"The Media Is The Devil!!!"

Citizens, Citizens! Here at Zu York City, me, Grizz, Jove, ???, and the indomitable Mr. Eric Michael all believe in informing the uninformed of real world events . . . when we're not talking about anything else, that is. No really, even though this is a blog and we have the right to talk about the dumbest shit imaginable (which we exercise regularly), we're still technically in the realm of media. And ooooohhhhh, do I hate media.
If anything, its more of a love/hate relationship, because in this Internet Age I couldn't really go anywhere or do anything without having to find out what the media has to offer on the subject. Media keeps me informed on sports, music, movies, art, literature, and everything else having absolutely NOTHING to do with world politics, because the news never know what the fuck's really going on; its really a large guessing game of sorts to keep the masses from realizing they don't have any more a clue than we do as to how it really works. Consider them cheerleaders, :). Its clear that I NEED the media as a whole. I certainly don't need certain aspects of it, however, and those aspects are obviously the work of the Devil. I don't want anything to do with them whatsoever, so the day I received Us Weekly in the mail, I freaked.

Oh hoh hoh hoh, don't try to pretend you can't recall what Us Weekly is. Females know all too well, males wish they could forget. I found out the same way most unsuspecting males find out: waiting in line at the grocery store. See, the owners of said grocery stores know that the one place you're most likely going to get stuck looking at stuff you're not in the least interested in is when you're in line, just trying to get home in time for Family Guy. This is the most opportune time for them to sell useless, shitty magazines that no sane person would ever spend money on (Sorry, Guera) because what else can you do to keep from getting impatient at the snail-slow cashier but read these abominations? It can only result in you being mericilessly enthralled by celebrity gossip or utterly disgusted at the nerve of it.
Now, its completely understandable that people would want to know what their favorite celebrities are up to; thats why MediaTakeOut.com is what that is. But even the mighty MTO takes it a little too far. Once you start seeing magazines spewing people's private lives just for profit, potentially fucking up their entire careers, you know that Hollywood is really not the place to be. I mean, have you SEEN Britney Spears of late? I've been trying to avoid looking at her at all, but I can't seem to make it out of H.E.B (or any other grocery store) without catching a glimpse of her doing something suggestively psychotic on a magazine cover. Sure, you can say its her fault for engaging in questionable activities while she's out in public, but there is no such thing as privacy for her. Have you ever seen how these criminals are able to take these "discreet" snapshots you see? They are literally torn down by paparazzi; it sort of resembles an antelope being dismantled by dozens of starving lions. There's no discretion at all, just 20 people with cameras running up to said celebrity's face and snapping away before he/she can reach for the mace. This is precisely why I think it should be perfectly legal to whoop that ass when a celebrity is hounded by the media. Its actually gotten so bad that one of my favorite websites, Cracked.com (check them out in the City Hall to the left) has refused to comment on her for the rest of her career, fearing they might drive her to suicide.

Take a second and read the headlines on these "Merchants of Chaos", if you will. If I was Angelina Jolie, I would have shot somebody by now. Brad Pitt seems to be sharing his entire love life with us. Jennifer Aniston downgraded to Vince Vaughn, then pulled a Brad move and started messing with John Mayer.


Adolescent girls such as the broade from High School Musical (forgive me for not Googling her name) can't even do common adolescent shit. I'm not saying EVERY girl takes pictures of herself naked and stuff . . . but have you seen MySpace lately? Yet, somehow it becomes a big deal for her. Britney Spears has gone crazy, Rihanna's cheating on Chris Brown with Travie McCoy, Nick Lachey won while Jessica Simpson stays losing, and Lindsay Lohan can't seem to make it through a SINGLE day in rehab. How do we know all of this? Well if it isn't from an "inside source" or a "pal" (WTF, how do these people pick their friends?) its lots and lots of speculation. I just saw an article that tried to claim Tom Cruise was physically abusive by using a picture showing him holding Katie Holmes upper arm firmly while walking. Now I'm not saying its not possible that he's abusive (the man is already insane) but to try to prove it off a singular photo?
Of course, there is nothing WRONG with speculation. I speculate all the time. The problem here is that they present speculation as the TRUTH, when its really just that: speculation. Ya dig?




Unfortunately, you don't need fame to have your business announced to the world for scrutiny. I remember when I was in elementary school and had to stay home sick. Those days were always spent watching talk shows with my mother; I'm talking classics like Ricki Lake, and Jenny Jones. Then there was Jerry Springer, the greatest of them all.

Of course, Jerry Springer is pretty much the epitome of trashy media, but he is excused for it because a) he was an ORIGINATOR and b) Jerry Springer was fully aware of what he was doing and wasn't pulling any punches. Jerry didn't really give a fuck what happened on his show, but that was the POINT. At the end of each episode, Jerry would give a speech that sounded just like the one he gave the day before, the overall message being: "We live in a fucked-up world, and its been like that for millenia. Deal with the shit, grin, and bear it."
There was no shadiness about that at all. People went on Jerry to fight. No one really went on there to SOLVE problems, and that was okay because there was no confusion about it either. Today's version of Jerry, however, may as well be the Prince of Darkness himself. While Jerry was undeniably human, MAURY is clearly a spawn from the depths of hell. MAURY. Its the only show on TV that competes with Us Weekly and Star as far as sleaziness goes. You have a middle-aged white man ruining as many as 20 different people's lives in one sitting, all while trying to act like he really cares. You see the flaw in this right? Its the PRETENSE that makes this man so evil. He pretends to be a kind-hearted person, but what kind-hearted person would profit from destroying families for years on end? This guy has "Who's the Baby's Father?" MARATHONS. Sure, one can say that its society's fault for actually showing up to this shit, but come on folks. There are such a thing as stupid people, and mankind has been cursed with an abundancy of them since day one. MAURY is a very intelligent person, and he is using his intellect to drive the cattle off the cliff. That should not be allowed, moreover not by a man who's faker than Angel Lola Luv.
Understand where Maury has put the field of Media. Journalists have always searched for the hottest topics to write about, but that was on the basis that these "hottest topics" were items people would really be interested in. The Maury Show's definition of the "hottest topic" is "anything that will allow people to sit at home and talk shit even though their lives are no better." The small group of people who actually PAY to go to a Maury Show disgust me. These are normal people, no better than the ones on stage, and yet they feel compelled to judge every mofo who walks in there with cheers and jeers. You always see down-and-out people watching Maury; the women who have 3 children by 3 different daddies, but still feel comfortable watching Maury because they "KNOW who THEIR baby's fathers are"; the couch potato husbands who sit at home drinking 40 oz. all day because "at least they're not abusing THEIR children"; the adolescent teen having UNPROTECTED sex with 4 or 5 people at the age of 17 because "that kid off Maury had sex 300 times before 15". These people all give themselves a false sense of security by looking down at disappointments. They hardly ever realize that unless you look up, you'll never realize how far you've fallen. You see what Maury is doing to you?










And in a sense, people are doing the same to their celebrities. I do admit there are some crazy socialites out there, but the media crucifies them to a point that can only be explained by society's need to look down on others, especially on those who that we put up on a pedestal in the first place. This is the sole reason behind the existence of Us Weekly. So next time you're standing in line at H.E.B. (or Wal-Mart, or Albertson's) pick up the newspaper instead. AND STOP WATCHING MAURY.

One Time For Your Mind.
ZuLou.

LAMES and BITCHASSNESS!!

Stop being so goddamn sensitive you ol’ sensitive-ass-bitch-lame-ass dudes!


Or perhaps we’ve all become to cold hearted? Over the last several weeks I’ve been tossing thoughts around in my head. The first is about “LAMES”, basically I’ve noticed that everyone is a “LAME” or at least that’s what I’m calling them the moment I see them, and not until recently did I notice how outrageous my “LAME” spotting were becoming. So I decided to try and figure out what makes a person a “LAME”. The other thought I was troubled with came as a result to trying to figure out how to truly determine if a person was in fact a “LAME” or not, and that is are people too sensitive? The connection was made when I stood up for a person who was being ousted for being a “LAME”, and I knew I wasn’t sensitive and then it struck me perhaps people have not become more sensitive instead people have become cold hearted. The follow will hopefully give you better insight and hopefully make the world a little better.
First lets discuss “LAMES” a lame is in current context someone who is an uncool person, wears uncool clothes, has an uncool attitude, or I simply feel that that person is uncool making them in fact a “LAME”. The dictionaries defines a “LAME” as a dysfunctional limb, or attribute that hinders or puts a person at a disadvantage, such as a lame arm or leg, a cripple would be “LAME” by dictionary terms.
This leaves me to believe that People started calling other People “LAMES” as to refer to what ever uncool quality they inhabited as crippling in their social life. My previous thoughts on “LAMES” were that you were lame if you didn’t rock fly shit, then realized you can rock shit that’s not name brand and still be cool. Then I started to think that people were lame if they rocked the fly shit but only because they saw a cool person rocking it,
then I had to change that after realizing that at some point I didn’t know about the fly shit and thought I was wearing fly shit, and then I adopted my new and current philosophy on “LAMES” which is what I will introduce to you now as I will attempt to break down what constitutes someone as being a “LAME”. I believe there is only 3 ways in which a person can be a “LAME” the first way-A lame can only be lame if he/she is friendless. I say this because if a person has friends then they have accepted that person and if you are accepted then your friends would not consider you lame, and if they do then they are really not your friends. If you have friends and someone thinks your lame but your friends accept you then you are now just stuck with opposing opinions and no one will ever be right. Now if you have no friends and people call you lame you would have no one besides your own self to argue for why you are not lame, and I’ll explain in my third explanation on why this does not prove that you are not lame. The second way a person can be lame is if society gets together and votes on what is lame and what is not lame. If you think about it this is they way it has always worked, society gets together (not literally like a town meeting, but sort of just unconsciously) and decides what is cool and what’s not, but never has a criteria been set out to decide whether a person is lame or not, I point to style as proof, the fact that there are different styles is proof that society has yet to decide what is lame or not. Lastly, you can only be lame if you openly admit you are lame, this goes back to the first one where if someone had no friends chances are this would be the only way to recognize you are lame, and if a person can recognize they are lame then they can correct the problem. This goes back to the dumb theory I discovered a few years back. A dumb person will not admit to being dumb and neither will a lame person, but if a person can recognize they are dumb then they can correct it, well if they are not handicapped, anything light of that a person, if properly educated can be at least at an average level IQ.
Now with all this said, what is a “LAME”?


Well it all basically boils down to this a “LAME” is all in matter of opinion, great right I could of saved you all time by writing that in the title, well it’s a little deeper than that. It works like this everyone has a style,

and yes saying “I don’t have a style” is a style just as not having an opinion is an opinion. And to say ones style is superior to another’s is essentially to say that ones opinion is superior to another’s, which as we all should know is not the case. And if agreed that everyone has a style and everyone has an opinion and that no ones opinion can be wrong then to say someone’s style is lesser than you acknowledge that your style can be lesser.

Now how does this play into being sensitive well let me try and make the connection. You see when you tell some one that they are lame and that person takes offense you hear people say things like “bitch, quit being so goddamn sensitive! Bitch!” or something to the effect, or even when someone is just joking and you get offended people like to think that the person who is offended is sensitive, where I believe the opposite, not saying a person can’t be to sensitive, but for the most part I think we as people have just become to mean. We like to tell people exactly how we feel and say that we don’t care what others think, so why do we think people care what we think? There seems to be a lot of not making sense going on in this world with double standards, don’t worry I’ll stick to the context of the before said, and we seem to think that we have a right to say whatever we damn well please and at the same time that we can’t be told anything about ourselves. So the next time your out in a mall, or any public place really, and you look over after hearing a noise or maybe some person is chatting away on their Cell and you hear the entire conversation, before we judge that person and categorize them as “LAME” lets refrain and asses the situation, does said person have friends (if on phone obviously someone will talk to him) and if you deiced that you want to call him/her a “LAME” well fine but if you must confront this so called “LAME” lets respect people and maybe say it in a manner that is not negative or overtly rude, remember how to give positive criticism.

STICKS AND STONES MAY BREAK MY BONES BUT WORDS WILL NEVER HURT ME! (THIS PHRASE IS A LIE WORDS HURT WORSE AND LAST LONGER)!!

silly thug... gangs are for kids

due to the overwhelming presence of gangs in hip hop and general youth culture
i have been compelled to write this

i have had many conversations with so called
bloods & crips
i say “so called” because i have had encounters with the real deal
and these encounters with real and fake have lead me to ask
when did claiming a gang become a fad?
i mean i could be wrong
but i remember being younger and gang affiliation not being something to claim frivolously
now everybody and their cousins wants to chunk the c or throw up the b
its getting ridiculous

the original
bloods & crips
were a gang formed for the purpose of comradery and protection
{no matter how illegal or violent}

i may not have the stats to support this
but when was the last time you saw a group of oppressed kids in the suburbs?
im not saying their soft or anything
but suburbs usually have a pd that responds to 911 calls
unlike many neighborhoods where these gangs were originated

the original
bloods & crips
have specific ways of initiating new members
{blessing, jumping, branding etc.}

when was the last time you were in the suburbs and you asked a kid
“how did you get all those bruises?”
and he responded with
“just got jumped in”
i have had countless run-ins with people who claim to be a
blood or crip
and im supposed to believe them just because they say so
i have actually met someone who told me they were a blood
why? you ask
because their favorite color was red
wtf!?!?
{sorry but...}
get real my nigga!

i cant necessarily say that gangs are respected
but they are a serious matter
pop culture and ignorance has turned gangs into a joke

just a thought


p.s.
ill have more on the subject later


holla front, one and all that shilznit


.:the one u love to hate:.

Whoop, Whoop, That's the Sound of the Police!

Whoop, Whoop, That's the Sound of the Police!

and for most of us the scariest sound on the planet. If anything this post if for police, or aspiring police officers around the country, no the world. I had an encounter with the police a while back. You know, over some small time "you could be out catching real criminals instead of messing with us" type deal. Well anyways, so the event occurs and I started thinking about the police and the way they handle things. Keeping in mind that a cop has to be alert and ready for anything, literally anything, like seriously if cops get called to a scene and the call is for a robbery in progress and the cops show up and two men are naked with bombs taped to their balls and they have flame throwers for weapons, the cops have to show up and assess the scene and decide how to execute to that specific situation. Now, like I said I'm keeping this in mind, but still I don't get cops thought process. So the words that were exchanged during the cop and ourselves discourse was as follows "What's going on, huh no one wants to talk,....what are you scared?" YES!!! you see I was scared and I always am, and forever will be. The cops always ask, what I think are the dumbest questions by far. Let's look at a scenario that was similar to my own. You and friends are gathered in an apartment room squashing each other on a single bed and a fairly big chair. KNOCK, KNOCK, KNOCK!!!

The banging at the door was so loud everyone looked at each other, and then it continued. Let's examine this first occurring event. When do you hear loud banging on a door and its something positive?? Never, that's when. So now we hear banging at the door followed by what? An announcement, no matter the name we already find ourselves on the defensive. The announcement is "IT'S THE POLICE, OPEN UP!" wait what? Ok, this is whats going on, the person at the door has identified themselves, and after further thinking, yep, you've realized that you don't know the police. Lets say that instead of "...POLICE..." you heard "IT'S JOHN, OPEN UP!!" lets even say we know John, chances are you still don't want to open that door, because judging by his tone you've done something wrong and are about to find out how John plans on righting this wrong. So first off the police should know it's not that people are trying to flush evidence down a toilet or secure a hostage, no instead it's just that we're scared out of our minds for a few seconds causing a delay of door opening. Plus, besides that if you were anyone else doing that to my door I still wouldn't answer. Now the doors finally open and the questioning begins. "WHAT TOOK SO LONG TO OPEN THE DOOR?" so you answer "oh...I was jus.....umm...." yep looks like you're thinking of a lie, well its because you really are! Because we all know the truthful answer would be "I'm fucking scared! You were beating on my door, you know how scary that sounded."and anything else besides this is a full out lie. Lets say you get taken in for further questioning, now is when they have fun with you. The police understand team work, and to be honest, have perfected it better than Stockton and Malone. You are brought to a small room, usually with a table and a chair for you and the officer (even when there are two officers one usually stands) and you are asked a question. Now stop here because that question and that answer have just become a Simon says game that you better prey you can win. You see the answer that you give needs to be remembered and when that question comes around at you again, and it will, you need to make sure you first understand that its the same question, they like to word it different each time, and after you understand that it's the same question you better reply with the exact same answer, you don't get the liberty of saying the same thing and wording it differently, because that's called a lie. And when you lie to the police you go to Jail, and no one wants to go to Jail. So I propose a new way to talk to the police, because hey I realize your job is a little hard and risky and causes you to pretty much be a dick the entire time your working, I get that I really do, but at the same time don't expect me to be able to talk to you as if you didn't have the upper hand in every situation that we could ever possibly encounter each other.

My new suggestion when talking to cops, be 100% HONEST!! Yeah I know you hear honesty is the best policy and for the most part I feel that's a true statement. I'm not saying if a cop stops you for speeding and writes you the ticket and is about to let you go that you should inform him about the bag of cocaine in your shoe, but when he ask you something and you don't answer right away because you are nervous or caught off guard, and you know you have a perfectly valid answer, just start by saying "officer hold on a second cause I'm scared", or say "hold on I need to gather my thoughts I'm nervous". Chances are he will ask you "Why?" you are scared or nervous, don't worry I have a response for this as well. "Because you are the police and if you're not helping me, which you seem to not be doing seeing as how I don't need any help, you are arresting people, and I don't want to be arrested" A cop knows that he/she is a scary sight. what other job can you think of that has employees that scare its own employees, cops that's the only job. So just keep in mind that it's ok to tell the cops you are scared of them, if they don't understand that I promise a jury of your peers will. Oh and cops stop asking questions that you know the answer too, chances are the crackhead was buying crack from the undercover, thats why when the undercover said the magic words "its Christmas day today" that you swarmed and arrested him, so don't ask him what he was talking to the man in the truck for because you know exactley what was said, and if you forget you have the video camera that was hidden in his collar button for you to go back and watch it all unfold before your very eyes.

"You Doing Ho Activities, With Ho Tendencies . . ."

About two weeks ago, I happened to be in the Grizzly Adams neighborhood and decided to stop by. When I got there, the Viking was nowhere to be found, but I knew he'd show up eventually, so I opted to play the bum role. Less than thirty minutes later, his RA (Residential Assistants, for you non-scholars) O.N.E showed up. O.N.E lives in the apartment with Grizz, so he went ahead and let me in, unknowingly thrusting me into what would become a two-hour conversation on the political feud raging between the Playas and Hoes.
Of course, you DO know what I speak of, right? In this world of promiscuity, Playas and Hos are the most turbulent forces in modern sex relations. Whether you're heterosexual or homosexual, black or white, male or female, as long as you're between the ages of 13 and 36 (yes, we're starting that early now), you are affected by these opposing philosophies.



It wasn't until feminism really started popping off that this became a issue; for centuries mankind was convinced that a female's place was behind a male. The only culture that was ever noted for having females lead the community is the Amazon tribe, and who really knows if they ever existed? Its a myth, sitting right up there with Atlantis and the friggin' Loch Ness Monster.

This didn't happen people. Stick to Xena.

Things aren't like that in this day and age, and thats what had O.N.E's panties in a bunch. Don't get me wrong, he's not a misogynist or anything, and he doesn't believe males are in anyway superior to females. Its just the issue of Playas and Hos that bothers him; no, its the fact that the issue of Playas and Hos has changed views, that bothers him. The main gist of it is this: it is generally understood that when a man knocks down multiple girls, he will undoubtedly be called a Playa. When a woman is knocked down by multiple men, she's a Ho. At least, thats how it used
Casual sex has changed the rules, and this what was up for discussion on this particularly hot Friday. Why is it that the same things that earn a man praise will only serve to degrade a woman? O.N.E thinks a woman should know better than to have casual sex, because doing so will only result in her being called a Ho. At the same time, a man can choose to have casual sex if he likes, without any consequences. Thats how the world is, and thats how it should stay.
Now, I happen to know a number of females who engage in "casual sex." When I say casual sex, I am referring to a man and a woman having sexual intercourse without necessarily trying to pursue a relationship. The possibility of a relationship is always there, of course, but neither party is really thinking about it. I've had my fair share of casual sex, and I personally didn't know what was wrong with a female going out getting hers as well. That doesn't make her a Ho; Hos have a specific mindframe that allows you to identify them. They unknowingly inform you about their Ho status through seemingly random actions such as not giving a fuck if you got a girlfriend, or asking how much money you have if you "look like a foot" (as Jovontique would say).
Not every woman who has casual sex thinks like that. I've had casual sex with a couple of non-Hos in my past, and I'm sure others have as well. So how fair is it to call these girls Hos? Sure they're sleeping with multiple guys, but most of my male friends do the same to girls. If I don't knock THEM for it, why would I be a hypocrite and criticize a girl for doing it? In my eyes thats only fair.
to be.

This unfortunately put me in a difficult position, because then O.N.E concluded that I must be Cpt. Save-A-Ho. Not so, peoples, but either way I was still forced to explain to him my views on what makes a Ho and what doesn't. This blog is long enough as it is, so I'm not going to go too much into detail with that topic. But at the end of the conversation, I was able to convince O.N.E that a woman has every right to have casual sex, as long as males are allowed to, without having to be called a Ho. To think otherwise would be saying that men and women aren't equal, wouldn't it?
One would think so, but the other day Chuck Klosterman slapped some sense into me through means of his book "Sex, Drugs, and Cocoa Puffs" which I recommend EVERYBODY should get. Grizz lent it to me, and if you have no idea who Chuck is, fine, because we're in the same boat. All I know is, the man makes a lot of sense, even when I don't agree with what he says. Here's a passage from a chapter in his book, which clearly states the flaw in my mind process:

"For the past twenty-five years, culture has been obsessed with making males and females more alike, and that's fine. Maybe its even enlightened. But what I've noticed - at least among young people - is that this convergence has mostly just prompted females to adopt the worst qualities of men. Its like girls are trying to attain equality by becoming equally shallow and selfish. Whenever I see TV shows like Fox's defunct Ally McBeal or HBO's Sex and the City, I find myself perplexed as to how this is sometimes viewed as an "advancement" for feminism; it seems to imply that its empowering for women to think like all of the stupidest men I know (myself included).
"We've all heard the argument that there is an eternal double standard about promiscuity . . . the consensus is that this double standard is wrong, so - therefore - we should ALL have sex with as many people as possible, regardless of gender. "

This is where we're at now . . .

In other words, who said that guys being promiscuous is a GOOD thing? Why am I justifying women having casual sex by saying "Well, guys have casual sex all the time and get called Playas, so women should enjoy that, too"? Maybe I got it all wrong. Maybe its us males that need to stop acting like Hos, because thats exactly what we're acting like: a change of title doesn't mean shit when both groups serve the same purpose. Hoes.
I'm no longer saying its okay for a woman to have casual sex, but I won't criticize one for doing so either. What she does is her business, as long as she has self-respect. The fact is, a female's promiscuity can't be justified on the faults of the masculine state of mind. Even if the girl isn't a Ho persay, she doesn't have to do what guys are doing; its like having a "He started it!" argument with a little kid.

As for guys, if you are fucking a bunch of girls for no apparent reason, you're a Ho. You are not cool for doing so just because your friends have led you to believe so. Take heed of the few females who still have an old-fashioned way of thinking, and keep the number of girls you sexually interact with to a minimum. This is not a call for celibacy, its a call for self-control.

Hoes.


One Time For Your Mind
ZuLou