fpp yes. Offensive content? no.
posted by twistedonion at 5:28 AM on November 28, 2007

If you watch the vids, you will quickly realize that no cats were harmed. Don't be like one of these whackos that boycott sponsors of shows they've never watched.

As for dwarf-tossing, well, some find it repugnant, while others think it's a bit of fun. Kind of like rugby.
posted by Mister_A at 5:43 AM on November 28, 2007

First, they came for my sexism. Then, they came for my dwarf-tossing.
posted by WCityMike at 5:46 AM on November 28, 2007 [5 favorites]

Holy crap, don't say anything negative about the poster, you might get flagged as being SEXIST.
posted by arnold at 5:49 AM on November 28, 2007

What poster? This poster? I fucking love this poster, OK?
posted by Mister_A at 5:51 AM on November 28, 2007

DarlingBri, it's considered good form to link to the MetaTalk callout in the original thread. I went ahead and made the link, just FYI.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 5:51 AM on November 28, 2007

Well, stop right there. Look for yourself, then comment.

Eh, fuck that noise. I'd agree with you if it were like some major news of the day, world events type thing, but it's some goofy shit on YouTube. That's MY five minutes you're asking for here, man. I don't think so. I'm just saying, if animals are injured, sure, dump it. If it otherwise sucks, dump it then, too, but I have nothing to say on that score, other than experience tells me that, yes, this post probably does suck.
posted by kittens for breakfast at 5:53 AM on November 28, 2007 [2 favorites]

Ooo, she's being "dramatic" and "emotive"! Time to break out the new flag.

That's unfair. Posting "if crap like this is OK at MeFi, then we have no etiquette" is definitely being overly dramatic. Stop blurring the sexism issue, smackfu.
posted by mediareport at 5:57 AM on November 28, 2007 [2 favorites]

I realise that people's accounts get hijacked, that people fall off the wagon, and that crack is both cheap and easy to buy, so on the off chance, ...

You're really tempting me to go after the my little pony thing you have going there.

Though five minutes too late, I also discovered that the ford commercial is a double. Triple, even. Which sucks because nothing makes me cringe in the early morning like an unexpected decapitation.

Neat. Taken completely out of context my posting history does look a bit odd.
posted by IronLizard at 6:04 AM on November 28, 2007

That was a tremendously bad post, but a MetaTalk about it? Next time you actually want to erase something from your brain, I suggest a full bottle of Ouzo, not a public complaint where a flagging would've sufficed.
posted by Greg Nog at 6:05 AM on November 28, 2007

If only there was some sort of pledge of excellence we could all take.
posted by modernnomad at 6:10 AM on November 28, 2007 [10 favorites]

I read the post, I clicked all the links, I posted in the thread, I walked away for half an hour to calm down, and then I posted on MeTa.

I'll leave dwarf tossing debates to those who think it really is debatable. But I stand by my opinion that the last video is egregious. I don't even like cats, and I'm not squeamish, but that's...

I'm just waiting for the fake snuff film to be posted so people can explain to me that nobody was really murdered, and that it still qualifies as "Best of the Web."

It is possible that my point about IronLizard's previous comments was ill advised. I was not in a charitable state of mind when I read them, and "that's some huge tits" and "sometwat fucking related" probably slanted my reading of everything to the worst possible light. Go figure.
posted by DarlingBri at 6:12 AM on November 28, 2007

What's offensive about it? I can't watch the videos, so I don't know, but just the titles don't seem offensive. Tasteless, yes.

The implication that two of the three ways this might get posted are because the poster is addicted to drugs seems problematic.
posted by OmieWise at 6:13 AM on November 28, 2007

Oh, sorry, you've commented. What happens in the last video?
posted by OmieWise at 6:13 AM on November 28, 2007

Oh, sorry, you've commented. What happens in the last video?

A cat is filmed being deliberately trapped in a car sunroof, struggles, and is decapitated.
posted by DarlingBri at 6:15 AM on November 28, 2007

You know it's just cinema magic, yeah?
posted by chrismear at 6:17 AM on November 28, 2007 [1 favorite]

If those comments bother you, I hope you never venture into the posts from which they spawned.
posted by IronLizard at 6:17 AM on November 28, 2007

A cat is filmed being deliberately trapped in a car sunroof, struggles, and is decapitated.

Oh, come on, it's a UK Ford car ad. It's shocking, and certainly that post in general was crap, but you can stop misrepresenting it as some sort of evil cat torture any time now.
posted by mediareport at 6:19 AM on November 28, 2007 [3 favorites]

Not a great post, not a great callout. Take longer to cool down next time.
posted by languagehat at 6:20 AM on November 28, 2007

Please, for the love of humanity, erase this MeFi user from my brain.
This may help

Besides, I leave the Dwarf-tossing issues to Aragorn and Gimli. If it's good for them, it's good for me.
posted by jmd82 at 6:20 AM on November 28, 2007

A cat is filmed being deliberately trapped in a car sunroof, struggles, and is decapitated.

If that was really what happened then I would be as horrified as you seem to be.
posted by twistedonion at 6:24 AM on November 28, 2007

Weep, o warriors of free speech. The Battle of Splat Cat Hill has been lost this day.

*taps*
posted by kittens for breakfast at 6:25 AM on November 28, 2007

I love really crap MetaTalk call outs. They really are the best part of this site. Since IronLizard probably isn't going to flame out because he is probably not a crack head, i'm hoping DarlingBri will instead. Please don't disappoint.
posted by chunking express at 6:26 AM on November 28, 2007 [1 favorite]

That does sound awful, but if it's an advertisement, it would seem to be appropriate for MetaFilter, even if it makes a crappy post. Do you really think MetaFilter should have more restrictive content standards than British TV?

This whole thing reads a bit as if you want to impose your very personal reaction on everyone else here.
posted by OmieWise at 6:28 AM on November 28, 2007

The original post has been deleted.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 6:28 AM on November 28, 2007

So, that post was pretty dumb, and it's gone now. IronLizard, you may want to avoid making irc-inspired late-night posts about potentially people-pissing-off subjects, going forward; that's kind of the double-dog-dare territory of FPPland, and it turns out to be a bad idea fairly often as far as I can tell. Sleep on it, next time.

DarlingBri, your callout here was pretty over-the-top, too. I think you're reading a lot more villain into IronLizard than seems to be there, looking through is account, so setting up a post callout as a hatchet job on the user seems kind of out of line.

And at 4 am Pacific, you're posting in pretty much the exact window that's likely to prompt zero administrative response. It'd be okay to likewise just flag, send us some email, and give it some time.
posted by cortex at 6:30 AM on November 28, 2007

You have got to be kidding DarlingBri. If this post offends you to the extent that you need to make statements like; "for the love of humanity", "erase this MeFi user from my brain", "beyond offensive" (all hyperbole) and create pejorative hypotheticals about how the post might have come about; account hijacked, fallen off the wagon, crack user, you need to reset your outrage filter. The post was crap but it didn't warrant this callout.
posted by tellurian at 6:32 AM on November 28, 2007 [3 favorites]

I am a slow typer.
posted by tellurian at 6:33 AM on November 28, 2007

It was a pretty weak post, it's rare that a "oh ha ha watch that animal struggle" link stays on the front page though it has happened.
posted by jessamyn at 6:34 AM on November 28, 2007

And at 4 am Pacific, you're posting in pretty much the exact window that's likely to prompt zero administrative response.
That's handy to know.
posted by tellurian at 6:35 AM on November 28, 2007 [2 favorites]

Oh man. Please someone post something I find offensive. I'd like to be dramatic about it too.
posted by Stynxno at 6:37 AM on November 28, 2007 [1 favorite]

Personally I want to hear more about IronLizard's substance abuse problems.
posted by shakespeherian at 6:40 AM on November 28, 2007

Oh, ha ha! both cortex and jessamyn. Bloody small window if you ask me (I can see cortex and jessamyn /playschool).
posted by tellurian at 6:44 AM on November 28, 2007

I think DarlingBri should take up smoking.

[NOT SMOKERIST!!]

[EVEN THOUGH I HATE THE FILTHY FUCKERS!!]

[EVEN THOUGH I USED TO BE ONE!!!!!]

[SMOKE 'EM IF YOU GOT 'EM!!!!!!]
posted by Mister_A at 6:44 AM on November 28, 2007 [2 favorites]

It wasn't too good. It's pretty much the reason I make few FPP's, they're rather uninspired. The 'splat the cat' thing was what, in fact, prompted me to post this at all (late night IRC chats aside). I was thumbing through a very old printout of The Bastard Operator From Hell (In Britain, number two) and ran across this little tidbit:

It's: SPLAT-MY-CAT!"
Slower than a DATSUN 180B. Much slower. Mortally slower, one might say. Rest in peices.

Of course I had to Google it. Who could resist?


Oh man. Please someone post something I find offensive. I'd like to be dramatic about it too.
NSFW Will this do? (No, probably not but it was worth a shot.)
posted by IronLizard at 6:47 AM on November 28, 2007

There's a long-lost Philip K. Dick story about erasing Metafilter users from the brain. I can't find it, but I know he touches upon this in his Exegesis.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 6:48 AM on November 28, 2007 [1 favorite]

Should be a (sic) after peices(sic). Angle brackets, you know.
posted by IronLizard at 6:49 AM on November 28, 2007

I apologise for the over the top nature of my callout, in that case.

OmnieWise, the ad was never aired on TV, and would never have made it onto British television. We're talking about a country that had a Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals more than 100 years before it had one for children. People graphically being killed in car crashes: yes. Animals being tortured: not so much.
posted by DarlingBri at 6:50 AM on November 28, 2007

Ok, the cat ad cracked me up, while the technical side wondered "Neat, how'd they do that?!". Which doesn't mean you're wrong Bri, just pointing out that one person's offense could be another's chuckle.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 6:56 AM on November 28, 2007

Here's the original two posts for the car ad.
posted by IronLizard at 6:57 AM on November 28, 2007

I would worry that MeFi's outrage filter has recently been recalibrated so as to have no tolerance whatsoever, but then I remember that it has always been thus (for some).
posted by dreamsign at 6:59 AM on November 28, 2007

I miss the img tag.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 7:02 AM on November 28, 2007

setting up a post callout as a hatchet job on the user seems kind of out of line.

More than kind of.
And someone should take smackfu's PC Police badge away.
posted by CunningLinguist at 7:02 AM on November 28, 2007

the pig tossing story made me laugh. there is a place for lowbrow, and it often works better than most of the desperately middlebrow, banal stuff that's all over the front page and does not get deleted
posted by matteo at 7:05 AM on November 28, 2007

Good on'ya DarlingBri. I agreed with you in principle and you're very gracious.
posted by tellurian at 7:06 AM on November 28, 2007

Bad post, bad callout. Nothing more to see here. Oh, except:

Holy crap, don't say anything negative about the poster, you might get flagged as being SEXIST.
posted by arnold at 8:49 AM on November 28 [+] [!]

I'm going to tie you to your strawman, burn it down, and then flag your remains as "stupid troll" HOLY CRAP!
posted by Kwine at 7:08 AM on November 28, 2007

So, darlingbri, I assume you would consider this post unsuitable for Metafilter?
posted by stinkycheese at 7:11 AM on November 28, 2007

This flameout sucks.

*unsummons languagehat*
posted by Mister_A at 7:11 AM on November 28, 2007

If the sun doesn't shine out of your ass, then...
posted by Sailormom at 7:16 AM on November 28, 2007

It was a pretty weak post, it's rare that a "oh ha ha watch that animal struggle" link stays on the front page though it has happened.
posted by jessamyn

Very true. We've got the 'is it christmas' post up, and the cat purrrrring is pretty special, so the bar has been set damn high.
posted by justgary at 7:17 AM on November 28, 2007 [2 favorites]

Please, for the love of humanity, erase this MeFi user from my brain.

Did someone call me?
posted by brain_drain at 7:20 AM on November 28, 2007 [4 favorites]

So, darlingbri, I assume you would consider this post unsuitable for Metafilter?

stinkycheese, I'm 100% fine with that post.

As Lotto commented in the discussion, "the first link is an article, the second the wikipedia entry about the site. Neither contain any images. In fact, I was just about to thank ascullion for not linking to the site."

Which, IMHO, is a great way to go if you want to discuss stuff like this. Linking to the articles provides some context and analysis and invites people to compare their thoughts on the question asked in the original post: "why they do it, and what it says about us."

Which is pretty much what happened. I actually think that's an excellent example of a great MeFi post.
posted by DarlingBri at 7:26 AM on November 28, 2007

I'm just waiting for the fake snuff film to be posted

Somebody did post a link to an Encyclopedia Dramatica page that had an animated gif of Bud Dwyer killing himself. I'm not going to link it, I'm not going to look for it.
posted by louche mustachio at 7:26 AM on November 28, 2007

And someone should take smackfu's PC Police badge away.

I just call them like other people want me to see them.
posted by smackfu at 7:26 AM on November 28, 2007 [1 favorite]

I actually think that's an excellent example of a great MeFi post.

I'm glad to hear it. I quite agree.
posted by stinkycheese at 7:34 AM on November 28, 2007

We're talking about a country that had a Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals more than 100 years...
Tally ho!
posted by Wolfdog at 7:35 AM on November 28, 2007 [4 favorites]

A cat is filmed being deliberately trapped in a car sunroof, struggles, and is decapitated.

A horse is decapitated and its head put in someone's bed.

A dog is shot and killed.

A deer is shot and killed.

A buffalo is slaughtered.

etc., etc. Youtube clips of all of those scenes might have been posted for various reasons. Indeed, scenes of (fictional) human deaths might be posted for various reasons (I seem to recall a post of the best horror movie deaths, but it might have been somewhere else). The admins of this site can't (and shouldn't) regulate taste. If nobody (or no animals) were harmed, just skip it and move on.
posted by pardonyou? at 7:40 AM on November 28, 2007

Please, for the love of humanity, erase this MeFi user from my brain.

Okay, but it'll cost you $50 and you have to provide the mallet and icepick.
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 8:06 AM on November 28, 2007 [1 favorite]

Yes! Transorbital leucotomy for dummies, eh Alvy?
posted by Mister_A at 8:14 AM on November 28, 2007

If the decapitation had featured an ad agency "creative," no sentient being capable of feeling would have been harmed and the post could have stood. Small reduction is the customer base for London's hard-working coke dealers though, I suppose. The moral maze!
posted by Abiezer at 8:18 AM on November 28, 2007 [1 favorite]

Abiezer, who died and made you Hitler? Hitler? Huh?
posted by Mister_A at 8:25 AM on November 28, 2007

Wait, you understood that??
posted by IronLizard at 8:28 AM on November 28, 2007

Funny you should ask, Mister_A. About two years after I was born, three mysterious elderly gentlemen with German accents arrived in the village. They set out a number of small objects on a cloth before me. I selected the moustache comb and was taken away to be reared in a secret bunker in Argentina. Unfortunately, a sartorial contretemps over the advisability of jackboots worn with a poncho cut short my budding rise to world domination.
posted by Abiezer at 8:38 AM on November 28, 2007 [17 favorites]

[rends garments]
posted by JanetLand at 8:58 AM on November 28, 2007 [1 favorite]

a sartorial contretemps over the advisability of jackboots worn with a poncho cut short my budding rise to world domination.

Göring is that you?
posted by IronLizard at 9:01 AM on November 28, 2007

Count your blessings, at least he didn't email you "a picture of someone putting their penis in a racoons mouth". That's a quote, and also a verifiable fact.
posted by prostyle at 9:35 AM on November 28, 2007

Raccoon, chicken, whatever. There's been all manner of bestiality posted here.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 9:42 AM on November 28, 2007

So, it was YOU who sent him a nasty e-mail!

Or you just remember weird shit even better than I can.
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 9:42 AM on November 28, 2007

Or you just remember weird shit even better than I can.

Ding!

...it's rare that a "oh ha ha watch that animal struggle" link stays on the front page though it has happened.
posted by prostyle at 9:46 AM on November 28, 2007

*hugs DarlingBri; hugs IronLizard, and brandon, and stavros, and peacay... and; puts down drink and passes out*
posted by taz at 9:48 AM on November 28, 2007

though it has happened

Here too.
posted by Armitage Shanks at 9:51 AM on November 28, 2007

though it has happened.

In 2001.
posted by jessamyn at 9:52 AM on November 28, 2007

/me draws mustache on taz.
posted by chrismear at 10:00 AM on November 28, 2007

We're talking about a country that had a Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals more than 100 years before it had one for children.

Which is the exact reason why my country is so fucked up.
posted by ninthart at 10:38 AM on November 28, 2007

: takes fighting stance to protect the honor of taz's drink :
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 10:43 AM on November 28, 2007

People graphically being killed in car crashes: yes. Animals being tortured: not so much.

What in the hell?
posted by Ambrosia Voyeur at 10:45 AM on November 28, 2007

"Okay, but it'll cost you $50 and you have to provide the mallet and icepick."

I provide the mallet and icepick, because I find that the real profit comes not in keeping overhead down, but in charging the $50 both before AND after the operation.
posted by klangklangston at 10:49 AM on November 28, 2007 [1 favorite]

And I vaguely remember IronLizard as one of the retarded Men's Rights folks, but thumbing through his history, I don't see any real mention of those topics (though I haven't looked very far). Maybe I'm confusing him with Space Diver, who (IIRC) was on about that and circumcision at some point.
posted by klangklangston at 10:50 AM on November 28, 2007

And how many of you think the cats LIKE being put in the scanners? (Especially the sheet-feed rather than flat-panel ones)

The link that inspired this post that was talked about in irc was this one, the "the" in "Splat the Cat".

At the bottom of the long, old-style web page it says:

Caveat to the reader of the above nonsense:

If this has offended you, I'm sorry, but I don't take it back. This was in no way intended to be a slam against cats. It was done with tongue-in-cheek and developed out of good natured chiding with some wonderful people who just also happened to be cat lovers. Best wishes to Julia, Barb, Kaye, et al.

Saudade
12/01/1995

I consider it a piece of Web History (or more accurately The History of Bad Taste on the Web) and therefore minimally worthy of MetaFilter's consideration.

IronLizard's efforts to make it more than a single-link post were clumsy at best, and the last link was not only cruel, gross and a double post, but also unrelated to the Flinging theme of the post. An obvious mistake, potentially grounds for deletion of the post, but not for such level of anger and hatred toward the poster.

FULL DISCLOSURE: I am a dog person, and in fact, had an allergy to cats in my youth, one which I thankfully overcame over time. But as a child, there was more than one occasion when a cat lept into my lap or onto my shoulder and I responded reflexively by flinging the cat away from me. Those cats were not harmed by my actions and did confirm the old trope about "cats always land on their feet".
posted by wendell at 11:02 AM on November 28, 2007

This is a weak-ass callout of a weakish post. But the post was no weaker than a lot of what makes it on the blue these days.

Something about cats turns otherwise normal people into simpering poop-scooping baby-talking slaves to the feline overlords.
posted by Justinian at 11:32 AM on November 28, 2007

I know it probably goes without saying, but shouldn't we still put a little more emphasis on the fact that, you know, no cat was actually harmed to make that video?

It may not be a shining example of good taste, but the way this discussion is going so far you'd almost think we were talking about images of an actual cat decapitation.
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 11:36 AM on November 28, 2007

I know it probably goes without saying, but shouldn't we still put a little more emphasis on the fact that, you know, no cat was actually harmed to make that video?

I dunno. There's a really good FPP in this mess that should examine that. After all, if it's ok if not real live things are involved, then is CGI kiddie porn ok? After all, no kids were used. Does it then become ok to actually do all that terrible things that people say about Ann Coulter, since it's all CGI and no one is actually getting hurt? Just because there is nothing we can touch, does it make it less real, even if we are affected in the same way (most people would be as grossed out by CGI kiddie porn as real kiddie porn)?

:cue Matrix music:
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 11:56 AM on November 28, 2007

Are more people offended by the cat-decapitating ad or the Orangina ad?
posted by Wolfdog at 12:03 PM on November 28, 2007

If enough people answer that question I can probably write it up and get a masters degree in some sort of social science.
posted by Wolfdog at 12:05 PM on November 28, 2007

Well, someone just posted a video of cattle being slaughtered in today's Taser thread.
posted by fandango_matt at 12:11 PM on November 28, 2007

Wolfdog, I'm more offended by the French announcer's sultry elocution of the word "pulpeuse."
posted by Ambrosia Voyeur at 12:32 PM on November 28, 2007

FWIW I can state with some authority that Darlingbri is not a cat person.
posted by genghis at 12:40 PM on November 28, 2007

but also unrelated to the Flinging theme of the post.

Not true. I'd originally thought someone was controlling the sunroof through remote. So more like cat fishing, but still. Cat fishing. Hah.
posted by IronLizard at 1:13 PM on November 28, 2007

Count your blessings, at least he didn't email you "a picture of someone putting their penis in a racoons mouth". That's a quote, and also a verifiable fact.

Oh right. Sorry about that.
posted by IronLizard at 1:15 PM on November 28, 2007

I think I'm more offended by the Orangina ad than by anything ever. Gluey, blotchey, yet hideously sleek uncanny canyon CGI? check; furrysploitation? check; protagonist is a skeletal bear with obvious body issues that drive him to commit acts of violence and sadistic thievery upon slighter species, and all his crimes are presented positively? check; overreliance on the bikini-clad sex zebras inducing ejaculation in softdrink bottles meme? check. Everybody's secondary sex characteristics turning into oranges and then exploding or something it's difficult to tell? Check! What's not to hate with every fibre of one's being?

(Thank you, in other words. Now I'll go watch it again with the sound on.)
posted by Don Pepino at 2:11 PM on November 28, 2007

Watch the high quality version, Don.
posted by Wolfdog at 2:15 PM on November 28, 2007 [3 favorites]

Does anyone else here ever get the "MeTa Itch" What I mean is do you ever just 'know' when something is going down. I do, I can feel it. But I happen to be very spiritual.

As you were.
posted by nola at 2:44 PM on November 28, 2007

My goodness, the Orangina ad is the most unintentionally hilarious abuse of motion capture animation I've ever seen, leading right up to the flashdance reference. For weeks now, every time I see one of their bottom-heavy orange bottles at the grocery, I'm going to see a squid woman and start snickering.
posted by KirkJobSluder at 3:19 PM on November 28, 2007

About half of the way through, I think, "they got the gender wrong on the peacocks" but then I realize that the whole thing works better if you see it as a drag show.
posted by KirkJobSluder at 3:58 PM on November 28, 2007

Wolfdog, the Orangina is awesome, thanks.
posted by tellurian at 4:15 PM on November 28, 2007

That bear's gonna eat that sexy deer. How's your slightly fizzy orange drink now?
posted by BitterOldPunk at 4:31 PM on November 28, 2007

Wow, that Orangina ad takes your bottle of boring old orange juice and transforms it right before your eyes into sexy tropical mango and passion fruit nectar! Advertising is magic, I tells ya.
posted by Quietgal at 7:14 PM on November 28, 2007

Does it then become ok to actually do all that terrible things that people say about Ann Coulter, since it's all CGI and no one is actually getting hurt?

Even in the Matrix, Ann Coulter is a bitch.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 7:18 PM on November 28, 2007

Can you eat that egg?

If not sure you ought-ter,
then place it in water.
If it lies on its side,
then it's fresh; eat with pride.

After three or four days,
at an angle it lays.
But, it still is a treat,
so go on and eat.

Ten days, stands on end,
in your baking 'twill blend.
'Cause it's definitely edible,
in your baking, incredible.

But, if it floats on the surface,
that egg serves no purpose.
'Cause a floater's a stinker!
Out the back door best fling 'er!
posted by stupidsexyFlanders at 8:02 PM on November 28, 2007 [3 favorites]

We need a "helpful" flag for stupidsexyFlanders poetry.
posted by Iron Rat at 8:25 PM on November 28, 2007

See, I knew this MeFiMail thing was a disaster waiting to happen. You've gone and made it so that there are so many ways to contact an administrator on the site that people can only remember the most obvious and least appropriate one - posting a new thread on MeTa for every single fucking stupid little thing that annoys them.

Hell in a handbasket, I tells ya.
posted by dg at 10:05 PM on November 28, 2007

How happy is the blameless Vestal's lot!
The world forgetting, by the world forgot.
Eternal sunshine of the spotless mind!
Each pray'r accepted, and each wish resign'd.
posted by drjimmy11 at 10:25 PM on November 28, 2007

Gary Larson writes in one of his big compilations a story about a cartoon he drew, where two dogs are playing "tethercat", which is tetherball using a cat. [someone's site with the cartoon, scroll down.]

Evidentally this cartoon, more than most he's drawn over the years, attracted piles of hate mail calling him a cat abuser and such.

In the book, he speculates that it's driven by the fact that, as a static cartoon panel, the game of "tethercat" never ends; you could put aside the paper, come back two years later, and those dogs are STILL torturing that poor cat.

But it does highlight the level of sensitivity that people have regarding animal cruelty, such that even an artistic depiction of an impossible situation (dogs playing tetherball with a cat? really?) can get people writing nasty letters about it.
posted by davejay at 12:10 AM on November 29, 2007

In the same book, he mentioned another panel in which a family with a dog has gotten a new cat, and the dog isn't happy, such that the dog ties up the cat and hangs it from a rope (not from the neck, just tied up) outside the family's window. In the panel, the owner has pulled the curtain aside, discovered the tied-up cat, and says to his off-panel wife "The dog ain't goin' for the new cat."

The hate mail he got on that one was mostly centered around the incorrect assumption that the owner had tied up the cat and left it as food for the dog, and by "the dog ain't goin' for the new cat" he meant that the dog wasn't eating it. Which is kind of crazy, when you think about it. But people get upset, they do.
posted by davejay at 12:13 AM on November 29, 2007

People graphically being killed in car crashes: yes. Animals being tortured: not so much.

What in the hell?

Oh, I just meant that there are very graphic road safety adverts on telly in the UK; there are some on YouTube but they seem to be older and don't really illustrate what I was saying. But I'm guessing wherever you live, similar ads are run so you know what I'm talking about. (The most graphic one I've seen running is Irish, though, and I can't find it on YouTube at all.)

So in terms of what meets the standards for UK television, those road safety ads are fine but the cat ad would not have been shown.
posted by DarlingBri at 1:03 AM on November 29, 2007

What if it were couched as a warning about the dangers of automobile sunroofs? Dangerous, those things are. I'm now picturing some drunken maniac popping out of the sunroof, waving a bottle of scotch at some passerby only to be decapitated by the overpowered electric motors ramming a sheet of layered glass and polycarbonate safety glass through their throat. [Pan to ford emblem on hood]
posted by IronLizard at 1:22 AM on November 29, 2007

IronLizard, without seeing your imagined video and assuming that a) humans continue to devolve to a point where sunroof decapitation becomes a statistically viable issue, and b) it was a safety awareness video, I'd probably be as fine with that as I am with the road safety ones.
posted by DarlingBri at 2:30 AM on November 29, 2007

You have every right to post a shitty this-user-has-done-something-that-I-personally-could-care-less-for callout, and we have every right to make fun of you for it. Memail is good for this sort of thing. A user has never been banned for offending a single other user's sensibilities. If whatever this person was doing was offending large numbers of people, the flag queue would be doing its job nicely.
posted by tehloki at 7:59 AM on November 29, 2007

DarlingBriPoster: "Oh, sorry, you've commented. What happens in the last video?

A cat is filmed being deliberately trapped in a car sunroof, struggles, and is decapitated."

I strongly dislike misleading descriptions like this. I'm inclined to say that DarlingBri is intentionally making the video seem worse than it actually is to falsely reinforce her disgust.

A better description would be "It's a british car ad where a car that would appear to be alive, sensible and predatory lays in wait for a curious cat which it then eats. The result is that the cat is decapitated when the car eats its head using the sunroof." But then that doesn't sound like PEOPLE USING CARS TO TORTURE POOR DEFENSELESS KITTIES!
posted by shmegegge at 9:13 AM on November 29, 2007

That cat? I'd have tased its ass, too.
posted by dersins at 10:17 AM on November 29, 2007

People graphically being killed in car crashes: yes. Animals being tortured: not so much.

What in the hell?

Oh, I just meant that there are very graphic road safety adverts on telly in the UK

DarlingBri, since you posted this, I inferred that you have a problem with depictions of violence against animals, perhaps a gut reaction of revulsion. But you don't seem to mind when people subjected to equal violence? Is it irrelevant that some of us get react with revulsion and even terror to graphic car collisions, and seeing them contributes to our *cue violins* lasting PTSD?
posted by Ambrosia Voyeur at 10:20 AM on November 29, 2007

Sorry for the extra words.
posted by Ambrosia Voyeur at 10:21 AM on November 29, 2007

Ambrosia Voyeur, the car ads are not being presented as entertainment. The cat ad however is "helpless animal targeted by more powerful human and tormented for amusement - funny ha ha!" and I think that's just a very different thing.
posted by DarlingBri at 11:35 AM on November 29, 2007

Bri, are you talking about the real world or the world of the ad?

1) In the ad, it is not a "more powerful human" that targets the cat but a malevolent car.

2) In the real world, no cats were harmed.

What exactly is upsetting you?
posted by languagehat at 11:48 AM on November 29, 2007

Wait, I read the snopes thing you linked to, the cat ad is "curious animal targeted by more powerful car and tormented for amusement-funny ha ha!" There's a really huge difference there. The one may or may not be acceptable, the other is clearly absurd. It's premise is fantastical from the outset. Are the rules not different for fantasy?

I mean, of course, you're free to feel however you feel about it, but it seems a bit like your arguing from the same position fundamentalists who dislike Harry Potter take. They fail to account for the fact that HP is fiction and that wizardry does not exist, and that therefore Rowling isn't really advocating wizardy. They're welcome to that opinion, but it beats the fuck out of me why anyone rational should be forced to comply with it.
posted by OmieWise at 11:50 AM on November 29, 2007

waitwaitwait. Is the deal here that DarlingBri is under the impression that there is someone inside the car in the ad controlling the sunroof? That would explain her take on it. I suppose that, given the compression and low resolution of the video, it's understandable why the reflection on the car window might obscure enough of the car's cabin to allow someone to believe that there could be a person hiding in the front seat or something. But really, there isn't. Not in the fantasy world of the commercial at least. If you think about it, it makes much more sense that way. that's why they're calling the SportKa the evil twin of the Ka, which would be another car not so inclined to eating cats.
posted by shmegegge at 1:02 PM on November 29, 2007

After all, if it's ok if not real live things are involved, then is CGI kiddie porn ok? After all, no kids were used.

Um, yes. (Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition, 535 U.S. 234 (2002)).
posted by The Bellman at 3:55 PM on November 29, 2007