Exactly How Stupid Is Jennifer Lawrence

Why do women allow men to urinate, defecate, or ejaculate on their face? Regarding the latter feminist author Andrea Dworkin wrote that "The ejaculation on her is a way of saying (through showing) that she is contaminated with his dirt; that she is dirty."

On August 31st 2014 the first round of The Fappening was dropped. Since then there have been multiple rounds released. I have no idea how many images are currently out there. Among the celebrities targeted Jennifer Lawrence had pornographic images of herself, which she was storing on her cell phone, stolen and posted on the internet. In this month's issue of Vanity Fair she blames everybody for her misfortune including the government, the owner's of the web pages, any person that views the images, and the entire world, stating "I can’t believe that we even live in that kind of world." Some of the participants she specifically chose to not blame were the photographer, the model that posed submissively with a large amount of semen deposited on her face, and the dumb-ass that was storing such images on her cell phone. I want to clarify that in my opinion she did nothing wrong by taking the pictures, but if she wants to create a list of "who's to blame" then she should start at the beginning of the chain.

http://hellogiggles.com/jennifer-lawrence-stolen-photos

In my lifetime, and on separate occasions, I have been caught in the middle of a gang shoot out, robbed at gun point, assaulted by strangers, and witnessed my fifteen year old neighbor murdered by a stray drive-by bullet. I am pretty sure I have never said "I can’t believe that we even live in that kind of world." If she is struggling with the fact that somebody stole her porno pictures and posted them on the internet, then I think it's fair to question her grasp on reality. This isn't something that only happens to celebrities. "Ex-girlfriend" web sites, displaying these type of images of non-celebrities, have existed almost as long as the internet has been around. We have all heard the stories about teenage girls killing themselves over the same experiences Jennifer Lawrence is going through right now. I guess in her opinion the subject wasn't important until it happened to her.

In the article she tries to put a spin on her participation by saying she was in a loving, four year, long-distance relationship and for fear that her man might view porn, she created the images as an alternative. I have been in love. I didn't show my love by telling my woman to get on her knees while I marked her as my territory. If her man was looking at porn of her then he was watching other porn as well, but I am sure she knows that. All things considered, including the fact that she is no longer in this relationship, it kind of seems like it probably wasn't as loving as she describes, or possibly she just has no idea what love really is.

The day the Vanity Fair article was released, her Wikipedia page was bombarded with nude photos of her.

http://www.inquisitr.com/1525888/jennifer-lawrences-wikipedia-slammed-with-nude-the-fappening-photos-same-day-she-breaks-silence/

So if her goal was to get people to stop talking about her, or to stop posting photos of her, then she failed.

Personally I think, with the article, she was hoping to portray herself as a strong woman. Out of all the celebrities involved, her images were some of the most degrading. I wouldn't say that she set feminism back, but she certainly showed that she is no supporter of its cause. On a core level, I am sure that is what is bothering her more than the fact that people saw her boobies. As a result she blamed the world instead of just saying "I like dirty sex and it's none of your fucking business."

Changing the subject for a second, lets take a walk down memory lane. Do you remember in 2012 when everybody and their dog's cousin had Stop Sopa & Pipa on their social network sights / Facebook profile picture?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protests_against_SOPA_and_PIPA

I was the only person I knew that was in favor of the laws. My argument at the time was:

"Just because something is available (the internet) does not mean you are entitled to it. Opium, a product of nature, was once legal in every country. It was the action of it's abusers that dictated the need for it's control."

The people that opposed the law (pretty much everybody) stated that once the government started putting restrictions on the internet, then the process would be never ending. I wonder how Jennifer Lawrence felt about Sopa/Pipa? As far as that goes, any and all of the celebrities targeted by the hackers, I wonder on which side of that argument each of them stood. Sopa/Pipa pertained to copyrighted material, and not specifically to what has happened to them, but in this Vanity Fair article she is crying that the government hasn't done something about what is happening on the internet, so one thing does have something to do with the other.

And she is not alone.

http://au.ibtimes.com/articles/568497/20141003/jennifer-lawrence-google-hacked-images-fappening-ariana.htm#.VDeFTBauRgM

The woman targeted are banning together and threatening to sue Google. The key part of that statement is the word "threatening." I am sure if anybody threatens to sue Google they just say "Cool, get in line." With more money than these woman would be willing to spend, and a far superior legal team, I am sure Google isn't staying up worrying about this threat, if they even consider it a threat.

It is a tired cliche, but it remains true. You can't have your cake and eat it too. The internet needs to be regulated. If all you ladies worked together, and were willing to accept the fact that with the regulations you want, there will also be regulations you don't want, I think you could use this situation to bring about the change you desire.

Admittedly I have seen a fair amount of the images that were released. According to Jennifer Lawrence that makes me a sex offender, but according to Jennifer Lawrence love is demonstrated by a man subjugating a woman, soooo yeah. Back in September my first impression was, "Why are there so many images of Jennifer Lawrence?" and then as I went through all of them I noticed that most of the images of the other ladies are just nudes. The majority of them could be printed in Playboy while some of her photos wouldn't be allowed in Hustler. When talking to my daughters about all the leaked images her name was the only one to come up. I told them "Don't be as stupid as Jennifer Lawrence." Then yesterday, after reading sections from the recent article, I reminded my daughters what I told them back in September and said "Nevermind, I am beginning to think that nobody is as stupid as Jennifer Lawrence."

Video Interview: Teenage Daydreams

Last year we did a pretty extensive interview with the one-man band that is Teenage Daydreams. You can read it here.

Now with a new LP to promote, and a single soon to be featured on an upcoming compilation album by Lackpro Records, we once again reached out to Teenage Daydreams to see what's what. This time we thought we would try something new. Always a great sport, Aidan from Teenage Daydream said he was down to do it, and willing to be our guinea pig, test pilot, first video interview.

Our intention is to do a series of interviews with different artists in different stages of their career, asking each artist the same questions. The purpose of asking the same questions is to demonstrate different ways each artist approaches obstacles, and views their path. Some artists give dull same ol same ol answers, but usually we get some creative twists. For example when asked how he promoted his first recordings, Teenage Daydreams said he utilized Craigslist to do this. A clever approach to cheap promotion, he is the first to have stated he sought attention this way.

Hopefully these videos will offer some type of insight into what works, and what doesn't work. More than that, we hope you find them entertaining.

_____

May You Marry Rich

In a recent interview Aerosmith drummer Joey Kramar said he doesn't see any point in the band making another album. Citing the dismal state of the music industry as the reason, Kramar said "Records don't sell, and they don't do anything."

Kramer Interview

The same logic was also stated by REM when they gave their farewell speech in 2011. The band held a press conference to announce their departure, probably because without a press conference nobody would have noticed.

A clear case could be made that these acts don't sell because these acts are no longer relevant. I would point out that the Miley Cyrus album Bangerz (one of the most hyped releases in years) was out for 7 months and only just reached platinum status last month. Lady Ga Ga's album Artpop had a very strong release, but has now been out over half a year and is still not platinum.

If you are in your twenties, or younger, then this doesn't mean much to you, but once upon a time popular albums shipped platinum. Stores bought enough copies that before any single fan had a CD in their hand, the artist had already earned 10% of 15 million dollars (approximately).

There was a day and a time and a moment in history when a small band or artist could pay for his own album, and sell enough at shows to earn some serious money. Hootie and the Blowfish did it. They were so successful at doing it that before signing with a label they were able to sell 50K copies of a demo EP in 1993. Let's assume they charged a modest $5 a piece (although it is more likely they charged $10). At five per unit, that's $250,000 in the bands pocket (minus expenses).

As things are, I doubt it is possible for a band to do the same today. How often do you buy music? I virtually never pay for it.

When I have this discussion with my grandmother she always tries to claim the higher ground by saying that she always pays for her music. That is true, but used albums and cassettes acquired at garage sales do not earn the performer any revenue.

This is why you no longer hear stories about how a band met, at least not true stories. The industry is changing and 99.9% of acts on major labels are created by the label. It's a story older than Motown: "If you set here, don't talk back, and look pretty, we will let you have the crumbs that fall from the table." An example of this would be Lorde who was 13 when she signed to Universal and was under their tutelage for four years, working with singing instructors, and songwriters, before the label could convince the public that she was worth a shit.

Why then would you want to be a musician in a time when your chances at widespread success are so slim? I mean there are always ditches that need to be dug, and truthfully you would earn more money (and certainly spend less) making holes in the ground. I guess you could be an artist because you derive satisfaction from the process. I guess you could do it because you're not just another attention hungry whore.

On a different subject, earlier this year Imagine Dragons won the Grammy for Best Rock Performance proving that Rock is dead. More recently, Lorde won the Billboard award for Best Rock Song proving that God is dead.

Things are not what they once were. You can go with the flow, or get out of the way, but the progression is not going backwards. I once loved Rock music, but any more I seldom recognize it.

I think about this often. Occasionally it causes me to become depressed. Having reached my lowest point, unaware of how much I needed salvation, a single, suspended light shined upon me. Nurturing my otherwise starved desire for sincere creativity in music the band Colourmusic blessed me with the album May You Marry Rich.  

Not familiar with Colourmusic? That's a shame. You need to rectify that. This band's got balls. After taking two albums to their label and having the suits tell them that the records weren't commercial enough, rather than scrapping their vision, the band chose to pay to release the albums themselves.

May You Marry Rich, released on the Memphis Industries label, is the follow up to that nearly noumenon hiatus.

Check out their previous work. All of it is gold. This new album, however, is a staggering leap forward from the bands back catalog, while still maintaining the group's eccentric existentialism. Teetering between profound and profane, May You Marry Rich is a beautiful portrayal of the thinking man's lowest common denominator: it's all about sex baby. It's all about you and me. Or in this case, more often about submission.



After you've listened to it and fell in love with it, then do yourself a favor and go out of your way to go see them live. I once saw Nick Cave perform with a 7 piece band, and I would argue that Colourmusic's three piece can compete with Cave's wall of sound any day of the week. It is all encompassing, completely awe inspiring, and always entertaining.

Things will never be as they once were, but now I believe there's a chance (although slight) that they can be even better. I once was lost, but now I am found. Was blind but now I see. May You Marry Rich has given me hope that the record industry may once again be able to sustain intelligent life.

You can learn more about the band's background from their Bio:

http://www.memphis-industries.com/artist/colourmusic/

and enjoy their back catalog for free here (but you really should pay them for their effort):

http://colourmusic.bandcamp.com/

And don't go away without watching their awesome video for the song You For Leaving Me. It's not from the new album. I just love the video.