The politics of Clueless‘ fashions still endure 20 years later. [Fusion]
Transphobia is not about free speech. [Vice]
It’s possible to be outraged by more than one thing at a time. [LA Times]
The case for trigger warnings in Jessica Jones. [Medium]
Nick Jonas’ flirtation with the gay gaze. [Fusion]
ICYMI: Struggling with feelings that because Charlie Sheen is a bad person he deserves HIV.
High heels help to differentiate women from the relative equality they’ve achieved with men. [Attn:]
Gay male misogyny: “To assert you love dick doesn’t mean you have to feign disgust at women and their bodies.” [Broadly]
“Why Writers Run.” [The Atlantic]
America is fascinated by the amateur but hate their jobs. [NYTimes]
Tweeting about TV during #ParisAttacks. [Fusion]
NBC’s interview with Charlie Sheen about his HIV-positive status was unethical. [ABC The Drum]
And before you go blaming his frequent sex with porn stars for his status, adult performers are one of the most tested populations on the planet and can’t perform if they have a positive test. [Vocativ]
In entertainment, the American dream is Latino. [Vulture]
Rebecca Shaw—aka Brocklesnitch—is Woman Against Feminism. [Ravishly]
WTF?! James Holmes—aka the Batman killer—is hot?! [Jezebel]
How to avoid jail as a pregnant woman. Or really, a woman who could potentially be pregnant at some stage in the future. [HuffPo]
Paul Murray is glad Nick D’Arcy didn’t qualify for the Olympic finals, and I am too. After getting a slap on the wrist for those gun photos—not to mention the infamous assault—he shouldn’t have even been in London. [MamaMia]
Charlie Sheen’s corporate appeal. [Daily Beast]
Was Katie Holmes the innocent bystander in Tom Cruise’s Scientological quest for world domination, as the media makes her out to be, or is there more to her and the divorce?
“I’m convinced that she’s the most fame-hungry person the world has ever seen.” [Vulture]
The psychology of rapists. [Jezebel]
“Millennial expert” and “voice of a generation” Chelsea Krost isn’t a feminist because she “doesn’t think boys suck” but she can relate to the people whose “feet are in their own feces in Africa”. Nice. [NY Observer]
In the wake of the Herald Sun calling Leisel Jones fat, it seems as a female Olympian you also have to have perfect hair and not be too muscly so as you begin to resemble a man. [MamaMia, Jezebel, ThinkProgress]
Image via Jezebel.
So the interwebs were all aflutter last week with talk of Chris Brown’s Grammy performance, nomination and subsequent win, starting with a Tweet (or several, as the screenshots will attest) from a young girl who didn’t know what Rihanna was complaining about: she’d love it if Brown punched her.
Wow, just wow.
Following on from this, I read this fabulous post from Sasha Pasulka on HelloGiggles on why she wasn’t okay with Brown performing at the Grammys and why you shouldn’t be either, and another great blog post in which Michael Fassbender was vilified for allegedly beating his girlfriend whilst simultaneously being lauded for his acting skills in the media.
Now, I’ve never seen anything Fassbender’s been in, but my housemate is (or was, until I linked him to this story about the assault) a fan, so I’m familiar with his work.
I linked the above news story (is TMZ considered news?!) on Facebook admonishing Fassbender, and a friend asked me if I was going to boycott everything anyone with a dubious personal life has been in, like David Boreanaz, for example. I replied that cheating may be immoral, but it’s not illegal, whereas Brown and Fassbender (along with my favourite, Charlie Sheen) are accused of intimate partner violence, which is never okay.
Now, I’m not really a fan of forgiveness and second chances, personally, but I do agree that Brown and Fassbender should be given second chances so that we can say they have when they inevitably fuck up again and then expunge them from society. Some could argue that Brown had his when he trashed a dressing room on Good Morning America and threw a chair out of a window. From experience, I know that violent men hardly ever only hit once and will always revert to their old ways.
The abovementioned friend who asked me if I will boycott all Brown, Fassbender, Sheen et al. projects (and so far I have successfully done so) said, after reading the TMZ piece, that Fassbender’s girlfriend should have left after he dragged her from a moving vehicle causing injuries to her knee, ankle and a blown ovarian cyst.
Sure, to anyone safely removed from that situation and reading about it from the comfort of their own home, the seemingly logical thing to do would be to leave after the first push, slap or abusive comment. But that reeks of victim blaming; abusers are highly skilled in manipulation and will make you feel like you have no other option but to stay. That it’s your fault. That they only hurt you because they love you so much. That they promise they’ll never do it again.
And, in the case of Brown, to allege that Rihanna deserved it because she sings about “S&M” and “Breaking Dishes” (more on this to come next week) is abhorrent! Those songs are what Rihanna does for a job. Furthermore, S&M is a consensual sexual act with “safe words and boundaries”, as one commenter on this MamaMia thread put it. Intimate partner violence is not consensual and there are no safe words. “Stop!” “You’re hurting me!” and “I can’t breathe!” are not enough to stop those who are mentally predisposed to hurting their lover with violence.
I thoroughly urge you to read the HelloGiggles piece if you haven’t already. In it, Pasulka uses quotes from the likes of Lindsay Lohan and Carrie Underwood, who said what a tragedy it was for both parties involved in the assault at the time. Oh yeah, it’s really tragic for Brown to have his name dragged through the dirt for a crime he actually committed. I guess it’s kinda tragic for Rihanna, too, as she was beaten to a bloody pulp by the man she loved and trusted and was then disparaged for it by the public.
Pasulka also cites the statement from the producers of the Grammys in which they insinuate that Brown’s attack on Rihanna the night before the awards three years ago was an inconvenience to them. Yeah, I’d say it was pretty inconvenient for Rihanna, too.
Also troublingly, going through the screenshots of all the Chris-Brown-can-beat-me-all-night-long-if-he-wants Tweets, they are primarily from young, white girls. To me, that signifies the trope of black-man-as-predator. Yes, this probably didn’t even cross the girls’ minds, but that they’re seemingly willing to be with someone who is a known wifebeater because he is attractive (personally, I find him ugly, but then I’m biased) not because of his race is a problem within itself.
In the comments thread on HelloGiggles some commenters raised the question of why is Brown being so vigorously vilified while other known/alleged wifebeaters such as Charlie Sheen and Mel Gibson go by unscathed. Is it because he’s black?
And they raise a good point. Personally, I don’t think it is, but it baffles me as to why people jumped at the chance to follow Sheen on Twitter, get tickets to his My Violent Torpedo of Truth tour and lament the fact that Two and a Half Men is apparently now less funny with fellow douchebag Ashton Kutcher at the helm. (Gibson suffered considerably more public scrutiny for his racist and anti-Semitic vitriol, but was still cast alongside one of his defenders, Jodie Foster, in The Beaver. That he was replaced in The Hangover with Mike Tyson is just as bad: substituting one violent racist, sexist alcoholic for a convicted rapist. Nice.)
Brown responded to his haters after winning a Grammy with the above Tweet. Take from that what you will but, to me, that doesn’t sound like a man who’s remorseful for physically assaulting his girlfriend and deserving of a second chance.
*Trigger Warning: This post deals with domestic violence and may be upsetting to some.
Related: Why Are Famous Men Forgiven for Their Wrongdoings, While Women Are Vilified for Much Less?
Rihanna’s “S&M”: Is It Really So Much Worse Than Her Other Stuff?
Elsewhere: [HelloGiggles] I’m Not Okay With Chris Brown Performing at the Grammys & I’m Not Sure Why You Are.
[TMZ] Girlfriend Fears Inglorious Basterds Star.
[MamaMia] Chris Brown Performing at the Grammys is Not Okay.
Geelong may seem like a world away for city slickers. At first, I was going to let its distance prevent me from attending the city’s latest exhibition, Femme Fatale: The Female Criminal, at the National Wool Museum. But if you take some friends and a good book (though not both at the same time. Take it from me; you’ll be stuck on the same page for the duration of the trip!), the hour’s train commute is worth it.
The exhibition juxtaposes “glamorous depictions of female felons in literature” with “the grim reality experienced by real women criminals”, such as Janet Wright, who was prosecuted for performing an abortion on a teenager who, after becoming ill, reported her, in 1928. Or “Sydney’s most beautiful prostitute”, Dulcie Markham, who probably got her fake name from Alfred Hitchcock’s Murder!, and whose real identity was never revealed. Or Louisa Collins, who poisoned—“poison was considered a particularly feminine murder weapon”—her husband in order to marry a boarder in their home just two months later, in 1887. She was sentenced to hang on 8th January, 1889, but the execution was botched by the hangman, “who was unable to open the trapdoor”. The execution was eventually carried out.
These were just some of the individuals profiled in the exhibition, which dealt with the supposed “empowered, cunning, unemotional woman who commits crime and uses her sexual allure to persuade men to sin on her behalf”—the quintessential “femme fatale”—and today’s understanding “that a wide range of factors may influence criminality including difficult childhood environments, mental illness and drug addiction.”
But back in the day, it was believed that “women lack moral fortitude and are easily tempted”, which allegedly stemmed from Sigmund Freud’s “penis envy” theory.
In 1893, Italian criminologist Cesare Lombroso wrote La Donna Delinquente (The Criminal Woman), in which he contended that masculine features, such as a “mannish jawline”, noticed in his photographical portraits of female criminals, were the “stigmata of degeneration”. Factors such as the menstrual cycle and the fables of Eve in the Garden of Eden, Medusa, and the Biblical Delilah, of Samson fame, were also taken into account when women “sinned”.
As was written in relation to the Salem witch trials in the early 1690s, “the fear of wicked women, whether real or imagined, can have horrific consequences.”
In Australia, though, in recent years “the number of female offenders incarcerated… has risen dramatically”. In the early days of female incarceration in Australia, psychological punishments such as head shaving were preferred to physical punishment. But at the State Reformatory for Women in Long Bay, Sydney, which opened in 1909, “the women were encouraged to reconnect with their ‘femininity’ and to adopt more refined, ‘ladylike’ behaviour.”
The abortion section, which I briefly mentioned above in relation to Janet Wright, was quite affecting but, as my friend Eddie pointed out, perhaps seemed out of place in the exhibition. Sure, abortion was (and still is in some parts of the country) illegal for a long time, but it kind of felt like a certain agenda was being pushed via its inclusion. Still, it is “one of the few crimes that always involves a woman”.
My favourite part of the exhibition, by far, was the genre of “femme fatale” paperbacks and films, which lured me to it in the first place. There was a highlight reel of some of the silver screen’s greatest female villains, such as Glenn Close in Fatal Attraction, next to this Italian proverb: “woman is rarely wicked, but when she is, she is worse than a man.” Another quote, from Raymond Chandler in Farewell My Lovely, which really resonated with me and my love for femme fatales, and which I posted last week: “I like smooth shiny girls, hardboiled and loaded with sin.”
But as much as the femme fatale is lauded, in her heyday the American Production Code stated that “ ‘the sympathy of the audience should never be thrown to the side of crime’. Censorship led to many implausible endings and a high level of mortality among femmes fatales.”
The exhibition finished up with crime memorabilia, which has reached fever pitch in recent years, with action figures, calendars, trading cards and true crime publications. (I, myself, have a penchant for true crime. Dominick Dunne, anyone?) This is a far cry from the assertion that “most people find it repellant that an individual can become a celebrity simply for being very good at being bad.” Reminds me of a certain Rihanna song…
Overall, while each individual aspect of the exhibition was fascinating in its own right, Femme Fatale: The Female Criminal as a whole was a bit clunky and disjointed. I would still recommend seeing it, if “evil” women are your thing. But get in quick! It finishes next Monday.
Related: Cherchez la Femme (Fatale).
Raymond Chandler on the Femme Fatale.
Another City, Not My Own by Dominick Dunne Review.
Rihanna’s “S&M”: Is It Really So Much Worse Than Her Other Stuff?
Image via Art Geelong.
“The Class Boundaries of Veronica Mars.”
Why the Body Image Advisory Group’s voluntary code of conduct didn’t work.
Rachel Hills on the internet, artifice and being fake.
Speaking of the Middleton’s, Melinda Tankard Reist takes issue with the admiration of Pippa’s ass online:
“The FB site provides an opportunity for men everywhere to share their sexual fantasies for the young maid of honour. Knock her up, bash her in, cause her injury such that she would not be able to walk. Wrecking and shredding a woman’s anus is a popular porn script.
“And all this is supposed to be accepted as a compliment. Of course there are no ‘Pippa the Wonderfully Supportive Sister Appreciation Societies’ or other pages lauding her gifts and character and other non-body related attributes.”
Bret Easton Ellis on the spectacle that is Charlie Sheen.
“Filling the Gaps” in the online feminist community’s “call-out culture”.
In what was Elizabeth Taylor’s last interview, with Kim Kardashian for US Harper’s Bazaar, she divulges her thoughts on living like a queen, the Krupp diamond and Twitter. I was never a fan of Taylor, but this interview made me one.
What does it mean to be a feminist today?
Is the male body “Repulsive or Beautiful?”
Ever been hollered at in the street as you walk past a construction site? “Why Men Cat Call” sounds interesting, but is disappointingly dismal.
“Amélie sex (noun): intercourse undertaken in the classic missionary position which, by itself, is not objectionable—during which the male is impervious to the female’s lack of enjoyment.”
The bromance VS. Bridesmaids’ “Homance”.
Don’t give up your day job: “Freelancing on the Side.”
Images via I Just Have So Many Feelings, Sydney Morning Herald.
In the past week, Lindsay Lohan began her community service in a see-through singlet with no bra, Ricky Nixon lost it on Today Tonight, and Charlie Sheen announced he’s bringing his Violent Torpedo of Truth tour down under. God save us all.
Lohan seems to get the shortest end of the stick out of these three, yet they’re all scars on the face of humanity by most peoples’ reasoning. Why is that?
Is it because she’s the youngest? If that’s the case we should be cutting her more slack as her brain hasn’t finished developing yet. Is it because she’s a member of young Hollywood, and has had everything handed to her? Sheen was also a member of the young Hollywood brat pack in his early days, too. And Nixon was a footballer himself before going on to be an agent, and we all know how footballers are held up to a different microscope than the rest of humanity.
The only common denominator that separates Nixon and Sheen from Lohan is that Lohan happens to be female.
I’ve written a bit about this before, and there’s also some more material on this topic over at MamaMia that’s well worth a look (see below), but there’s no denying that gender is the most likely reason for society’s vilification of Lindsay for being a party girl who’s been to rehab and jail five times each, while Nixon had an alleged sexual relationship with an underage girl who tried to ruin several of his clients’ careers, and Sheen is a well-known misogynist who beats and shoots women.
The reason I object to this blatant favouritism is that Lohan is only hurting herself. At the end of the day, if she can’t drag herself out of the depths of the addiction, rehab and prison cycle, then she’s only got herself to blame. It only affects her.
Nixon has screwed over his clients, who are a bunch of bad eggs themselves. Not to mention (arguably) preyed on an underage girl, who is as much to blame for this whole thing as Nixon. But, might I mention, Nixon is a GROWN MAN, not a 17-year-old child who was, in her eyes, used and abused by the AFL and wanted revenge.
But Sheen is the crown jewel in this group of hot messes: he’s a drug addict and seemingly mentally ill, which are understandable and treatable conditions in and of themselves. But it’s not just them. He also beats women, whether they be his significant other or no. He’s a fan of prostitutes, and child porn, it is alleged. He trashes hotel rooms. He has four young children to think about. His behaviour is most definitely affecting multiple others, yet he’s rewarded for it with a world fucking tour!
Those are the differences between Lindsay Lohan, Ricky Nixon and Charlie Sheen.
Related: Lindsay Lohan & Double Standards.
Poor Little Rich Girl: Lindsay Lohan in Who.
Why Are Famous Men Forgiven for Their Wrongdoings, While Women Are Vilified for Much Less?
Guilty Until Proven Innocent: Charlie Sheen’s Witness.
Elsewhere: [MamaMia] St. Kilda Schoolgirl: One Journalist’s Dilemma.
[MamaMia] AFL Sex Scandal on 60 Minutes.
[MamaMia] AFL Train Wreck: Is the 17-year-old Girl A Product of Modern Media?
[MamaMia] Is St. Kilda Player Nick Riewoldt the New Lara Bingle?
Images via WWTDD, TNT Magazine, Herald Sun.
White Girl Problems is the latest Twitter phenomenon to sweep the pop culture world, with such gems as “Fine, if that’s the way you’re going to act, then you’re uninvited to my Elizabeth Taylor memorial cocktails” and “I’m sorry you think I’m being a bitch”; the passive-aggressive “apology” heard in relationships the world over.
While the Twitter profile is poignantly taking the piss out of the problems of the privileged, there is the issue of race there, also.
Like, why is it called White Girl Problems? Why not Privileged Girl Problems? Or Rich Girl Problems? But even with that, it would be feeding into the classism debate. Whichever way you look at it, White Girl Problems is a double entrendre of racism and classism.
It also highlights the body image battle a lot of young girls face, be they white, black, rich, poor, or whatever. Here are a couple of examples:
While I’m not personally offended by the Twitter feed (I am a white girl with [first world] problems, after all), I can understand why some might be.
Racialicious, actually writing about the Alexandra Wallace/“Asians in the Library” scandal, says that it all comes down to “white female privilege”, meaning “you can say more outrageous shit because you’re a pretty white lady”.
That may be so (I have been known to voice my opinion on all manner of topics that may be deemed controversial: the baptism of babies being bullshit, pretentious parenting, and abortion [more to come on that last one in coming weeks]), but how long have men—of all races but, yes, particularly Caucasian ones—been getting away with it? And still are. Charlie Sheen and Chris Brown are two names that spring to mind…
Related: First World Problems.
Rihanna’s “S&M”: Is It Really So Much Worse Than Her Other Stuff?
Guilty Until Proven Innocent: Charlie Sheen’s Witness.
Why Are Famous Men Forgiven for Their Wrongdoings, While Women Are Vilified for Much Less?
Elsewhere: [Twitter] White Girl Problems.
Images via TV.IGN, Anu News, Film Junk.
Rebecca Black is subversifying the pop world.
“Yet here the discerning viewer notes that something is wrong. Because it is a simply matter of fact that in this car all the good seats have already been taken. For Rebecca Black (her name here would seem to evoke Rosa Parks, a mirroring that will only gain in significance) there is no actual choice, only the illusion of choice.
“The viewer knows that she’ll take the only seat that’s offered to her…”
The Awl even goes so far as to say Black’s relationship with the rapper in her “Friday” clip might be Lolita-esque, and that the video is a commentary on “a crypto sex scene from which we return to the suburban house party”. Creepy.
What it feels like for a (tween star) girl.
I hate answering the phone. When I lived at home, I would never answer the landline when it rang. Now that I fend for myself and can only afford one phone, I only answer numbers I recognise. So does Pamela Paul, via MamaMia.
Extremely racist anti-abortion billboards aimed at African Americans.
Lucy Ormonde asks if it’s acceptable for women to make the first move. My answer: hell yes! Otherwise I would never get any action!
“Words That Are Transphobic & Why.”
The Sartorialist’s “sturdy” shitstorm.
It’s okay to be “fat”, just as long as it’s in the right places, ie. bum, hips and boobs, allowing for a small waist, à la Kim Kardashian and Christina Hendricks.
After reading this review, I can’t wait to see Sucker Punch: a “Burlesque meets Inception” amalgamation of “bustiers, fishnets and glitter instead of asylum uniforms” where Vanessa Hudgens, Abbie Cornish et al’s characters reside in the film. These are just some “of the many clues that we are not actually inside the mind of a young girl, but inside Zach Snyder’s spank bank!”
Perhaps it could have been titled something else, but “How to Be Skinny” has some good points.
“She’s certainly not a loser, based on her many accomplishments. Having a baby doesn’t instantly turn you into a winner. If you feel like a loser for not having a baby, that is your personal truth, but it is not The Truth. And! The fact that so many media outlets picked up this one sentence segment—from a long cover story with quotes about divorce, high heels and Lady Gaga—shows that we, the public are the real losers, for placing so much importance on how a woman uses her uterus.”
“5 Seconds of Every #1 Song From 1993–2011.”
“What Celebrity Culture Means:” Asking completely unqualified famous teenage boys their opinions on abortion and rape:
“‘Thanks for joining us tonight Mr. Bieber. What are your views on climate change? How do you feel about Iraq? And what do you think of the criticism levied against the parents of the Columbine shooters?’”
Is gay marriage really the hallmark of society’s downfall? Not according to this fab pie chart.
Charlie Sheen, Mel Gibson, John Galliano et al: our obsession with celebs behaving badly.
Sarah Ayoub-Christie likens the freelance market to war, via Lois Lane, on The New Adventures of Superman. I’m inclined to agree!
“Jackie O & the Twisted Politics of Being a Bad Mother” at MamaMia.
Jezebel has also picked up the story.
Today’s celebrity perfumers could take a lesson from the late Liz Taylor in personal branding.
90% of Facebook users take note: “Ten Words You Need to Stop Misspelling.”
The fashion life cycle of the meat dress.
Images via Democratic Underground, Graph Jam, Feministing, The Awl.
In light of my doomsday musings on 2012 being the end of the world, I came across this “Comment of the Day” on Jezebel, which lamented the supposed discovery of the lost city of Atlantis:
“Oh, fuck. All the loose plots are being resolved. I guess the world really is going to end next year.”
With all the natural disasters and political uprisings in the world at the moment, you’d be forgiven for thinking the end of the world—2012, according to the Mayan calendar—was happening as we speak I write.
But with Japan’s earthquake, tsunami and nuclear crisis, New Zealand’s recent earthquake, Queensland and Victoria’s floods and Cyclone Yasi, the civil war in Libya and the Egyptian revolution, the end is nigh.
Now personally, I don’t actually believe the end of the world will occur on December 21, 2012, when the Mayan, or the Mesoamerican Long Count calendar, finishes. I think it will be more of an ideological shift caused by catastrophic events, like those happening in Japan, than Armageddon.
But let’s have a look at when the end of said calendar occurs and what it actually means.
In a (very sketchy) nutshell, December 20, 2012 marks the end of the 13th b’ak’tun, (equivalent to 144,000 days and 394.3 solar years), while December 21, 2012 will be the beginning of the 14th b’ak’tun.
There have been rumours that no prophetic predictions have been made after 2012 by Nostradamus et al., but Susan Milbrath, curator of Latin American Art and Archaeology at the Florida Museum of Natural History, says that reaching the end of a b’ak’tun cycle was cause for celebration and that the 2012 hullabaloo is “a complete fabrication and a chance for a lot of people to cash in.”
This lends evidence to my theory that with the world literally cracking up, it’s only a matter of time before we have to take heed of global warming warnings, which are manifesting themselves in natural disasters across the globe. Is it merely a coincidence that the first stage of the ratification of the Kyoto protocol finishes in December 2012?
Anyone who hasn’t been living under a rock (pardon the highly distasteful pun) in recent days would know that the Japanese quake was the seventh most powerful in history, and was actually so forceful, according to Italy’s National Institute of Geophysics and Volcanology, the University of Toronto, and NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory that it actually “shifted the Earth’s axis by 25 centimeters (9.8 in). This deviation led to a number of small planetary changes, including the length of a day and the tilt of the Earth. The speed of the Earth’s rotation increased, shortening the day by 1.8 microseconds due to the redistribution of Earth’s mass.”
Not to mention its repercussions across the rest of the world, including Hawaii, the U.S. and Canada’s west coasts, Tonga, American Samoa, New Zealand, Russia, Mexico, Peru and Chile, and the holdup the nuclear disaster will cause for other countries interested in adopting nuclear power, including Australia.
Egypt’s uprising and Libya’s civil war seem like child’s play in comparison, but one humanitarian disaster after another seems to be the way of the future unless we get our act together and think of the bigger picture.
Twitter played a huge part in Egypt’s revolution (the Libyan people haven’t been so lucky, with internet access shut down by the government); mobile phones allowed Christchurch’s residents trapped in the rubble to contact family and emergency services with their whereabouts. With electricity, phone and internet connections down in Japan, it’s proving difficult to take the same road (again, pardon the pun; the tsunami washed out roads and train lines, leaving most Japanese residents in affected areas stranded). However, Google Person Finder, which was used in the Haitian, Chilean and New Zealand disasters, is coming in handy.
I’m not 100% sure what this all means, or even how it all relates to the supposed “end of the world”.
What I do know is that it seems increasingly likely that every time we turn on the news or open up our web browsers, we won’t see Charlie Sheen’s latest antics, but another disaster that is leading us to the end of the world if we don’t take a look at ourselves and make a change, as Michael Jackson so poignantly sung.
Elsewhere: [Jezebel] Comment of the Day: Earth Prepares for 2012 Series Finale.
[Wikipedia] Mesoamerican Long Count Calendar.
[Wikipedia] 2011 Japanese Earthquake and Tsunami.
[USA Today] Does Maya Calendar Predict 2012 Apocalypse?
[WebCite] Japan’s Quake Shifts Earth’s Axis by 25 Centimetres.
[CBS] Earth’s Day Length Shortened by Japan Earthquake.
Related: Apocalypse Now: 2012 Come Early?
The Big Issue Review, 1-14 March, 2011.
Images via YouTube, Wish I Didn’t Know.
The Scarlett Woman 