Snob

1. Man Murders Entire Family To End Daughter’s Migraines

Just this May, Randy Janzen of British Columbia admitted to murdering his daughter, his wife, and his sister on Facebook after doing the deed. His reasons were confusing but he stated that he shot his daughter because of the chronic migraines she had long suffered and killed his wife so that she wouldn’t have to live with the fact that he’d killed their daughter.

Janzen’s home was quickly surrounded by police using smoke bombs to get him to come out but he wouldn’t. Moments after, the whole place went up in a blaze that killed Janzen and burned the bodies of his daughter and wife.

2. Murder For Breakfast

In 2010, 16-year-old Joshua Davies went to meet 15-year-old Rebecca Aylward to go for a walk together. The two had gone out for three months in 2009 before Davies broke it off and Rebecca is reported to have hoped he would ask her out again. However, Davies had something else in mind entirely and once the two young people entered the cover of a forest, Davies attacked Rebecca, first attempting to break her neck before finally smashing her head in with a rock.

He then went and got a friend to show him the murder scene because this friend had promised to buy him breakfast if Davies was willing to go through with his Facebook promise that he was going to murder Rebecca.

Rebecca’s family has since sued those friends of Davies who knew he was making threats against her but did nothing. Davies has since been convicted of the murder and was sentenced to life in prison.

3. “Rip Jennifer Alfonso”

In 2013, Derek Medina posted those fateful words on his Facebook feed along with a photo of his wife, dead, and a murder confession. What began as an argument escalated to murder after the two began fighting and Medina pointed a gun at Alfonso. Declaring she was leaving him, she then went downstairs. Medina put the gun down and followed her at which time he claims the she began hitting and punching him. So, he went back upstairs to retrieve his gun and came down to see Alfonso holding a knife. Managing to take the knife away, Alfonso began hitting Medina again at which point he shot her to death.

Medina is still awaiting trial.

4. Disabled Daughter Allegedly Murders Mother, Brags On Facebook

This June, 23-year-old Gypsy Blancharde and her boyfriend Nicholas Godejohn were arrested for the murder of Gypsy’s mother who the boyfriend allegedly stabbed to death while Gypsy, who was reported to suffer from leukemia and muscular dystrophy, waited in another room.

Gypsy, a Louisiana native living in Springfield, Missouri had met Nicholas online and possibly tried to make the murder look like it was committed by a robber since they also stole several thousand dollars from the mother’s safe.

Gypsy and Nicholas are currently awaiting trial. Police have alleged that Gypsy’s medical conditions are not as severe as reported (or even present) and that her and her now deceased mother falsely claimed to be Hurricane Katrina refugees in order to receive charitable donations.

5. Filipino Man Murders Daughter, Posts It On Facebook

In the Spring of 2014, after his wife who was away on work in Canada refused to return home and stopped answering him on Facebook, Mark Alvin Manliclic allegedly took a knife and stabbed his seven-year-old daughter Angel multiple times in the back and neck until he’d killed her. He then took a photograph of her body and posted it on Facebook, presumably for his wife to see.

The 31-year-old man was arrested on charges of parricide.

6. Bored Woman Commits Murder Because She Was “Unfriended”

30-year-old Jenelle Potter of Mountain City, TN, trolled the hell out of Billy Jean Hayworth and her fiancé, Bill Payne as well as harassing and stalking them prior to convincing a male relative that kill them both.

It all began when Hayworth and Payne unfriended Potter on Facebook. Before long, Potter was stirring up trouble under three different pseudonyms and eventually convinced her father to shoot Hayworth and Payne in 2013. Hayworth was a new mother at the time of her death Her body was found still holding her child who survived.

Jenelle Potter and her mother have since both been convicted on two counts of 1st degree murder. Jenelle’s father was also convicted of two counts of murder.

1. “We are meddling because we love you and of course we know better!”

2. “We are capable of rational thought! Well… unless we’re meddling.”

3. “Being kind, enthusiastic, and giving is not the same as flirting. We genuinely enjoy connecting with people, and for its own sake. Not usually with ulterior motives.”

4. “Sometimes we get very tired of all this giving support and being warm too. We just want someone to get us too, understand without words and give unyielding support. We have the hardest time asking for it.”

5. “When we tell you about our insights into a person, believe it, because later when you circle back to tell us how shocked you were that we turned out to be right, it’s hard not to want to roll our eyes at you. I know, how arrogant, but there it is.”

6. “We’re not ALL huggers!”

7. “We can be shy too! Just because we crave social interaction doesn’t mean we always feel 100% confident initiating it, especially if we have feelings for a person. Sometimes we want you to approach us.”

8. “There’s nothing we need more than to sit with a good friend and a bottle of wine as we explain all the ways we’ve been trying to fix the world. The biggest gift is if someone will just sit and unwind with us and actually listen and analyze all the details about all the relationships and emotions we’ve been sorting through for everyone else.”

9. “We really do try not to interfere… but it’s painful for us to watch you make the same mistakes over and over again.”

10. “I won’t get into heated arguments with others about my morals or beliefs but that doesn’t mean I don’t have them. It just means I don’t want to step on your toes or shove my beliefs down your throat. If you get to know an ENFJ better, you’ll usually find that they’re a lot more opinionated than you originally thought.”

11. “Yes. We could do it your way. But why would we try your way when we can do it the right way?”

12. “We’re not manipulators and we don’t break our way through anyone’s life. We know when people don’t want to talk and we let them be after telling them that we’re there if they need us. We’re also not busybodies who don’t know how to take care of themselves because they’re so busy with others. We’re independent and know very well how to take care of ourselves.”

13. “Yes we are emotionally strong but that doesn’t mean we’re always okay. Please ask us every once in a while.”

14. “You don’t need to pretend to be strong around us. We really do want to hear your problems and help you – when you shut us out, we feel useless.”

15. “Don’t mistake out kindness for weakness.”

Were you 19 yesterday, and is today your birthday? Congrats, girl—you’re finally in your 20s! Being this young will only happen 9 more times until you’re 30, which is when your jaw falls off and your IUD self-destructs (right??). So cherish every moment! Your 20s exist for you to learn the limits of the world, your abilities, and your parent’s Amex. Sure, you might act a little foolish, but you have the luxury to throw caution to the wind! Live on the edge of someone else’s checkbook and freefall into these mistakes every twentysomething needs to make when they’re guaranteed a safety net.

 

Choosing Your Passions Over a Career

Find your passion and follow it! Whether you love music, acting, writing, scuba diving or starting your own business, you never know what your parents will say “sure, sweetie” to, so seize the day and ask. You shouldn’t weigh yourself down with a job just yet. You’re still a sprightly twentysomething fairy with milkmaid braids and maybe even a thigh gap. This won’t last forever, so let yourself fly now. Spread your wings—that enormous wingspan is the amount of zeroes on your family’s paycheck. Even if your passions don’t pan out, you won’t regret barely having paid for it!

 

Not Having Any Savings

You’re 20, for Pete’s sake. Stop putting away paychecks at the expense of living life! Go to that new club they just opened, “Throat,” and take a taxi back with your heels in one hand and a bottle of rosé in the other. All twentysomethings need to do this cause we majored in sociology. Scrimping every penny will only weigh you down with the same pressure and stresses as the people who supplement your lifestyle. Stay wild! Toss all the safety nets aside from the ones in which you’re institutionally enmeshed. You will have no regrets because there will never be any consequences!

 

 

Splurging on Things That Make You Happy

Your twenties are the perfect time to make silly purchases, since you’re not saddled by responsibilities like children or a job or the responsibility of financing them alone. So you’re hungover and you want that $24 stack of saffron flapjacks. So maybe you shouldn’t have cut that $300 check to Sephora and signed it “LMFAO!” Maybe you don’t need a new car because you have a professional driver. You’re young! If you didn’t make mistakes like this, you wouldn’t know who you are or how much money others have at their disposal. (Remember: Don’t ask the girl at Sephora why she works there. Her parents might only be new money!)

 

Getting Arrested for a DUI while in Possession of Cocaine

Some mistakes are bigger than others. But like my legal team says, the biggest mistakes are the ones to which “guilty” is not an answer. Even if you got behind the wheel of your BMW after taking a bottle of Pinnacle vodka to the face, with an ounce of cocaine where the spare tire goes, you regret nothing. You’re not defined by your mistakes, but by the size of your family’s influence.

 

 

There you have it! Mistakes can be scary, but they won’t ever slow you down unless there’s another housing bubble burst. Listen to your curiosity as much as your mother’s financial offers, and you’ll go far! And remember: This freewheeling time of your life will only last until you turn 30, at which point you might just have to wait for your inheritance.

Your carefree Halloween nights that ended in hobbling down the street in four-inch heels are over. You’re an adult now, and your Halloween costume is the perfect platform for broadcasting your new grown-up morals and beliefs. Before you buy that sexy pizza rat costume, take a moment to consider a respectable Halloween costume that will say, “I have principles and a sense of my own value, and it’s not as much fun as it looks; not one bit.”

 

Marie Curie

You are Marie Curie, the Polish physicist and chemist who conducted pioneering research on radioactivity. Curie is a celebrated woman in science—unlike that cute ladybug you were going to be. Unfortunately, ladybugs don’t contribute to science (no matter how cute they are), and you have the societal pressures of being an exemplary feminist 24/7, so Marie Curie it is!

Fun Level: Minimal to No Fun

 

 

The Bechdel Test

This is a super respectable costume for Halloween, and it’s interactive, too! Every time you converse with a woman while in costume, you may NOT discuss a man. You will feel so much more empowered dressed as the Bechdel test than as some meaningless lollabout like Cinderella. She’s a fictional character you thought you loved, but she’s from a movie that certainly does not pass the Bechdel test. No one will think you’re fun or want to be around you, but you can rest assured that your sexual ethics are in check!

Fun Level: Not the Least Bit Fun

 

Louisa May Alcott

Sure petticoats are heavy, but it will be worth it when you roll up to a party dressed up as 17^th-century American novelist Louisa May Alcott. Skip the sexualization of young women this year, because H’Ween 2015 is all about values. Louisa May Alcott wrote stories filled with strong female characters….unlike your former favorite book, Fifty Shades of Grey. Jo March is a rebellious female writer, and reading Little Women is totally satisfying even though Jo never gets fucked. Not even once.

Fun Level: Zero Fun

 

Malala Yousafzi

Malala is a pioneering 18-year-old Pakistani activist for girls’ education. She is also the world’s youngest Nobel Prize Laureate. You won’t have a good time, but you will know that you are better than everyone else at this Halloween party. That will provide you with some solace as you sit alone in the corner while everyone is dancing and having fun dressed up like naughty superheroes and saying something about “it’s offensive to wear other people’s culture as a costume, Danielle.”

Fun Level: Not Fun but Super Respectable

 

 

#FreeTheNipple

Okay, so you’re walking around topless but it is NOT what it looks like. You are using Halloween to bring awareness to the Free The Nipple campaign—a movement that points out the hypocrisy in censorship laws when it comes to male and female nipples. So if you see us at a party this Halloween, we are NOT slutting it up. We are bringing LIGHT to a VERY important issue and taking the STIGMA off our titties! Titties are only okay if they are hardcore politicized beyond the point of enjoyability. If you’re too shy to show your own nips, ask a male friend to cut his off and put them over your own. What do you have to say to THAT, Instagram?!?

Fun Level: Pretty Fun

 

This Halloween will be absolutely no fun, but you will get the chance to not-so-subtly lord your recently adopted second-wave feminism over people who are just trying to have a good time. So grab some sensible shoes and try one of these no-fun-yet-historically-relevant disguises! Have a decent Halloween!

If your enormous to-do list starts hurting your social life, don’t panic! If you learn how to multitask like a pro, soon that list will magically become manageable, one lost friend at a time. You won’t believe how quickly and efficiently you can alienate everyone around you, leaving you with even more time to get stuff done! Here’s how:

 

Wake up crazy early.

Getting an early start to your day is an optimal way to both get more done and become a cranky nightmare person. You’ve already alienated your nighttime friends with your new 10 o’clock bedtime, but by the time you get in the elevator in the morning, you’ll still be so tired that you’re ready to make everyone’s life equally as miserable. Productivity!

 

 

Stay caffeinated at all times!

Drinking extreme amounts of coffee keeps you energized throughout the day, and has the added benefit of making you go to the bathroom really frequently (numbers one AND two). No one is fully comfortable around that person who’s very aware and might dart into the bathroom at any given moment, but think of how many ideas you would have! This could be you!

 

Cut out all distractions. All of them.

When you sit down at your desk, clear away anything that might split your focus. Turn off your music, log off of social media, destroy your phone, cover your walls with black garbage bags, and stare robotically ahead into the abyss. Remember: the un-fun ones get shit done!

 

Set time limits for meetings and enforce them mercilessly.

Each time you enter a room, defiantly set an hourglass upon the table as a visual reminder that time is always running out for each and every one of us, but especially productive people like you. This keeps everyone focused on the topic at hand and motivates your colleagues to get out of your presence and on with the rest of their lives as soon as possible. How’s that for synergy?

 

 

Use productivity apps liberally.

Become one with technology by turning into the task-oriented computer you were always meant to be. Download at least ten productivity apps and make sure to check them whenever you’re in conversation with others. This way, you don’t have to sacrifice efficiency to let people know you just enjoy speaking to them.

 

Stick to your schedule at all costs.

Productive people don’t have time for tasks that aren’t explicitly scheduled on their to-do lists. Truly productive people make one list that collects all of the lists they’ve ever made, and learn to live by that list alone. That’s exactly what productive people need to do. There is no outside world now. There is only The List.  People won’t like this very much, but you will certainly have a nice list!

 

Keep small talk to a minimum.

Actually, you know what? You don’t really need to worry about this one. There’s absolutely no one who wants to talk to you at this point. Well done, productive girl!

 

Follow these tips like the letter of the law, and you’ll have absolutely no trouble doing everything you want to do at work, with enough time to get home to that special no one.

About 58 percent of Americans support marijuana legalization, according to a new Gallup poll released Wednesday.

Gallup

This is an all-time high in support, but it actually ties with the levels of support Gallup found in 2013. Marijuana legalization advocates cautioned back in 2013 that the 2013 poll was probably an outlier, since other polling organizations — like the Pew Research Center — found lower levels of support for legalization. (This year, Pew put support at 53 percent.)

Support for legalization has been steadily climbing for decades, driven largely by more support among younger Americans. According to Gallup, 71 percent of Americans ages 18 to 34 now back pot legalization.

Gallup

These polls are particularly pertinent since it's a presidential election year. None of the presidential candidates have endorsed legalization, although Bernie Sanders suggested in the first Democratic debate that he would likely support legalization if it came to a vote in his state's ballot. That puts Sanders not just to the left of Hillary Clinton on pot, but also closer to the Democratic base — Gallup and Pew have found that around six in 10 Democrats back legalization — and, increasingly, to all Americans.

But more than the political party breakdown, it's the age breakdown that matters to legalization advocates. Since younger Americans increasingly tend to back legalizing marijuana, many advocates feel it's only a matter of time until the country legalizes pot as young people grow up and vote. For advocates, then, it's more about how and when to legalize, rather than if.

---

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, in a speech on Tuesday to the Zionist Congress, blamed a Palestinian, Grand Mufti of Jerusalem Haj Amin al-Husseini, for the Holocaust. According to Netanyahu, the grand mufti (whose title means he was the senior Sunni Muslim religious leader in the city) convinced Hitler to launch a campaign of extermination when the two men met in November 1941.

"Hitler didn’t want to exterminate the Jews at the time, he wanted to expel the Jews," Netanyahu said. "And Haj Amin al-Husseini went to Hitler and said, ‘If you expel them, they’ll all come here [to Palestine].’" In Netanyahu's history, Hitler then asked, "What should I do with them?" Al-Husseini replied, "Burn them."

The clear implication is that without al-Husseini, Hitler would simply have expelled the Jews in Nazi-controlled territory, not murdered them. It's true that al-Husseini was a virulent, murderous anti-Semite who was in contact with Hitler. But according to virtually all reputable historians, it is not true that he inspired the Holocaust.

Netanyahu's apparent effort to pin the Holocaust on Palestinians has become such a controversy that even the German government spokesperson, extraordinarily, condemned the comments: "We know that responsibility for this crime against humanity is German and very much our own."

Here's what Netanyahu's history gets wrong, and what it shows about the politicization of the Holocaust.

Netanyahu's revisionism versus the actual history

Hitler in 1939. (France Presse Voir/AFP/Getty Images)

There's still a lot of debate among historians over the origins of the Holocaust, particularly the question of whether Hitler's ideas led him to plot an extermination campaign years before the camps were built (the "intentionalist" view) or the Holocaust evolved somewhat organically from Nazi policy during the war (the "functionalist" view).

But there are issues on which scholars agree. "Historians have reached relative consensus on a number of important points concerning the decisions for the Final Solution," Christopher Browning, an eminent Holocaust historian at the University of North Carolina, wrote in a 2003 essay. Much of this consensus flatly contradicts Netanyahu's history:

• Historians generally agree that the Nazis decided to exterminate Jews in Soviet territory in "mid-summer" 1941, during the Nazi invasion of Russia — months before Hitler's November 28 meeting with al-Husseini. The decision to extend this murder campaign to all Europe's Jews was made sometime in 1941.
• Historians see the Holocaust as the natural extension of Hitler's earlier practices — not, as Netanyahu suggests, a dramatic shift for which an outside actor like the grand mufti might be blamed. "There is more continuity than discontinuity between the decisions for the Final Solution taken in 1941 and those behind the policies of ethnic cleansing and demographic engineering" that preceded them, Browning writes.
• Hitler was not inspired to create the Holocaust by one conversation with anyone, let alone the grand mufti. "There was no single decision, no 'big bang,' that produced the Final Solution," Browning writes. "Rather, there were a series of decisions taken incrementally; the decision-making process was cumulative and prolonged."

"To say that the mufti was the first to mention to Hitler the idea to kill or burn the Jews is not correct," Dina Porat, chief historian at Yad Vashem, the Israeli Holocaust memorial museum, told Israel Radio. "The idea to rid the world of the Jews was a central theme in Hitler's ideology a long, long time before he met the mufti."

The official German record of Hitler's November meeting with the mufti supports this interpretation. "The Fuhrer replied that Germany's fundamental attitude on these questions, as the Mufti himself had already stated, was clear. Germany stood for uncompromising war against the Jews. That naturally included active opposition to the Jewish national home in Palestine," the record reads. That clearly indicates Hitler had a commitment to destroying global Jewry before the meeting, and that the mufti recognized it — indicating that he wasn't entertaining the idea of expelling the Jews to Palestine.

The likely roots of Netanyahu's Holocaust revisionism

Haj Amin al-Husseini in 1937. (Keystone/Getty Images)

So if this is the general view among historians, where did Netanyahu's ideas come from? It's hard to say for sure, but one very plausible candidate is a recent book, by two scholars at an Israeli research center, called Nazis, Islamists, and the Making of the Modern Middle East.

Authored by Wolfgang G. Schwanitz and (the late) Barry Rubin, the book argues that Hitler's meeting with al-Husseini played a critical role in inspiring the Holocaust:

After the meeting... Hitler made a fifth decision that would end millions of lives. He ordered [SS second-in-command Reinhard] Heydrich to organize a conference within ten days to prepare the "final solution to the Jewish question." Thus, Hitler made his key decision to start the genocide with al-Husseini's anti-Jewish rhetoric and insistence on wiping out the Jews fresh in his ears.

This theory has not been well-received, partly because the evidence for it is very thin.

"The notion that al-Husseini played a key role in Hitler’s settling on the Final Solution is based on one piece of thin hearsay evidence: comments that the controversial Hungarian Jewish leader Rudolf Kastner attributed to Eichmann’s subordinate Dieter Wisliceny," University of Houston professor David Mikics writes in a review of the book for Tablet.

"The claim that al-Husseini was the hidden hand behind Adolf Hitler is implausible, even silly," Mikics concluded.

The claim is, however, politically useful: It can be used to portray the Palestinians as irreconcilably committed to the extermination of Jews, and thus incapable of making peace.

"Rubin and Schwanitz are historians with a political agenda: They want to show that eliminationist anti-Semitism animates the Islamic Middle East, and so they paint al-Husseini as so devilishly anti-Semitic that he can contend with Hitler himself," Mikics writes.

Netanyahu, despite the backlash, is refusing to back down from his comments.

"It is absurd. I had no intention to absolve Hitler of responsibility for his diabolical destruction of European Jewry," he said in an official statement. "It is equally absurd to ignore the role played by the Mufti, Haj Amin al-Husseini, a war criminal, for encouraging and urging Hitler, Ribbentropp, Himmler and others, to exterminate European Jewry.

"Al-Husseini is still a revered figure in Palestinian society, he appears in textbooks and it is taught that he is one of the founding fathers of the nation, and this incitement that started then with him, inciting the murder of Jews — continues," Netanyahu's statement concluded. "What is important is to recognize the historical facts and not ignore them, not then and not today."

This might be the best TV episode about clinical depression ever made.

In "There Is Not Currently a Problem," the seventh episode and midpoint of its second season, FXX comedy You're the Worst does something I'm not sure I've ever seen TV do so well: It makes clinical depression understandable.

It does so by grounding that depression in a character we already love, who's always been troubled but basically fine. And it adds a nasty edge to one of the things that's always been funniest about her, her ability to immediately find the worst thing about someone, the point where they feel the weakest, and turn it into a snide joke. It makes depression at once sympathetic and terrifying, and it shows just how exhausting living with the condition can be.

It also brings the series to another level. You're the Worst has been dancing around this revelation for a while. The first six episodes of this season indicated something was wrong with Gretchen (the series' female lead, played by Aya Cash), but not specifically what.

But even in season one, her hugely messy apartment and her occasionally erratic demeanor suggested she was suffering from something far more extreme than garden-variety self-loathing.

Now, though, her secret's out in the open. Her boyfriend, Jimmy (Chris Geere), knows, and he's determined to fix it. But if Gretchen knows anything, it's this: She can't fix this. She can only manage it. Maybe.

Television is a horrible medium for talking about mental illness

Showtime

One of the things about mental illness is that it never truly leaves a person. It can be medicated, and talk therapy can definitely help. But if someone is clinically depressed, she's always going to be clinically depressed. She'll have peaks and valleys, sure, but you can't tell a story that's all peaks. That's just bad drama.

This is absolute anathema to television, which thrives on change and on characters either overcoming their obstacles or eventually falling prey to them through means of their own making. As an example, consider The Sopranos, where Tony's panic attacks gradually subsided as the series went on, because he was unable to confront the real roots of his anxiety and depression. To do so would be to admit his own weaknesses and his own culpability in egging on those conditions. So he drifted on, blithely trying to keep a cork in a big, rage-filled bottle.

Television generally takes that approach to dealing with mental illness. It's a problem, and maybe the characters always know it's a problem, but they also can't constantly be struggling with the same problem week after week, lest the viewer become exhausted. On the '90s soap Party of Five, for instance, Kristen, one of the main character's love interests, fell into a bout of depression, but it was largely treated as something she would overcome with proper care and treatment. The idea that it might never go away is just too much for a TV show to deal with.

For an example of a show that I think generally handles mental illness well, turn to Showtime's Homeland, where the lead, Carrie Mathison, struggles with bipolar disorder. The show too often suggests that Carrie's fits of mania drive much of her spycraft prowess, and "my mental illness makes me a great crime solver!" is an unfortunate TV trope. But when it digs into how horrible Carrie can be to those around her, and to herself, in her depressive phases, the show finds the long, grinding process of learning to live with mental illness.

Plenty of viewers have complained about this (especially connected to a recent episode where Carrie went off her meds yet again), but there's an admirable stubbornness to it. This is what it's really like to have bipolar disorder. Most people look away. Will you?

You're the Worst tries to make this funny — and somehow succeeds

FXX

The centerpiece of "Problem" is a scene in which Gretchen tells every single one of her friends exactly what she thinks of them. Now, it's not actually what she thinks of them. It's her depression feeding her the worst thoughts she's ever had about them, then blowing them up even further. It's her brain causing her to drop a nuclear bomb on her life. (Amusingly, one character who's an improv comedian seems to treat the whole thing as just another comedy game.)

But this scene will ring devastatingly true to anyone who suffers from depression or loves and cares about someone who does. These moments of seemingly over-the-top rage happen, and they're usually followed by even deeper trough of self-loathing. Gretchen doesn't really hate all of her friends. She hates herself.

What makes the episode work until the centerpiece scene is how expertly writers Stephen Falk (also creator and showrunner) and Philippe Iujvidin convey that something's not right, even as everything, outwardly, seems to be just fine. This is an impeccably crafted episode of television, one that takes place in a single location and includes lots and lots of little motifs that indicate things are going very wrong.

In particular, there's a mouse that Jimmy becomes obsessed with catching. It could too cutely stand in for his need to fix the problems in Gretchen's life — he doesn't yet know she's depressed, but does know she goes out at night to cry in her car — but when the episode ends, the mouse, which he believed to be dead at his hand, skitters back into the wall. You can't get rid of these things. You can only turn a blind eye to them, until they're staring you in the face.

But in terms of raising tension, the episode also lets Gretchen be off, wearing sunglasses inside and drinking too much and dancing to music that's not even playing. She's staving off something that's chasing her, but she won't be able to forever. You can't escape depression.

The centerpiece shouting match is followed by a sweet scene where Gretchen's oldest friend, Lindsay, who's received many of Gretchen's worst insults, goes into her bedroom to ask her if it's "back," if this will be like sophomore year, when she didn't leave her dorm room for weeks. Gretchen, tearfully, nods. Jimmy can't find out, she says. But Lindsay points out that Gretchen's shared more of herself with Jimmy than with anybody else. He needs to know about this if they're going to have a real relationship.

That's the cost of loving someone with clinical depression. It's understanding that they will go out of their way to make you feel, at times, like the smallest person on the planet, and then having to overcome that to realize they're not really yelling at you for who you are, but for loving them. Lindsay knows that. Jimmy is about to find out.

Depression is a ravenous beast that slumbers, sure, but never really goes away. When you're in a relationship with someone who suffers from it, it's the unspoken third in the relationship, the thing you try not to talk about. Maybe, if you're lucky, it will go hide in the wall for a while. But it always comes back out. It has to.

You're the Worst airs Wednesdays on FXX at 10:30 pm Eastern. Watch previous episodes on Hulu and FXNow.

Yo Zushi: Many of those calling out cultural appropriation of all kinds – from clothing and hair to musical genres – seem to share this proprietorial attitude, which insists that culture, by its nature a communally forged and ever-changing project, should belong to specific peoples and not to all. Banks is doubtless correct to feel this "undercurrent" of racial persecution by an industry that prefers its stars to be white and what they sell to be black, yet there is also truth in the second part of that undercurrent: "Y'all don't really own shit." When it comes to great movements in culture, the racial interloper is not wrong. None of us can, or should, "own" hip-hop, cornrows, or the right to wear a kimono.

Boyfriends and girlfriends are so passe. In a romantic era that knows no age, marital or gender identity bounds, Cristen and Caroline search for the ideal couple label that aptly communicates modern commitment.

"¡¡¡Mecágondios!!! ¿Que el Tribunal Supremo, sala máxima -y muy señera- del derecho español, se ha cargado con una sentencia a todos los Clubs Sociales de Cannabis (CSC's) del país?", resonó en mi cabeza el otro día como si me hubieran sacudido una buena hostia. Era mi pensamiento que se encargaba de darme los buenos días, al leer las noticias sobre la sentencia 484 del 2015.

Lo primero que pensé, sin haber podido leer la sentencia en ese momento, es que estaban exagerando. ¡Estos periodistas... cómo se ponen con las drogas! Pero no. Aunque sonaba marciano que -un buen día por la mañana- el tribunal más politizado del país se levantase y jodiera de un plumazo la única opción de acceso al cannabis en España para enfermos (o para viciosos fumetas adictos como yo), que no es el mercado negro puro y duro... Era real. ¡Está pasando! El Tribunal Supremo ha sentado doctrina, como quien planta un pino, y nos ha jodido bien: si quieres porros, llama a tu puto camello o plántate tú la yerba sin que te pillemos, pero eso de que puedas ir a comprarla o a adquirirla a un lugar conocido como un CSC -gestionado dentro del ámbito asociativo, con personas formadas en el uso y consumo de la droga que vas a pillar, que te pueden informar adecuadamente de lo que necesites- sin tener que sentir la emoción de estar violando la ley, se acabó.

Veeeenga, ya estás desempolvando ese viejo móvil -que guardas en el cajón al lado de esos condones que ibas a gastar en el 2008- y buscando el teléfono del camello que te hacía el favor de atenderte, y contra el que posiblemente has estado despotricando desde que conseguiste acceder a un CSC y pillar tu yerba, tu hash o tus extracciones de cannabis para dabear, en un sitio que no parecían los escenarios de "El Pico". Y sobre todo, reza mucho (a San Canuto) para que siga conservando el mismo número, y se acuerde de ese capullo que dejó de llamarle hace años pero no se acuerde con memoria suficiente como para tenerte "trizado" por algo que no le gustase de tu comportamiento como cliente, que los camellos son muy especialitos.

¡¡Llegó el "Supremazo 484" contra el cannabis!! Unos gobiernan con decretazos y otros legislan con supremazos, no vamos a sorprendernos ahora por eso ¿no? Cómo decía la dulce Cospedal -para mí tan dulce como "la dulce Neus"- hace poco: "¡¡¡LA DROGA ES MALA!!!".

De los jueces que esos políticos nombraron, no vamos pues a esperar "física cuántica": de esos polvos, estos lodos.

He aquí los hechos, resumidos para tu selectiva mente: el tribunal supremo recibe un recurso -de un fiscal muy fiscal que obedece por ley las órdenes del fiscal general del estado- diciendo que "no le parece nada bien que la audiencia de Vizcaya ha fallado lo que ha fallado contra una asociación llamada EBERS" en la que salían absueltos de lo que ese fiscal les acusaba: tráfico de drogas hablando en plata. La cosa es que se pone a mirar el tema y ve que lo que realmente son, es una asociación de esas que reúnen a activistas luchando por la salida del mercado negro del cannabis, a enfermos buscando ayuda real, personas en tratamiento por cáncer a quienes el estado falla, y a todo el espectro social de aquellos que usan marihuana lúdica o terapéuticamente. Todos con el factor común de intentar abastecerse fuera del mercado negro.

La sala que juzga se da cuenta de que tiene un "papelón" entre manos, y es que el discurso oficial del estado español es totalmente contrario a cualquier tipo de medida que suavice la presión contra el cannabis y/o las drogas. De hecho, como recuerda la sentencia, resulta que nuestros representantes políticos van por el mundo diciéndoles a los demás países que ni se le les ocurra pensar en "decriminalizar" el cannabis ni otras drogas, lo que es igual a pedirles que el consumo de cannabis siga siendo un delito -aunque en España no lo es, aún- y que no aflojen las fuerzas en la guerra contra las drogas. Es como decirle a un pobre que se muere de hambre, que no cambie de dieta porque le va a ir bien así. La política internacional Marca España es lo que tiene, los principales representantes de los asuntos sobre drogas en la ONU y otros países, no cambiaron tras la salida del gobierno de Zapatero: no hace falta porque -al final- tienen la misma política de drogas las dos caras de la moneda PPSOE.

Y al final, pues se bajan los pantalones y dicen que... hacen lo que hacen con su sentencia -cortar el cuello a todo el asociacionismo cultiveta cannábico- porque les obligan de fuera: acuden a justificarse a los tratados internacionales sobre drogas, incluso a su interpretación semántica si es necesario. La verdad es que la sentencia es un puto novelón increíble, un viaje a través de la realidad actual de la justicia en España y de las mentes pensantes que al final acaban escribiendo sentencias que dañan el consenso social, siempre por delante de lo que la norma dice. Literariamente es todo un ejercicio de derecho-ficción y neorrealismo hispano. A mí, como sentencia, me gusta porque no paro de reírme cuando la leo: ¿nunca habéis hecho eso de imaginar las caras de vuestros compañeros de trabajo, justo cuando se van a correr o cuando tienen que apretar cagando? Pues yo lo hago con los magistrados del Tribunal Supremo cuando tienen que firmar esas sentencias. Me va mejor.

Lo triste es que podían haber hecho algo más -ellos mismos citan el Art.3 del Código Civil que alude a la "realidad social"- e incluso algo útil para todos, ya que se ponen a pontificar ahora. La sentencia nos dice que 290 socios, excede lo que se puede entender como una extensión de nuestro derecho a consumir drogas bajo el supuesto del "consumo compartido" y del "cultivo compartido" como extensión a su vez del anterior. Pero a la vez, se lavan las manos y dicen que no es competencia de los tribunales decir cuántas personas son el límite para un CSC o club de ese tipo. Y es cierto, no es su competencia pero unas pequeñas indicaciones hubieran ayudado -doctrinalmente- a que su sentencia no se convierta en una caza de brujas contra los CSC.

El sábado, un día después de que fuera pública, la sentencia había rulado como la pólvora en ciertos ámbitos y no precisamente en los fumetas: al parecer las comisarias de policía la habían tomado por el best-seller del momento, y se la estaban pasando unas a otras como si fuera un regalito por Navidad. Por un lado, me parece estupendo que los uniformados conozcan bien la ley -empezando por las relativas a Derechos Humanos- y tanto interés en estar al día con la ultimísima sentencia del Tribunal Supremo es loable. Por otro lado, me cuesta (llamadme malpensado) imaginar que en realidad, la sentencia volando de una comisaria a otra, fuera el resultado de un intenso debate intrapolicial sobre los límites del derecho desde el positivismo jurídico. Más bien me comentan que fue algo más parecido a un "mira mira, que ya dicen los del supremo que podemos ir a por los fumetas esos de los clubs... que se vayan preparando JOJOJOJOJO!!" y lo cierto es que me lo creo, la navaja de Ockham me obliga.

¿Qué va a pasar ahora realmente?

Pues sin ser adivino, el futuro más probable es el de un cierre masivo de clubs de cannabis, en el estado español. Voluntario: no quiero/queremos ir al talego. O forzoso: te cierra la policía acusándote de tráfico de drogas. Por las buenas o por las malas.¿Has encontrado ya el teléfono de tu camello? Si no puedes plantar tú mismo, sigue buscando.

¿Y eso por qué, si a los de EBERS no los enchironan al final? ¿A ellos no y a mí sí?

Los de EBERS han tenido la suerte de usar una carta muy especial de la baraja, la del "error vencible". Por esa rareza del derecho que quiere decir -más o menos- que creías firmemente que no estabas cometiendo ningún delito, y además tus actos (en este caso, la limpieza con la que EBERS llevaba sus cosas) cuadran con ello: si en el desarrollo de la actividad que hacían, hubiera habido la menor prueba de que pretendían esconder algo porque sabían que era ilegal, el comodín del "error vencible" no se hubiera podido usar. Y además, una vez usado en este caso, el tribunal se encarga de aclarar que hay varios puntos del asunto que no se ajustan a lo que la ley permite en el modelo de los CSC en España, como pueden ser el número de socios (290 son demasiados, y ahí te quedas preguntando) o la intención de "permanencia" en el consumo compartido -porque de otra forma no puedes explicar que un cultivo sea compartido como escudo legal- hace que se contradiga con la jurisprudencia que sostenía el delicado entramado de los CSC, que se basaba en el consumo compartido, y por definición legal ha de ser de una cantidad mínima -aunque se aceptan acopios extra para ocasiones y fiestas de guardar- y para consumir en el momento.

También que no hace falta que se dé "ánimo de lucro" para que sea delito de tráfico de drogas: si tu cultivas "legalmente" para ti en tu finca del pueblo, y te ha salido medio kilo de buena yerba más del que puedes usar en un año, si se te ocurre dárselo a un enfermo que no pueda cultivar y te pida ayuda, como te trinquen vas pa'lante por tráfico de drogas, aunque no fueras a ganar nada con tu acción y seas un bonito candidato a recibir un indulto por buena persona. Preso y luego solicitas el perdón.

Existe otro punto curioso, y es que el tribunal da como hechos probados que ese grupo de 290 personas usaban 10'4 TONELADAS de cannabis cada 6 meses para abastecer sus necesidades. ¿Cómo es esto? Coge la calculadora, venga: 10.400 kilos de cogollos de yerba, cada 6 meses, para 290 socios... tocan a casi 6 kilos de cogollos de marihuana por mes. O lo que es igual a 200 gramos de yerba por día. ¡¡JODER CÓMO FUMAN ALLÍ!! Esto que lo resuelvan los de Expediente X o Cuarto Milenio.

Al mismo tiempo, el mismo tribunal dice que no hay que olvidar que se ha detenido a gente con cantidades notorias de cannabis en la zona, y de los que citan el que más llevaba eran 5'1 gramos de cannabis. ¿Explicación que cuadre ambas cosas? No lo intentes; mejor hazte un "PASOPALABRA" como Pedro Sánchez cuando le preguntan por el cannabis, en una vergonzosa demostración de su incapacidad para tratar este asunto, con la normalidad de un adulto en una sociedad adulta.

No todos los políticos que aspiran a que les des tu voto el 20 de diciembre están sin saber qué decir al respecto de la política de drogas y el cannabis: Albert Rivera, al ser preguntado por la cuestión del cannabis ha dejado claro que está a favor de la legalización, y que él ha fumado cannabis en varias ocasiones, que no lo oculta. Estas declaraciones del líder de C's se publican en la prensa al día siguiente del "Supremazo 484".

El cannabis ha entrado en campaña desde el pasado viernes, de la mano de nuestro inefable Tribunal Supremo. Y quien no lo vea, que se fume un porro.

Where do 'good' or pro-social institutions come from ? Why does the capacity for collective action and cooperative behaviour vary so much across the world today ? How do some populations transcend tribalism to form a civil society ? How do you "get to Denmark"?

After 14 seasons, 248 episodes, 2,950 experiments, and an endless supply of black t-shirts and white button-down shirts, Mythbusters is ending.

Jamie Hyneman and Adam Savage talked to Entertainment Weekly about the show's end and reflected on the show's impact, their working relationship, and what's next for them. Cue the lists of best myths, though there's always Discovery's complete database of the myths the show has tackled.

It's crazy how incredibly hit-driven the mobile games industry is, with Rovio's Angry Birds [$0.99] potentially serving as the greatest example of just how much mobile IP can explode- Seemingly out of nowhere. At the height of Angry Birds mania, it seemed like Angry Birds stuff was everywhere. Hell, I was even able to go to Bed Bath and Beyond and buy an entire Angry Birds bathroom set. I'm talking shower curtain, rug, trash can, soap dish, toothbrush holder, wall decals, towels, and other assorted junk.

It didn't stop there, as the Angry Birds empire expanded into education, publishing a series of cookbooks, and even opening some theme parks. Like most (all?) mobile mega-hits, what goes up must come down, and as Angry Birds popularity continues to dwindle, it's those three things that are getting the axe at Rovio. As they put the kibosh on directly managing e-learning, book publishing, and downsizing their attraction business, 213 Rovio employees are going to be looking for new jobs.

It's easy to be super-smug about this, as that seems to be standard internet comment operating procedure with anything to do with Rovio faltering, but it's really hard to fault the company for trying to capitalize as much as possible on the strength of the Angry Birds brand. There was a time there where it was totally appropriate to wonder whether Rovio was going to be the next Disney. Back in 2011-ish, trying to spot a kid who wasn't wearing something with Angry Birds on it was like playing a real-world version of Where's Waldo. I would've doubled down on aggressively trying to expand the brand into other mediums too.

It'll be interesting to see what happens with the Angry Birds movie which is set to be released next year, but I feel like they're a few years late on that. I'll go see it, for the same reason I own Angry Birds beach towels and matching neck tie (I guess I like wasting money on things tangentially related to iOS gaming?), but it's hard to imagine the film reinvigorating the brand in any meaningful manner. Either way, as a spectator sport, the rise and fall of Rovio has been fascinating to watch from and outsider's perspective... But likely really sucks for people whose livelihoods have been impacted. Hopefully the 213 employees hit quickly find new opportunities.

[via TechCrunch]

Este artículo apareció originalmente en Noisey, nuestra plataforma de música

"¡Id a ver a Suicide, id todos a ver a Suicide AHORA!" Eso fue lo que gritó Nick Cave al final de su concierto con Grinderman durante el Primavera Sound 2011 en Barcelona. Sus gritos tenían el tono y el aplomo de una orden de obligado cumplimiento, más que de una amable sugerencia. Si aquello hubiera sucedido en los sucios confines del legendario CBGB's, un club en el que aquella banda tocó con frecuencia durante su época de oro, en los 70, el vocalista Alan Vega sin duda llevaría en la mano la cadena de transmisión de una motocicleta, infundiendo terror salvaje y obsesión a partes iguales en aquel pequeño espacio. Pero no estaba seguro de si me encontraría el mismo grupo feroz, adalid de uno de los estilos más progresivos de la época —de la electrónica terrorífica de "Frankie Teardrop" al contoneo sexy de "Diamonds, Fur Coat, Champagne"—, o simplemente a la típica banda que se limita a reproducir su álbum más clásico de principio a fin, poseída por la apatía y movida por la desesperación económica.

Al final terminé viéndolos —lo iba a hacer de todos modos, Nick Cave— y lo que encontré fue a dos hombres viejos, empequeñecidos por el gran escenario, soltando humo negro y creando un sonido glorioso e infinito que parecía sacudir el suelo de hormigón sobre el que estábamos y que impregnaba el húmedo aire vespertino con una amenazante sensación de terror transmitida a través de sintetizadores.

"Ghostrider" sonaba tan energética, recargada y pulsante como seguramente lo hizo la primera vez que sonó en una sala de ensayo hace cuarenta años, como si aún se estuviera ensamblando sobre el escenario, construida mediante improvisación, hasta que el tema terminó siendo una pila de desechos. No hubo un deje de nostalgia en toda la presentación, ni un intento de complacer al público a través de clásicos, sino que vimos a un dúo aún feliz de enfrentarse tanto a su música como a su público.

2015 marca el 45 aniversario de la formación de la banda. Después de un viaje a Londres este verano para ver un concierto triunfal bajo la premisa de una 'Misa Punk' (el término proviene del título que usaban en unos flyers que repartían a principios de los 70, cuando tocaban conciertos bajo esa marca), aproveché la oportunidad para encontrarme con los dos integrantes del conjunto, Alan Vega y Martin Rev, para rebobinar sus mentes por el legado del grupo y saber por qué seguir a la vanguardia y haciendo cosas nuevas, a pesar de haber sufrido experiencias cercanas a la muerte, sigue motivándoles tanto hoy en día como lo hizo en 1970.

Ambos se conocieron en una galería multimedia de Manhattan que abría las 24 horas —Museum: a Project of Living Artists— y crearon Suicide, fusionando su amor por el arte, el freestyle jazz, el rock 'n' roll y la polémica amenaza de Iggy Pop, que había fascinado a Vega cuando lo vio en 1969. "Era una muralla de sonido con electrónica, muy provocativo," dice Rev, recordando el sonido que ambos hicieron cuando se juntaron por primera vez. "Era el sonido puro de los componentes electrónicos, esa era nuestra dirección. No teníamos referente en el mundo —no había nada como lo que estábamos haciendo, no teníamos conexión con nada más."

La combinación de las voces tipo "Elvis poseído por el diablo" de Alan Vega, aulladas sobre los sintetizadores de Martin Rev —que sonaba como un órgano de iglesia satánica— provocaba que encontraran el mismo número de detractores que de fanáticos en sus conciertos. "Cuando llegábamos a los clubs, la gente reaccionaba de manera muy agresiva a lo que estábamos haciendo. Mi paso al sonido electrónico puro fue cuando se volvió completamente intolerable para algunas personas. Se volvían muy agresivas," dice Rev. Pero Vega disfrutaba demasiado de la confrontación: "Solía gritarles '¡No te oigo!' —me ponían todos los abucheos." A veces Vega rompía una botella y empezaba a cortarse la cara para superar cualquier tipo de violencia; otras veces cerraba con seguro todas las salidas del lugar, para que nadie pudiera marcharse hasta que Suicide decidiera que ya podían hacerlo.

El shock de los asistentes era comprensible: la mayoría había crecido con los eternos y onanistas solos de guitarra de los descamisados dioses del rock. Y ahora tenían delante a dos personas que parecían decididas a destruir por completo su concepto de lo que se suponía que significaba la música de guitarra. Pero esta visión particular hizo que Suicide se sintieran indestructibles cuando se enfrentaban a todo ese odio. "Esa es la ilusión que te da el escenario," dice Rev. "Siempre sentí que tenía el control, aunque estuviera frente a 2.000 personas que clamaban por mi sangre; sentía que los tenía en la palma de mi mano, que los podía destruir con una mano atada —porque tenía el sonido, y el sonido es un poder increíble." Su nombre bastaba para que ni siquiera los promocionaran. "No nos publicaban en el Village Voice", recuerda Vega. Ponían en la lista a todas las bandas que estaban tocando en la ciudad, pero nunca a nosotros. Le dije a Marty, '¿Somos fantasmas?'"

Cada una de sus presentaciones se convertía en un paso hacia lo desconocido. "Estás ahí, de pie, diciendo: yo soy tal, estoy haciendo esto, y me la suda quién seas o lo que pienses al respecto. Eso es lo que tienes que hacer cuando estás haciendo algo nuevo," explica Rev, "y entonces, cuando dicen, 'No nos gusta una mierda lo que haces, bájate del escenario,' te quedas sobre el escenario y haces lo que tienes que hacer. Coges esa energía y se la mandas de vuelta." A veces la confrontación y el odio se salían de madre y en un concierto, mientras hacían de teloneros de The Clash y Elvis Costello en Bélgica, generaron tanta hostilidad en el público que les robaron el micrófono y la tarde terminó en una revuelta y Vega acabó con la nariz rota. Esa velada fue capturada en la grabación 23 Minutes Over Brussels , una presentación brutal que sigue sonando absolutamente aterradora, abrasiva y hermosa incluso hoy en día, con un mar de abucheos casi tan fuertes como la apabullante música, mientras Vega gritaba "I HATE YOUR FUCKING GUTS!" Definitivamente te contagia del estado de ánimo que se respira en la sala, a niveles casi palpables. En otro concierto en el que actuaron antes de The Clash en Glasgow, alguien le tiró una hacha a Vega. Pero, como dijo a The Guardian en el 2008, "eso no era nada fuera de lo común."

Suicide grabó su álbum de debut homónimo en una sola toma. El álbum entero, según Rev, prácticamente fue hecho en vivo — "No recuerdo ningún overdub," dice. Publicado en 1977, al resto del mundo le costó un tiempo ponerse al día. Vegga afirma: "Nos costó veinte años que nos aceptaran en Nueva York." Aun así, la confianza que tenían en sus creaciones musicales fueron factores fundamentales para su impulso, como Rev dice, "Siempre pensé que era el mejor material del mundo y pensé, joder, tenéis que escucharlo. Lo que tiene valor, finalmente será visto como algo valioso... con el tiempo."

Después de trabajar juntos por 45 años, Rev afirma que sus ocupaciones individuales son una de las razones por las que han logrado durar juntos tanto tiempo. "El secreto de que hayamos trabajado juntos tanto tiempo es que nos fuimos en direcciones distintas. Nunca hemos tenido un conflicto en el que digamos 'Ya no vamos a trabajar más juntos.' Tenemos nuestras vidas independientes y los dos somos personas bastante creativas, así que siempre estamos explorando cosas por nuestra parte." Ambos han hecho numerosos discos en solitario y han creado obras maestras por su cuenta. La de Rev llegó con su LP homónimo en 1980, mientras que Vega esperaría hasta el 2007 antes de crear el suyo, Station.

El grupo sigue modificando su viejo material y llevándolo a nuevos lugares cuando tocan en vivo. Pero el material nuevo tampoco es algo que esté descartado, según Rev, "si las circunstancias son las correctas." Sobre tocar incesantemente y modificar y reimaginar sus canciones viejas, dice "Cuando siento que me estoy familiarizando mucho con algo o me parece una fórmula preestablecida, entonces lo desechamos. Mucho de ese material es increíble, y puedes jugar con él y cambiarlo. No tienes que hacer lo mismo una y otra vez todas las noches, pero tampoco lo tienes que desechar por completo... trato de no hacer cosas como bises o traer artistas invitados muy a menudo, porque entonces Suicide se vuelve algo horizontal, y nosotros somos una banda vertical. No nos gusta relajarnos y pasarlo bien; nada de eso me atrae."

Ninguno de los dos quiere hacer predicciones sobre su futuro. En el 2012, Vega sufrió un infarto y un derrame cerebral, y casi no sobrevive. Pero a pesar del susto, no está en sus planes terminar pronto. "Nunca me voy a retirar, no va conmigo. Voy a morir bailando. Moriré sobre el escenario," dice con una sonrisa. Sin embargo, antes de que parta a ningún lugar, tiene un plan muy Suicide para una de sus mayores canciones. "Dream Baby Dream" ha sido reversionada por todo el mundo, desde Bruce Springsteen a Savages, Neneh Cherry y Arcade Fire (con David Byrne en las voces), pero los planes de Vega son aun más grandes. "Acabará siendo el himno nacional," dice con confianza sardónica. Rev tampoco tiene planes concretos para el grupo, y prefiere tomar las oportunidades una a una, "Nunca sé qué va a pasar de un concierto a otro. En lo que a mí respecta, podría haber sido nuestro concierto. Pero he pensado en eso varias veces, y siempre hay uno más." El futuro de Suicide es quizá un poco como su pasado: cada actuación es un paso más hacia lo completamente desconocido.

Sigue a Daniel en Twitter.

El pasado viernes publicábamos por aquí ‘Dime cómo te llamas y te diré con qué canción te torturaron‘, un post donde repasaba hits musicales con nombres propios que se repetían más que el ajo. Y cuando ya estaba publicado pense “ay va, ahí habría encajado perfectamente ‘A ti mujer’, el álbum que sacó Antonio Hidalgo cuando era un yernísimo de la televisión de España”.

Para quien no lo recuerde, pongamos en contexto su salto a la popularidad. Tras pasar por programas como ‘Una pareja feliz’ junto a una desconocida Anne Igartiburu, Antonio Hidalgo se convierte en el cantante de ‘Sabor a ti’, el programa de Ana Rosa Quintana, en el que comenzó en 1998. Poco a poco fue ganando fama y cariño y dejó de ser simplemente el chico de la orquesta para ir comenzando a presentar alguna que otra sección, hasta que se convirtió en el copresentador, desarrollando su labor en secciones como el panel de premios en el que había que buscar las casillas que pusiesen sabor-a-ti.

 Y cuando ya llevaba año y pico en antena, Antonio pone las cartas sobre la mesa para recordar que lo suyo es la música y lanza ‘A ti mujer’, su primer disco. Un álbum acompañado de muchas fotos del murciano poniendo carita de pícaro bonachón que hacía las delicias de las señoras que rondaban los 50 que solían acudir al plató. Para promocionarlo, se hizo un spot que salió hasta la saciedad en los cortes publicitarios de producciones como ‘Nada es para siempre’, como dicen en este post el compi Viruete.

Aunque pueda parecer algo baladí, el álbum tiene detrás un gran concepto hecho a base de versiones. Y es que, por si alguien no lo sabe, el título de ‘A ti mujer’ viene de una canción que participó en el Festival de Benidorm.

Con el resto de canciones, Antonio se demuestra un gentleman mojabragas que ha seducido a una ristra de amantes en el pasado, a la que dedica cada canción. Así, estuvo ‘Clara‘, la drogadicta a la que cantaba Joan Batista Humet; ‘Manuela’, la de Julio Iglesias; ‘Lucía’ la de Serrat; ‘Yolanda’ de Pablo Milanés; ‘Lola’ de Los Brincos; ‘Soledad’ de Emilio José; ‘Melina’ de Camilo Sesto; ‘Isabel’ de Charles Aznavour, y ‘Ramona’. Lo habría petado si en lugar de la ‘Ramona’ que entre otros grabó Raphael hubiese cantado a la pechugona de Fernando Esteso, pero no es el caso.

Junto a Antonio Hidalgo, a los coros, había profesionales de la música como Luismi Balandrón de La Década Prodigiosa, o Araceli Lavado, profesora de ‘Se llama copla’ que era una de esas cantantes de estudio que ponían la voz a las azafatas de ‘El semáforo’ o el ‘Un, dos, tres’ mientras un montón de chicas monas hacen playback. También aparece Miguel Morán, con tilde en la a, y no sé si será el mismo que Miguel Morant, el que cantaba ‘Oliver y Benji’, y Alicia Araque, vocal coach de ‘La voz’. Vaya, que estaba bien arropado.

En los agradecimientos, Antonio Hidalgo indica que “este trabajo es una respuesta de agradecimiento al público que con tanto cariño me ha ayudado a crecer en este difícil mundo de la televisión. A ti, mujer”, y luego comienza a dar más nombres que los que vienen en las guías telefónicas, y entre los que por supuesto está Ana Rosa.

Un año más tarde, Antonio repitió experincia musical con ‘Ciao Amore’, un nuevo álbum con más versiones como ‘Corazón gitano’ de Nicola di Bari o ‘Yo que no vivo sin ti’, de Luis Miguel, aunque tuvo menos acogida.

A Antonio Hidalgo le perdímos un poco la pista, aunque en Murcia lo han podido ver en su canal autonómico, y también en un especial de ‘Tu cara me suena’. Pero si hace quince años eras una ‘hidalguer’, no sufras, pues Antonio sigue dedicándose al mundo de la música. Actualmente se gana el pan cantando en ‘Los Happys’, una banda de versiones donde revisa éxitos del pasado de Alaska y Dinarama o los Village People. En los vídeos que hay en Youtube, de momento, ni rastro de ‘A ti mujer’, ni de ‘Melina’, ni de ‘Ramona’, ni de ninguna. Larga vida a Antonio Hidalgo y a sus covers, tenga nombre de señora o no.

Foto via Wikimedia Commons.

Es innegable: el Papa Bergoglio es capaz de seducir en menos de cinco segundos al anticlerical más rabioso. Será porque cualquiera puede empatizar más con él que con el Papa Ratzinger, pero el caso es que la figura de Bergoglio, construida en base a un perfil carismático y poco molesto ha sido aclamada inmediatamente por todo el mundo como la portadora del cambio.

En su entrevista más famosa publicada en septiembre de 2013 en la revista Civiltà Cattolica, Bergoglio evocó la imagen de la Iglesia como un "hospital de campaña" y predicó la misericordia para los gais y los divorciados e invocó la necesidad de reformas urgentes – siendo la primera de todas "la actitud".

Efectivamente estas declaraciones eran un hecho sin precedentes en la historia del clero y le hicieron ganar al Papa un puesto central en los medios de comunicación de todo el mundo, así como el apoyo de políticos, intelectuales, personalidades del mundo del entretenimiento y laicos,debatiendo con los gobiernos del mundo problemáticas que hasta entonces la Iglesia ni siquiera había contemplado. Seguramente el momento cumbre de esta tendencia tuvo lugar cuando la revista Time lo eligió como personaje del año ya que – parafraseando a Gibbs - "en menos de un año ha hecho una cosa extraordinaria: no sólo ha cambiado la letra, también ha cambiado la música".

No hace falta decir que esto fue un duro golpe para todos aquellos que, como quien ahora escribe, considere que las religiones son una creación humana fruto de una gran laguna intelectual y cultural. Pero más allá de las creencias – o no – espirituales, es legítimo preguntarse si este papa representa un cambio real respecto a los gravísimos escándalos – sexuales, económicos y políticos – en los que se ha movido el Vaticano durante los últimos años. O si por el contrario, detrás de todos sus movimientos de animador y de su cuidada imagen pública, este papado no es nada más que la encarnación de toda la ambigüedad seductora del catolicismo.

Estas contradicciones, las zonas grises y sus actitudes esquizofrénicas y peloteras, han aumentado particularmente durante los últimos meses en una escalada dictada por la apretada agenda del pontífice: desde su gira estadounidense al pressing a la política italiana e internacional por el Sínodo de la Familia y de ahí a sus corruptelas para conseguir el Jubileo Extraordinario que tanto quiere Bergoglio. Pero miremos de cerca algunas de estas últimas contradicciones para hasta donde llega la estafa del Papa Francisco.

AMÉRICA Y EL COMUNISMO

En el último año, Francisco visitó intensamente las Américas y los medios del mundo entero se hicieron eco de sus proclamas "revolucionarias". El pasado 23 de septiembre en el parlamento de los Estados Unidos declaró: "nosotros, el pueblo de este continente, no tenemos miedo de los extranjeros, porque muchos de nosotros fuimos una vez los extraños". Cierto.

Lástima que ni siquiera una semana después de estas declaraciones que conmovieron a todos los entusiastas de Bergoglio, y obligaron a todos los jefes de Estado a fingir durante unas horas que estaban reconsiderando el problema de la inmigración, el Papa Bergoglio canonizó al misionero español Junípero Serra que llevó a cabo un verdadero genocidio humano y cultural entre los nativos humanos de California desde 1769, convirtiéndolos de manera forzosa, vistiéndolos con sus uniformes azules y utilizándolos para anular su identidad cultural.

En el pasado julio, en Bolivia, Bergoglio arremetió contra el capitalismo, definiendo el dinero como un "excremento del diablo." Cosas como esta hacen que en varias ocasiones se haya definido al Papa Bergoglio como un franciscano de izquierdas, cercano a los pobres, lo que constituye una de las mayores operaciones de camuflaje llevadas a cabo por el pontífice.

Durante su visita a Bolivia, en uno de los muchos intercambios de regalos entre los gobernantes, Francisco recibió de la mano del primer ministro Evo Morales un extraño crucifijo en forma de hoz y martillo detrás del cual había una historia truculenta. El horror en los ojos del Papa ha marcado uno de los puntos más cómicos de se carrera, pero a pesar de ello sirvió para encumbrar aún más al Papa quien se vinculó a través del regalo, a la figura de Luis Espinal Camps, un misionero jesuita e intelectual que ideó en Bolivia el crucifijo marxista, donde fue asesinado en 1980 por los escuadrones de la muerte del exdictador Luis García Meza Tejada.

Mientras que en los medios de comunicación venden una historia en la que Bergoglio está totalmente a favor de políticas aperturistas en la Iglesia – tanto en lo cultural como en lo político – como por ejemplo la reciente reunión con Fidel Castro, las acciones políticas del papa muestran una realidad muy diferente. Sin salir de América del Sur, en Chile han criticado mucho al Papa por haber defendido ante los periodistas la designación del chileno Juan Barros Madrid como obispo de Osorno. Los acusadores no critican tanto que Barros Madrid fuese el monseñor que realizó el funeral privado del dictador chileno Augusto Pinochet, sino su encubrimiento de las actividades pederastas de su amigo y también sacerdote Fernando Karadima.

No obstante muchos chilenos fieles decidieron llevarle la pregunta al Papa Bergoglio a través de una representación de una veintena de parlamentarios, quien respondió a los periodistas diciendo que la Iglesia "ha perdido su libertad, la gente se ha dejado llenar la cabeza por los políticos y ha acusado al obispo sin tener ninguna prueba" y "pensad con la cabeza, no os dejéis engañar y no os guiéis por la nariz, han sido los izquierdistas quienes se han inventado esto". Por otro lado Bergoglio se ha caracterizado desde su toma de posición por mitificar la figura de Carol Wojtyla, el Papa más ferozmente anticomunista de la historia (tanto como para apoyar a las dictaduras de derechas) y cuyo trágico legado irá siempre relacionado a su oposición al uso de los preservativos en el momento de mayor virulencia de la pandemia del SIDA.

EL CASO DAVIS: MATRIMONIO GAY Y GÉNERO

El caso de Davis es otro de los puntos importantes para entender esta esquizofrenia. Kim Davis es una cincuentona funcionaria del Condado de Rowan en Kentucky que terminó en la cárcel en septiembre pasado por negarse a aplicar la ley que aprobaba los matrimonios entre miembros del mismo sexo después del fallo histórico del Tribunal Supremo estadounidense. Davis rechazaba la orden de la corte suprema y se negaba a dar la licencia de matrimonio repitiendo como un disco rayado que sus acciones respondían a única "autoridad divina".

Kim Davis

Si el caso se hubiese acabado aquí nos hubiésemos olvidado de inmediato, conformándonos con ver a la funcionaria como una de los muchos paletos que pueblan el llamado Cinturón de la Biblia de los Estados Unidos. Pero bastó la visita pastoral de Bergoglio a los Estados Unidos para dar lugar de nuevo a esta triste historia, ya que en una reunión privada de la embajada del Vaticano en Washington, el Papa se reunió con un par de personas, entre ellas Kim Davis. Tan pronto como los medios de comunicación estadounidenses fueron conscientes de la reunión comenzaron a cuestionar los motivos y las oportunidades espirituales y políticas de la visita privada, tratando de reconstruir de forma realista lo sucedido e incluyendo las declaraciones y los desmentidos tanto del Vaticano como de la mujer.

Dado que no existen audios ni vídeos del encuentro, no podemos creer en absoluto a ninguna de las dos fuentes: por un lado está Kim Davis, que inmediatamente después de su liberación ha utilizado el encuentro con Bergoglio como respaldo en relación a las futuras elecciones republicanas. Y por su parte, Bergoglio y la Santa Sede que, tras tartamudear intentando desmarcarse de un teórico apoyo a Davis solo han afirmado ambiguamente que la objeción de conciencia es un "derecho".

El portavoz del Vaticano le restó importancia al asunto diciendo que el Papa Bergoglio se reúne con todos, sin prejuicios. Sin embargo, en su reciente viaje a Cuba, el Papa negó esta posibilidad de reunión a los disidentes del gobierno, que probablemente sean más importantes que una reunión simbólica con una funcionaria de Kentucky que lo único que hizo fue negarle sus derechos civiles a los demás ciudadanos.

El caso de Davis es también un buen ejemplo para entender cómo funciona la máquina mediática de Bergoglio, y en este sentido, es importante prestar atención a la cronología de los acontecimientos. Como se mencionó anteriormente, el caso Davis ha provocado la indignación inmediata en todo el mundo, en los medios y entre los representantes de la cultura y el mundo LGBT. En Italia y otros países el hecho ha sido casi totalmente ignorado por los principales medios de comunicación y publicado tardíamente gracias a la salida del armario de Krzysztof Charamsa, sacerdote y teólogo polaco.

Aquí es donde el Papa Bergoglio, el mago Silvan, sacó rápidamente de la chistera un conejo blanco. Dos en realidad; una pareja de hombres gay, Yayo Grassi y su compañero Iwan Bagus. El primero es un amigo argentino y ex alumno del Papa, quien le dijo a CNN que había hablado personalmente con Bergoglio por correo electrónico para concertar esta reunión privada en Washington. Pero cuidado, porque en este punto, es importante leer las declaraciones del portavoz del pontífice que, en plena tormenta por el caso Davis, intentando evitar al Papa la responsabilidad de la reunión, dijo en un comunicado: "La única audiencia que concedió el Papa en la Nunciatura fue a uno de sus antiguos alumno y a su familia ". Esta declaración fue hecha antes de la revelación, por supuesto, de que esta familia era homosexual, creando una paradoja y alimentando las ambigüedades de este papado de apertura aparente inmediatamente acompañadas de rectificaciones.

No se encuentran entre los fans de Krzysztof Charamsa, ni de su salida del armario. Es sintomática, sin embargo, la reacción inmediata del Vaticano, que al instante de la declaración de Charamsa lo condenó y lo relevó de sus funciones. Es importante destacar este hecho porque el Vaticano es garantista y tolerante cuando entre sus funcionarios y representantes, alguien es culpable de crímenes reales o hace declaraciones justificando desde el feminicidio a la pedofilia, pasando por la comparación entre la homosexualidad e ISIS. En estos casos, la iglesia no aplica sanciones.

Si estas y muchas otras acciones del Vaticano son ignoradas por los medios de comunicación, o calificadas como simple malentendido, normalmente no se toman como posición oficial del Vaticano, es bueno recordar que las palabras del Papa no son menos terribles en ocasiones, como cuando en febrero pasado equiparó la petición de derechos de las personas transgénero a las armas nucleares , negando con esta fórmula el derecho a existir de los transexuales.

Después de estas declaraciones uno se pregunta cómo la sociedad civil y especialmente los líderes del mundo de la cultura pueden seguir diciendo a sus fans que están entusiasmados con el Papa. Dos ejemplos: la cantante Madonna, que incluso le dedicó una canción de su concierto en Filadelfia en septiembre pasado, dijo que el Papa Bergoglio tiene una mente abierta, que va en contra de las reglas, y, más recientemente, el diseñador Riccardo Tisci , que en un reciente número de la revista Marie Claire Italia expresó el deseo de vestir al Papa Francesco. Una cosa extraña para el diseñador italiano, que además de su innegable talento ha aparecido en los medios de comunicación por haber promovido a través de sus desfiles de moda y campañas a los modelos transexuales.

Entonces, ¿dónde está el Papa del diálogo, revolucionario, de los Millennials y en sintonía con los tiempos? Nunca existió. Y en este punto hay que acordarse de cómo el mundo gay fue el primero en picar gracias a una de las primeras declaraciones de Bergoglio, su famosa frase: "¿Quién soy yo para juzgar a un hombre gay que quiere estar más cerca de Dios?" –uno de los muchos espejismos que salpican su papado.

La cuestión del sexo, el género y el matrimonio gay seguirán siendo la principal obsesión del mundo católico. Incluso hoy en día la posición oficial de la iglesia es de considerar la homosexualidad como la "expresión de un desorden moral intrínseco", cuando la ciencia desde hace más de 30 años dice lo contrario. En muchos países, la acción intimidatoria del Vaticano respecto a este tema es una excusa perfecta para que los políticos no den pasos adelante respecto al matrimonio gay.

BERGOGLIO Y LA POLÍTICA

En los últimos días hemos sido testigos de uno de los casos más sensacionales de la injerencia del Vaticano en la política italiana. En el vuelo de regreso de su viaje a los EE.UU. Bergoglio respondió a la pregunta de un reportero sobre la presencia del alcalde de Roma, Ignazio Marino en su conferencia en Filadelfia.

No es mi intención esbozar una teoría conspirativa, pero es evidente la impaciencia del Vaticano con el ayuntamiento de Roma, en parte atribuible a la posición de apertura "real" de Marino a las parejas homosexuales.

Recientemente, a pocas horas de la definición del Sínodo como "no un parlamento, sino una expresión de la Iglesia que lee la realidad con el corazón", Bergoglio y todos los medios de comunicación del Vaticano habían expresado el deseo de un "avance político" para la ciudad de Roma, después de haber apoyado a la anterior administración romana de alcalde Alemanno. Y de nuevo, hay elementos como el Osservatore Romano, que dice de Roma: "La capital, a menos de dos meses del inicio del Jubileo, solo tiene la certeza de sus ruinas". No está mal, teniendo en cuenta que una buena parte de la propiedad de Roma pertenece al Vaticano que no paga ningún impuesto al ayuntamiento.

Dando por verdaderas y reales todas estas críticas a la municipalidad de Roma, es aún más imprudente e irresponsable el golpe de efecto del Jubileo Extraordinario, un evento que se espera que atraiga a 25 millones de personas sin haber sido acordado correctamente con el gobierno y con la ciudad que acoge al Vaticano.

Todas estas contradicciones, paradojas y aperturas falsas son síntomas inequívocos de una institución que ha decidido responder a sus propios escándalos internos y a la crisis de los fieles en el mundo no con una verdadera reflexión sobre la identidad y la misión de la Iglesia en este milenio, sino con un rebranding del que Francisco es el testimonio ideal.

El ejemplo más reciente se remonta a hace unos días, cuando Bergoglio de nuevo centralizaba la atención de los medios por hablar públicamente con estas palabras: "Hoy, en nombre de la Iglesia, pido perdón por los escándalos que se han producido recientemente en Roma y en el Vaticano". Hacer las paces ante la habitual multitud de fieles que sella con un aplauso atronador el "perdón" es uno de los trucos más probados del Papa, que nunca entra en el fondo de tales escándalos. El portavoz habitual, Federico Lombardi tuvo que mentir sobre las palabras del Papa, no dejando claro cuáles son los hechos que el Papa quería expiar, sino que simplemente era el deseo de Francisco "querer llegar a la gente común, con problemas y que se entristece cuando lee los escándalos provocados por la Iglesia y sus hombres". Sin embargo, los escándalos concretos no faltan. El más reciente es el caso que estalló en torno a la designación del nuevo embajador de Francia ante la Santa Sede, el católico Laurent Stefanini, el Vaticano no quiere aceptarlo porque es abiertamente gay.

Todos juntos, estos elementos enseñan sólo una cosa: no se puede responder a las interferencias de una monarquía absoluta como el Vaticano en el plano abstracto de la espiritualidad y la ética, sino en lo concreto de las leyes que rigen los estados democráticos.

Sigue a Riccardo en Twitter

Alguna vez he dicho en ente bloj que una de las frases que más odio es “¡Retírate ya!”. No. Quiero seguir comprando discos de Ian Anderson. Quiero ver a Harrison Ford dando leches. Mataría por otra película con Clint Eastwood de protagonista. Quizá matar sea exagerado. “Daría una patada en los cojones a alguien imbécil” sería más adecuado. El caso es que nunca he sido del culto a la juventud.

Kevin Kelly and I surveyed over 1600 people to come up with this list of the top 50 most popular non-fiction podcasts. From our introduction to the list:

We made a list of the best factual podcasts by ranking the most popular factual podcasts from the results of an unscientific survey we posted online several months ago. We asked readers of this Cool Tools blog and our social followers to take our survey and rate some suggested podcasts — and to add ones we did not know about. More than 1,600 people filled out the survey, and by the end we had a list of 775 suggested titles. We combined the number of times a podcast was checked together with its average rating to come up with a total score. We then sorted the final list of podcast titles by rank. (The full data dump is here.) We wrote descriptions for the top 50, shown below. (The rankings in this list are biased to our original suggestion list; we’d do the survey differently if we did it again next year.)

There are two broad types of factual podcasts; unscripted and scripted. Unscripted shows are usually interviews or discussions that play out as recorded. The producers don’t know, nor have much control, over where the show goes. Scripted shows, on the other hand, will carefully edit interviews after the fact, mixing them with narration, inter-splicing them with other interviews, maybe adding a soundtrack or ambient sounds. They craft the raw factual materials into a highly produced show in the way a reporter might craft a magazine article, rather than just run a Q&A. Scripted shows, on average, take much more energy, time, staff (and money) to make than unscripted shows (with some exceptions). It is no surprise that the highest ranked podcasts are scripted.

Image: Tim Wilson from Blaine, MN, USA, licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic license.

Photos by Steve Prue

Stoya is an adult performer,writer, and master of avoiding pants. Her writing has been published by the Guardian, the New York Times, and theNew Inquiry. She maintains a blog at GraphicDescriptions.comand recommends you refrain from Googling her at work. The below article appears in the new book Coming Out Like a Porn Star and was excerpted with permission. For more information and to order the book, visit comingoutlikeapornstar.com.

Murphy'sLaw of Inappropriate Behavior states that if you make a habit of taking yourclothes off in public, eventually everyone in your family (including members sodistant they share less DNA with you than a chimpanzee does with a cuttlefish)will somehow stumble upon documentation of what you're up to.

Mygrandmother is a very smart woman, and I'd been dodging the question of what Idid for a living for at least three professionally naked years. I really hadbeen meaning to tell her about my job before she found out from the televisionor a newspaper, but I thought I'd do it when I was ready. "Ready" consistentlybeing defined as any time except for right now.

So Iwas completely unprepared when she called and said, "Your mother says thatyou're sort of like a model. I don't know what that means because if you were amodel she would just say you're a model, and you're a bit short for thatanyway. No offense, dear. What do you do with your days?"

Iwished I'd discussed this inevitability with my mom or had some legitimatereason to get off the phone. My usually dodgy cell service was clear as a bell.I worried: What if I failed at easing her into the whole idea of my career inpornography and she had a heart attack, leaving me accidentally guilty ofgrand-matricide? What if she decided to just cut me out of her life? More pressinghowwas I supposed to explain what a modern pornographic actress was to a woman whodoesn't know how to work a cell phone and still had typesetting tools layingaround from her days in advertising?

"Well,um, do you remember Bettie Page and pinup? What I do is kind of like pinup butmore explicit. Like, with no clothes on."

"Oh! Soyou're a noooooooodie girl!"

EitherI was hallucinating or that statement had been delivered in a positive tone.

"Yes,ma'am. But, uh, pop culture is a bit more edgy now than things were in the'50s, so I have actual sex with people and it goes on video or DVD."

"In themooooving pic-tures! Do you enjoy it?"

"I havefun. It's always interesting. I only do things that I want to do, with peoplethat I want to do them with. It's good."

"Wellthen, that's all very nice and I'm glad to hear you're doing something youlike."

Sincethe conversation was going so well, I figured we might as well get everythingover with at once.

"There'ssomething else I should probably tell you while we're on this subject."

"Ohhh?"

Inaddition to being smart, my grandmother is an incredibly expressive woman. Youknow that Mehrabian's rule thing about how communication is 93 percentnonverbal? In my grandma's case, 99 percent of communication is pure vocalinflection. There's something in the way she draws out the vowels. They becomea whole adventure.

This particular"ohhh" had started out some distance into curiosity land, passed over thegosh-what-else-could-top-the-last-thing mountains, and settled on thepatiently-waiting-to-hear-more plains.

"I'musing your name as my stage name. Well, I'm using the Americanized diminutive.The point is, I'm using part of your name as my stage name."

"Vera?That's not very sexy."

"No,ma'am. I mean, I think Vera could actually be quite marketable with the currentneoburlesque scene, but I'm using Stoya."

"Oh?Oh."

Thefirst oh was surprised, and the second oh sounded less than enthused. In myhead, I stared into the largest imaginable pit of uh-oh. I wondered if shecould hear my heart pounding over the phone. My left hand frantically picked atthe stitches on the hem of my shirt. I became concerned that I might be the oneto have the heart attack, and I wasn't going to die without one last cigarette.I lit up, inhaled and exhaled, inhaled and exhaled again. Finally, I couldn'ttake the extended silence any longer.

"Gramma?"

"I wasjust thinking. I hope none of the men at the nursing home get us confused andtry to put my feet behind my head. I don't bend that way anymore."

Apparently,since the death of her last husband, she'd acquired three boyfriends. Becauseit takes that many of them to keep up with her. My stressful and dramatic coming-out-to-Grandmamoment turned into a farce because although the promiscuity gene may haveskipped a generation, it most definitely runs in my family.

For more Stoya visit her blog, her sexy porno site TRENCHCOATx, and follow her on Twitter.

Image by Jamee Baiser. Click here to order 'Coming Out Like a Porn Star'

While less than 1% of iTunes users, Apple CEO Tim Cook still insists that he is "really happy" with the numbers.

“The enlightened socialism and political passion of Stieg Larsson is not possible to fake.” These are the concluding thoughts of an article in one of Sweden’s largest liberal newspapers discussing the publication of a fourth book in Larsson’s Millennium series.

Stieg didn’t write the book, of course — his life was cut short by a heart attack in 2004. Instead a new author penned the additional volume, much to the consternation of Stieg’s companion of thirty-five years, Eva Gabrielsson, his personal friends, and others who have accused the project of being grotesque, immoral, and plain “grave robbery.”

Norstedts, the publishing house, contends that it is not unusual for a new writer to continue the work of a popular series of novels — the Millennium books have sold 80 million copies, the largest circulation of any Swedish author. Together with the films, the “Millennium industry” has yielded roughly $500 million, with about $60 million going to Stieg’s father and brother.

But Stieg was not just an author of popular detective novels. He was a socialist activist and throughout his short life fought racism, sexism, and social injustice. “The commercialization of Stieg’s work goes against everything he stood for,” says Gabrielsson who, thanks to obsolete Swedish inheritance law, didn’t inherit anything, despite being Steig’s lifelong partner.

Speaking of David Lagercrantz, the author pegged to write the fourth Millennium book, Gabrielsson remarked: “What can a writer, from the cultural elite, know about the world of Stieg Larsson who was an activist since his adolescence?” Göran Greider, well-known Swedish poet and editor of a labor daily, exclaimed: “The socialist Stieg Larsson has been erased!”

I got to know Stieg as a political journalist and party comrade during my twenty-year tenure as editor of the Swedish Trotskyist weekly Internationalen (the International). Beginning in the late 1970s Stieg wrote regularly for the paper for more than a decade even as he became involved in different projects. His political scholarship and passion for justice deserves to be remembered.

A Lifelong Activist

Before he moved to Stockholm in the late 1970s, Stieg lived in the northern university and workers’ town of Umeå where, ensconced in Umeå’s radical youth milieu, he became engaged in the anti-Vietnam war movement. There he came in contact with the anti-Stalinist left-wing organization Kommunistiska Arbetarförbundet, KAF (Communist Workers’ League) — renamed Socialistiska Partiet in 1982 — the Swedish section of the Fourth International, founded by Trotsky in 1938. Trotsky’s small international organization had seen a revival during the youth revolts of 1968, and an affiliated group was also founded in Sweden.

In Umeå the Trotskyists — who emphasized internationalism, antiracism, women’s liberation, and workers’ democratic power against both capitalism and Stalinist dictatorship — became a democratic alternative to the old Stalinist communist party, traditionally dominant in the left-wing labor unions of Sweden’s northern regions. Stieg became a member of, and politically active in, the local infantry regiment while doing his military service, often distributing the KAF soldier paper, Röd Soldat (Red Soldier).

Like many other young KAF members Stieg moved to industry after military service, getting a job at a paper mill. After saving some money he travelled to Ethiopia and Eritrea in 1977 on assignment for the Fourth International to support the Eritrean People’s Liberation Front (EPLF). Stieg was primarily there to deliver donations from Sweden, but he also trained women guerrilla soldiers in handling mortars, a skill he had learned in the military.

Back in Sweden, he and his companion Eva Gabrielsson moved to Stockholm where he worked briefly as a postman and eventually, starting in 1979, as a graphic news designer at the Swedish news agency Tidningarnas Telegrambyrå (TT), where he stayed for twenty years. The TT job suited Stieg’s desire to write articles in his spare time for Internationalen, which, like many other party members and activists, he did out of conviction and solidarity for no pay.

During the 1980s Stieg wrote many articles for Internationalen on myriad topics. His first long feature was a Marxist interpretation of Jules Verne, reflecting Stieg’s interest in science fiction. But while he wrote a few articles on cultural matters and science his primary focus was imperialism, right-wing politics, and terrorism.

His headlines included: “Reagan in Nazi plot,” “The man behind international right-wing terrorism,” “Neo-Nazis in Europe recruiting assassins to Nicaragua,” etc. Stieg’s thoroughly researched articles followed the networks of the extreme right both inside and outside Sweden, old and new Nazis, and their connections with establishment politics.

Stieg was also very interested in the revolution in the West Indian island of Grenada following the Sandinista victory in Nicaragua in 1979. He and Eva went to Grenada in 1981 to learn more about the revolution and were impressed by Maurice Bishop’s socialist project and the New Jewel Movement. Stieg and Eva viewed Bishop’s project as a democratic example of revolutionary change rooted in deep popular support and engagement — far from the Stalinist dictatorships in the East. Internationalen was actually the only Swedish newspaper that published commissioned articles on “Grenada’s unknown revolution.”

After returning to Sweden, Stieg and Eva became active in organizing a support committee for Grenada and lectured about their experiences throughout the country. The 1983 coup d’état by a Stalinist faction within Grenada’s radical regime — which overthrew and murdered Bishop — was a major shock to Stieg and Eva.

When the coup was immediately followed by an American military intervention that wiped out the socialist effort, Stieg and Eva stayed in constant telephone contact with Grenadian solidarity activists who narrated the dramatic events. Stieg’s articles in Internationalen thus became a unique documentation of the rise and fall of Grenada’s often overlooked revolution.

By the 1980s, like most countries, the left-wing radicalization of the seventies was broken in Sweden. In the wake of Thatcher and Reagan’s victories and their neoliberal offensive, the extreme right resurfaced — in Sweden racist skinheads, neo-Nazis, and white power music became a common feature in youth milieus.

Together with other antiracist activists the SP initiated the campaign group Stoppa Rasismen (Stop Racism) in 1984, and Stieg became active in publishing the group’s bulletin of the same name. By then he had already met with the editors of the British antifascist magazine Searchlight and had agreed to write about developments in Sweden. The Searchlight engagement was mirrored in articles for Internationalen about antifascism in Britain, both historical and contemporary.

As the 1980s turned into the ’90s the world political situation radically changed. With “the fall of the wall” and dissolution of the Soviet Union, Stalinist communism seemed to vanish, leaving the European ideological field open to both liberal capitalism and a new popular right. In 1991 Sweden elected a conservative government (for the first time since 1928), and the radical right-wing and anti-immigrant party, Ny Demokrati (New Democracy) gained seats in parliament for the first time.

That conservative breakthrough ushered in a turbulent decade in Sweden, not only in terms of the deregulation of the Swedish economy and the partial dismantling of the welfare state, but also in rising right-wing and neo-Nazi activity, which became increasingly more violent. Immigrants were murdered while journalists and left-wing activists were terrorized; in 1999 a journalist and his son were wounded as their car was blown to pieces, and a radical unionist in Stockholm was shot and killed in his home by Nazis.

Antiracist and antifascist engagement became Stieg’s overall priority during this period. Together with another journalist, Stieg wrote a book in 1991 on right-wing extremism and toured the country lecturing on the threat. In 1995 he founded Expo, a Swedish version of Searchlight. The magazine investigated and traced white power and Nazi networks and was met with furious hatred from right wing extremists. Bookstores that sold the magazine got their windows smashed, its print shop was threatened, and journalists who wrote for Expo were put on Nazi death lists.

For Stieg and Eva these were years of extreme activity and exhaustion. Along with constant security threats, everything in the magazine was made on free time and without pay. But the hard work paid off. The magazine became well-known and respected and when it was openly terrorized by Nazis the two main Swedish evening tabloids published it as a supplement.

Stieg quit his job at TT in 1999 to work full time as a writer and lecturer on racism and right-wing extremism. In the short time before his untimely death Stieg succeeded in establishing a more stable economic base for the magazine and broadening its non-partisan scope by including antiracists and antifascists from a variety of political backgrounds, including socialists, liberals, and anyone else opposed to the rising tide of right-wing extremism.

Stieg never formally resigned from his membership in Socialistiska partiet, but the northern section of the Stockholm branch, where he was a member, was dissolved in the early ’90s, around the same time that Stieg and Eva moved from the suburbs. Like all of the radical left, Socialistiska partiet’s membership and influence declined in the late 1980s and early ’90s, as members dropped out or, like Stieg, moved on to activities where they felt they could make a difference.

Stieg’s last article for Internationalen in 1988 — entitled “Glasnost in the streets of Moscow. Like a warm wind” — expressed the Trotskyist hope for democratic socialism in Soviet Union. Socialistiska partiet and its predecessors had always supported radical democratic movements in the Eastern bloc, from the Prague Spring of 1968 to clandestine Soviet trade unions and Solidarnosc in Poland.

That hope was extinguished in the 1990s, and as a result, defending the welfare state and fighting against racism and right-wing extremism came to dominate the left agenda in Sweden and Europe more broadly. The new wave of feminism was also linked to this orientation, expressing both the limitations of the old left and growing women’s resistance against the ideals and practices of the advancing right.

The combination of antiracism, feminism, and struggle for social justice was nothing new for Stieg. His politics were rooted in these ideals, both in terms of his personal life and in his lifelong political experiences. His disgust for the oppression of women and active engagement for women’s rights is expressed in many of his articles, particularly those from Grenada. But Stieg’s feminism could also be seen in his everyday politics, like internal party discussions in which he argued for universal military service for women — a minority position not always appreciated by the anti-militarists in the organization.

The Politics of Literature

Stieg’s Millenium books were a hobby — a form of relaxation after overworked days and weeks. But they are also heavily influenced by his own political life — the visit to Grenada in The Girl Who Played with Fire, surviving Nazi networks in The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo, the gallery of characters, the right-wing terror, the parallel and illegal Swedish counter-intelligence, and the muckraking and threatened magazine under heavy pressure are all drawn from Stieg’s experiences and passions. The “enlighted socialism and political passion” of the Millenium series noticed by the Swedish reviewer was the life of Stieg Larsson channeled in literary form into his books.

Stieg of course never saw his books become the Millenium industry with its hundreds of millions in profits — he died of an overwork-induced heart attack in November 2004. In the years that followed Stieg’s work was kidnapped by the same profit machines he used to rail against, the inheritance and the immaterial rights from the series wrested from the hands of Stieg’s life companion in love and activism.

So when Stieg’s long-forgotten will was recently found, in which he bequeathed his small financial resources to his party, none of his old comrades applauded with greedy eyes. The will was written decades ago when he went to Eritrea and was never witnessed. But it was not fear of a drawn-out juridical process that dissuaded the party from pressing its claim.

Instead, in a widely reported political demonstration, Stieg’s old Umeå comrades used public interest in the will to demand a change in Sweden’s obsolete legislation and for the publishing company and Stieg’s relatives to let Stieg’s rightful inheritor, Eva Gabrielsson, take over the responsibility for Stieg’s work.

Perhaps the publicity of this action contributed to Eva’s long struggle to convince Stieg’s relatives to secure the continuation of Expo — Stieg’s life project — with profits from the book series. Expo has so far received only $2.5 million from Stieg’s relatives, but they now promise that profits from the fourth book will go to fund the magazine. What happened to the rest of the millions gleaned from the efforts of an overworked and passionate activist is another story — a real-life thriller and ample material for a much more interesting fourth book.

Among other things, Vin Diesel is known for being an avid Dungeons and Dragons player. He's even gotten to play his own D&D character in the movie The Last Witch Hunter. But until recently, we hadn't been able to watch him play it live. To remedy that, the folks at the Nerdist and Geek and Sundry got Diesel and a few other people together to play D&Diesel, an exciting half hour full of natural twenties and growling.

Cast
Laura Bailey as Vex'ahlia, a Ranger
Travis Willingham as Grog, a Barbarian
Jessica Chobot as The Headmistress, a Monk
Dan Casey as Dupont Dupont, a Rogue
with Vin Diesel as Kaulder the Witch Hunter

You can find more D&D action from Laura Bailey and Travis Willingham on Geek and Sundry's Critical Role.

DMed by Matthew Mercer

D&Diesel previously (simulated).

España es el país europeo en el que más ha subido el recibo de la electricidad durante la crisis, 81 euros/MWH desde 2008, frente a los 42 euros de media en el conjunto de la Unión Europea. Un informe achaca la subida al peso de los impuestos y de las cargas de políticas públicas en la tarifa eléctrica.

"What's better company to keep than one monk and one samurai?" What sounds like the lead-in to a terrible joke is how Max Fortgang begins talking about matcha, a bright-green Japanese powdered tea.

Max is the co-owner of MatchaBar, which he shares with his brother Graham. He explains that 11th-century Zen monks drank this bitter tea before meditation for its calming quality. Several-hundred years later, matcha became popular among samurai for its caffeine. Fast-forward another few hundred years to modern-day Brooklyn where commuters have adapted the ancient tea ceremony associated with matcha in to-go cups with a splash of almond milk.

As Max and Graham discovered as students at NYU (after realizing that their "full-blown coffee and Red Bull habits" weren't sustainable), matcha can serve the same purpose as coffee, without a crash: It has 70 grams of caffeine, as opposed to 100 grams in a similar-sized serving of coffee, and releases the stimulant over a longer period of time. And—despite what I had always believed—it can taste pretty good. Here's how to make matcha, and find your go-to way to drink it:

 

Choose Your Matcha

  
Left: Always put matcha through a sieve to remove clumps. Right: Three different preparations of matcha.

There are two main classifications of matcha: ceremonial grade and culinary grade. Culinary-grade matcha is generally used in matcha-flavored foods (hey there, matcha pops) and is from mature leaves further down the green tea plant with little nutritional value or caffeine. Ceremonial-grade matcha uses younger leaves that are higher on the plant (the best is from the leaves at the tip of the tea plant), and is what Max and Graham recommend—plus, it's healthier.

Matcha isn't nearly as acidic as coffee (in fact, it's a base!), and it contains antioxidants like catechins that protect the body from free radicals and increase the time it takes for the caffeine to break down (that's where the smaller crash comes from).

 

Pick Your Drink

 
The Peaches and Cream drink (or is it the Irish flag?) at Matchabar uses peach juice, almond milk, and matcha.

Modern iterations of matcha (those in the aformentioned to-go cups) can be made into either cream-based, coffee-inspired drinks or fruit-based, iced refreshments.

For the coffee-inspired drinks, matcha can be used in the same way you'd use a shot of espresso, with the same ratios of milk. One teaspoon of matcha plus roughly 1/2 cup of water is equal to one shot of espresso, for these purposes. For example, MatchaBar serves something called a Flat Green, their matcha version of a flat white. Graham explained, "What we’re trying to do is make an unfamiliar product more familiar."

Fruit-based iced matcha drinks work in the same way lemonade does with tea in an Arnold Palmer. Max explained as I sipped a peach and matcha drink, "In the tea industry, one of the main ways you get people to start drinking it is to put lemonade in it, which is a very basic move that's opened up tea to a lot of people." He explained that matcha is a perfect canvas for a whole range of flavors and often brings out earthy tones of other ingredients. At MatchaBar, he mixes it with watermelon, peach, and fuji apple, among other juices (his recipe for Peaches and Cream Matcha is below). To do the same at home, fill a twelve-ounce glass with ice, then add 4 ounces of the fruit juice of your choice, and top with roughly 6 ounces of matcha, or 1 1/2 times as much matcha as juice.

 

Prepare the Matcha One of Three Ways

Traditional Whisk

  

Matcha is traditionally made with a tea whisk. To use one (and if you don't already have one, they retail for about $15), scoop 20 grams, or roughly 1 teaspoon, of matcha powder into a small bowl with relatively high edges so that the tea doesn't go overboard. Pour 1 cup boiling or cold water over the tea (matcha doesn't dissolve in water, it's just "suspended" as Max says, so the temperature of the water doesn't matter), and whisk quickly in a double-U or zig-zag formation until little bubbles start to form. Continue whisking until all of the clumps are broken up and the top of the tea is covered in a thin layer of foam. This takes about a minute.

Electric Beater

  

As with the whisk method, add 1 teaspoon of matcha to a small bowl with 1 cup of water over it, then use an electronic milk frother to create a layer of foam and break up all the clumps. Unlike the whisk method, which can take up to a minute, this method can take as little as 10 seconds.

If You Don't Have Either

  

Not all hope is lost! Max and Graham suggest sourcing a small airtight container with a secure lid. Add to it 1 teaspoon of matcha, 1/2 cup of cold water, and some ice cubes (the ice cubes help break up the clumps in the powder). Close the lid and shake the container vigorously until the matcha is fully suspended in the water.

To Max and Graham, there are several ways to make matcha tea that diverge from the original ceremony, but the drink itself is an art. As Graham puts it, "I would have a painting of Max's Peaches and Cream in my house if I could."

What's your preferred way to enjoy matcha? Do you think Peaches and Cream should be reserved for the classic dessert? Tell us in the comments below!

Photos by James Ransom

Hace hoy un año se trasladaron los restos mortales de Mari Carmen González Valerio, que ofreció su vida por la conversión del político de la II República.El 12 de enero de 1996 el Papa Juan Pablo II declaró Venerable a la niña María del Carmen González-Valerio, y mandó publicar el Decreto de sus virtudes heroicas. «Consta que la niña María del […]

The post La niña que rezaba por la conversión de Azaña appeared first on Infovaticana | Religión y persona.

Shortly before iOS took over my life, one of my favorite games was Boom Blox on the Wii. It was the brainchild of a little known game designer by the name of Steven Spielberg (who also dabbles in film, I’m told), and it was absurdly fun. There’s something about huge explosions and large structures toppling over that delights the eight year old boy in me, and Boom Blox (and especially it’s sequel, Bash Party) took over my free time for countless weeks. Ever since those days I’ve been yearning for something like that on mobile, and while there have been a couple physics-based games that provide a similar feeling (my favorite being Turbo Dismount [Free]), none have quite captured the floaty, block-on-block destruction I’ve craved since 2009. [Dramatic pause.] ...That is, until now.

Monkeyrama [$0.99] by Tuomas Erikoinen feels really, really close to Boom Blox. The physics are absolutely dead-on, and because of that it’s an utter joy to play. Each level presents you with a structure (or two or three) made of different types of blocks (wood, stone, ice, etc.) and your job is simply to destroy it. To do that, you need to throw monkeys at it. Yes, monkeys. (Well, their heads, anyway.) Like the blocks, there are different flavors of monkeys, including explosive monkeys, heavy monkeys, and--my favorite--sticky monkeys. To pass a level you just need to hit a certain score threshold, which is achieved by having as many blocks as possible fall off the foundation. It’s incredibly easy to grasp once you dive in, and part of what makes it work so well is how intuitive everything is.

Controlling the game is as simple as swiping and tapping. Swiping to swivel the level around or up and down to get a better view, and tapping to fire off a monkey. It’s super simple, and I’m glad the developer didn’t try to ape (heh) the Boom Blox series too closely by using some kind of crazy accelerometer controls for throwing, since I have vivid memories of my right arm being incredibly sore the day after playing those games. (Also, I rather like my iPhone not being stuck halfway into the wall.)

Just mimicking the physics of a beloved Wii game isn’t enough to make a great mobile experience, though. Thankfully, Monkeyrama absolutely nails the level design, with structures that range from pure explosive fun to surprisingly devious puzzles. For example, (spoilers?) there’s a pirate ship later on that has three explosive blocks on stilts and you only have two throws to knock it all down. I spent literally 20 minutes trying in vain to destroy the damn thing, when I accidentally scrolled the screen up and noticed the secret: larger explosives high above that could easily be knocked onto the other blocks to obliterate everything. I literally laughed out loud when I realized how simple it was.

Everything in the game works so well, actually, that all of my complaints are things that aren’t there, rather than problems with the things that are. For example, despite the fact that there are almost 90 different levels to complete, I finished all of them almost in one sitting. I suppose it’s a good thing to leave your audience wanting more, but Monkeyrama accomplished that a little too well. (Of course, it’s only 99 cents, and there are more levels supposedly on the way.) Another thing that pains me is that there’s no level editor included, which was by far the best part of the Boom Blox series. I mean, I literally made a giant piano and a working Minesweeper board in Bash Party. And then blew them up over and over. More realistically, it’d be great if there were replay options in Monkeyrama, like the ability to rewind the action and play it back at different speeds (like Turbo Dismount). Finally, it really sucks that there are no leaderboards. What the heck, Tuomas?

On paper, Monkeyrama doesn’t seem particularly exciting. It’s kind of hard to give a high rating to something that’s basically a super stripped down version of a previous game about throwing balls at blocks. But you know what? It’s only a buck, and it provides an experience that's absolutely perfect for large interactive screens like the iPad. Plus, it got more smiles-per-minute out of me than almost any other game I’ve played this year. I’m not sure what that says about me, and I don’t care. I whole-hearted love this game. (Mic drop.)

Han pasado quince años desde que naciera el Techno Viking, uno de los memes más populares de Internet. Hoy lo celebramos con un documental sobre su persona.

Aunque a veces pueda parecer que Internet ha inventado una nueva forma de cultura, en realidad no ha inventado gran cosa. Los memes llevan siglos con nosotros de forma de mitos, rumores y leyendas. De ahí que si tenemos que pensar sobre Techno Viking, el encantador mastuerzo que bailaba como el superhombre nietzschiano en las ruinas de la moral occidental conocida como la Fuckparade berlinesa allá por el lejano año 2000, no podamos pensarlo como una broma o un chiste, ya que ha trascendido hasta la categoría de mito. He ahí que el realizador del clip original, Matthias Fristch, haya decidido financiar por crowdfunding un documental sobre la historia del vikingo más famoso de nuestro tiempo. En él se nos narra tanto cómo ha ido evolucionando su figura a través del tiempo como los problemas legales en los cuales el director se ha visto envuelto, ya que el hombre que encarna a la figura más conocida de Internet quiere desvincularse de su propio mito en mor del derecho a la propia imagen. Incluso cuando no ha entendido que sólo su imagen es Techno Viking, no él mismo.

Problemas mitológico-legales aparte, el documental, de cincuenta minutos de duración y llamado The Story Of Techno Viking, se puede ver de forma gratuita en Internet. Lo cual es, a su vez, una forma fabulosa de celebrar la singularidad del Techno Viking y del poder de las leyendas (posmodernas): trascender lo real, la imagen o la identidad de un individuo concreto, para erigirse en un bien universal, que es de todos y de ninguno.

La entrada Techno Viking vuelve en forma de documental aparece primero en Canino.

Do Klatooine paddy frogs pair better with bantha milk or Jawa juice? And what’s good to eat on a swamp planet where the only chef is a tiny green Jedi hermit?

As richly detailed as the Star Wars universe is, food takes a back seat to all the explosions and dramatic lightsaber duels. But the franchise’s official supporting materials, ancillary novels, comic books, and rabid fanbase have filled in the back stories of many of the comestibles that the movies themselves only hint at. (And you just know that the Jedi mostly use their lightsabers to heat up their space coffee when they’re not battling the Sith.)

While we never need an excuse to dig out our old Kenner action figures, the excitement over the newest trailer for The Force Awakens was just too infectious. So cozy up to the cantina bar and pass the ardees: Here are some of our favorite backstories of the food and drink of the Star Wars universe.

Bantha Milk
The beverage that helps little boys on Tatooine grow up to be big, strong moisture farmers, the infamous “blue milk” that Aunt Beru serves in Episode IV, Star Wars: A New Hope, comes from the desert planet’s bantha herds—those furry, horned elephants that Tusken Raiders ride into battle. Yum. If you want to recreate the sweet liquid in real life, you might try making Milk Bar’s cereal milk using blue food dye or a product with blue pieces, like Booberry—no lactating elephants necessary.

Klatooine Paddy Frogs
Obese crime lord Jabba the Hutt seems to like two things above all else when we meet him in Episode VI, Return of the Jedi: bikini-clad slave girls and juicy amphibians fresh from the fishbowl. All we learn about the wriggling delicacies from the movie is that they’re big, they’re slimy, and they scream when you eat them. According to the comprehensive fan-run encyclopedia Wookieepedia, though, they hail from the planet Klatooine (as do Jabba’s bulldog-faced bodyguards), and Jabba’s chef keeps them swimming in brandy. In real life, they were portrayed by actual giant frogs from a zoo in all scenes except the one where Jabba eats them. During filming, a frog briefly escaped and wreaked havoc on the set.

Nutrition Bar
Stranded on the swamp planet of Dagobah in Episode V, The Empire Strikes Back, a whiny Luke Skywalker sits down to eat what looks like a high-energy hiking bar just before meeting the Jedi Master Yoda. Surprisingly, there’s almost nothing written about it in all of Star Wars literature. (Even Wookieepedia offers only the obvious: “A nutrition bar was a food-based energy bar that, when consumed, would provide a being with nutrients.”) Apparently, as in real life, the nutrition bar is so bland and unappetizing that it doesn’t merit much more thought, which may be why Yoda spits his nibble out and instead leads Luke to…

Rootleaf Stew
Yoda brings Luke home to eat some homemade rootleaf stew, made from “yarum seeds, mushroom spores, galla seeds, and sohli bark” that he sourced from the bogs near his humble Dagobah home. Luke, however, would rather begin his training as a Jedi knight, greatly disappointing Yoda. The lesson? If you want to be a Jedi, you eat your rootleaf stew. Interestingly, when the radio dramatization of The Empire Strikes Back came out in 1983, National Public Radio tasked Craig Claiborne with coming up with a real-life version of roofleaf stew. Claiborne’s was basically a lamb stew with ginger and chiles.

Levitating Shuura
In Episode II, Attack of the Clones, Anakin Skywalker woos Padme Amidala over what appears to be a strictly vegetarian repast by using the force to telekinetically float a piece of fruit in what’s the Jedi version of pulling the pigtails of a girl you like. For us Earthlings, the fruit’s clearly just a regular old pear, but in the Star Wars universe, the impulsive padawan is showing off with what’s called a shuura, a sweet and juicy fruit native to the planet Naboo. That probably tastes a lot like a pear.

Jawa Juice
In Episode II, Obi-Wan Kenobi turns down an offer of “Jawa juice” from a friendly diner droid. Technically named “ardees,” Jawa juice is described as a bitter, alcoholic drink made from fermented grains and bantha hide. (Banthas show up in a disturbing number of Star Wars meals.) It’s probably safe to assume the beverage gets its name because the rodent-like traders of Tatooine have a well-known liking for it, not because Jawa juice is actually made from Jawas. But then again, you never know. Which takes us to…

The Cantina “Special”
According to the official Star Wars website, the Mos Eisley cantina, where Luke Skywalker and Obi-Wan Kenobi first meet Han Solo and Chewbacca, has “strong drinks, hot tunes, and occasional outbreaks of shocking violence.” According to a short story from the expanded universe, we learn that after Sol shot (first) and killed the bounty hunter Greedo, the bartender of Chalmun’s Spaceport Cantina took the hapless Rodian’s corpse and used it to infuse a liqueur. In other words, don’t order the special at the Mos Eisley cantina. There’s no real-life version of Greedo-infused liqueur that we would suggest.

The post Blue Milk and Space Frogs: The Secret Stories of Star Wars Foods appeared first on Bon Appétit.

"Son sus costumbres y hay que respetarlas". Esta frase, que siempre acaba apareciendo en los comentarios de los vídeos de rusos, es una verdad como un templo de Debod. Porque sus costumbres consisten, básicamente, en beber demasiado, sobrevivir por los pelos y jamás perder la sonrisa. Los que crecimos con Vídeos de Primera y conocimos las manchas de Gorbachov sabemos que aquí se saltan varias pantallas de golpe y que la lucha EE.UU. vs. URSS tiene un claro vencedor. Los gatitos no están mal y Albert Rivera cirujano tiene un pase, pero esto... ESTO ES MAGIA. Si te gustaron los vídeos del tipo que rompe una ventana para pedir tabaco y el del que conduce un tanque incendiado, sabrás valorar (y quizá has visto ya) estas joyitas:

Minero borracho

Empezamos por un clásico. El alcoholismo extremo es exótico para quienes nos llevamos las manos a la cabeza cuando vemos a un albañil comiendo con tinto de verano. Pero no para los rusos. Para ellos es algo cotidiano y son capaces de seguir con lo que están haciendo sin despeinarse (en este caso, responder a una entrevista).

Noqueado por un tronco

Si pides que te pasen un tronco pero no lo interceptas bien y se estrella en tu cara, no esperes después que corran a consolarte o socorrerte cuando el impacto en tu cabeza te deje inconsciente en la silla. Como mucho, seguirán grabándote y te moverán la cabeza para que quede mejor en cámara. Nadie comprobará tampoco si sigues vivo.

Camión en llamas

La versión Dogma de un clásico del cine: Speed. Dos minutos que se antojan eternos, en los que un vehículo de grandes dimensiones circula con total normalidad mientras desprende llamaradas de varios metros de altura. Como cuando descubres que tienes un flyer de publicidad enganchado al limpiaparabrisas pero lo dejas ahí hasta llegar a tu destino.

La antorcha humana

Joder. Aquí se insiste muchísimo en su insensibilidad a la tragedia. En la cochambre rusa (equivalente a nuestros polígonos industriales), una inesperada explosión que prende fuego a tus pantalones no merece más que un corretear rápido y dejar que alguien te den unas pataditas hasta que los tejanos calcinados se desprendan y dejen tu culo al aire.

Historias cruzadas

Crash, Magnolia, 21 Gramos, Traffic... Esta pieza bebe de todas ellas y las reinterpreta, obligando al espectador a repetir varias veces el visionado hasta conseguir diferenciar todas y cada una de las historias que contiene. Es tan trepidante que no hay tiempo para paladear. Cuando ves que a quién dabas por muerto está vivo, entra en plano otro señor.

Niño bailón

Los rusos son tan prolíficos en YouTube que barajamos cerrar esta modesta selección con el vídeo del fulano que habla por teléfono con su cajetilla de tabaco cuando le paran en un control de alcoholemia. O alguno de peleas múltiples. Finalmente nos decantamos por el niño vestido como un adulto que baila como los ángeles en un alter infecto.