Know Your Product, after (I’m) Stranded, is what people remember The Saints by. Those that are grounded in their culture anyway. No, Your product is the real depth. Awesome. A beast that burned too briefly.
January 26, 2012
No, Your Product
Posted by franc under art, culture, music | Tags: antibaboons, Chris Bailey, Ed Kuepper, The Saints |[27] Comments
grey lining 
January 26, 2012 at 9:34 pm
Erotic Neurotic
January 26, 2012 at 9:38 pm
No Time
January 26, 2012 at 9:40 pm
Demolition Girl
January 26, 2012 at 9:42 pm
Nights in Venice
January 26, 2012 at 9:47 pm
Remember folks, this was 1976….
January 26, 2012 at 10:41 pm
Good times for music! Well, in the alternative scenes that is, not mainstream radio of course.
January 27, 2012 at 12:23 am
21 YEARS IS A LONG LONG TIME TO BE IN THIS PRISON WHEN THERE AIN’T NO CRIME.
Fuck yeah. Sticky carpet, vomit smell. Please, I want it again.
January 27, 2012 at 11:44 am
Slow News day in the office, your stuck in a Time Zone or just being lazy…. get to work Franc. so much to write about….
January 27, 2012 at 11:55 am
[bold]You’re[/bold] making me lazy & sloppy
March 3, 2012 at 3:10 pm
Franc, you haven’t posted anything in a month. On vacation?
March 11, 2012 at 12:52 pm
Do you think he went and started a new blog under a new nym and left us all behind?
Franc, we were gaining steam as anti-FFtBlag crew.
Now, it’s back to the madness without a voice of sanity 😦
March 11, 2012 at 4:10 pm
As tempting as that would be, no. Just have had way too many external complications, unrelated to baboonery, to be able to devote serious, uninterrupted time here. In a way it’s good – make it all the more pleasurable to ruin the baboons sense of smug gloating. I have a pile of half complete articles, and I make a promise to you there will be something in the next few days. Their idiocy has grown spectacularly in the interim – this is another factor, being overwhelmed by nausea even thinking about it. But I have to get back in business, and kicking and screaming I will.
March 14, 2012 at 7:27 pm
That’s one of the reasons it’s so hard to fight feminists. They tend to have no life and devote 24/7 to their cause. While the more sober people are likely to only be able to (or want to) deal with it in their spare time.
April 1, 2012 at 6:39 am
“I make a promise to you there will be something in the next few days.”
I think he meant months.
March 18, 2012 at 11:55 am
In fact, there’s no point talking with feminists. If anything, feminism has lowered my impression of women. I started out as an egalitarian, and ended with utter disgust. They have nothing constructive to offer civilization..how many Nobel Prize winning female scientists, or world changing female technologists have we seen in the last 40 years of feminism? Amongst them, how many gladly identify as feminists? I was watching the AC/DC interview a few weeks ago, and at 10:58 the interviewer calls their music sexist. Now.. WTF is that? If feminists want to make their own music.. they can. But nope.. they have to take an existing thing that has achieved greatness, and malign that. Piece of shits. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MzZ7aDoKYFw
How can you talk to them.. look at them play eternal victims. they have no self-respect. http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2012/s3428343.htm
This bitch says And I think part of the reason of doing the play was that so many women I had interviewed had not only, not said the word “vagina”, they never saw their vaginas, they didn’t know what they looked like, they didn’t know how their vaginas functioned, they didn’t know what gave them pleasure. They didn’t even know their vaginas were their own. There you go.. they never saw their vaginas, and they didnt even know their vaginas were their own. Like someone said.. “I have never seen my anus either, and its not bothering me”
March 19, 2012 at 2:24 am
Feminists are perfectly free not to listen to AC/DC. Of course, exactly like the fundamentalist Christians they so despise, they’re not content until you don’t listen to AC/DC either. Even better is the possibility that they can get a public “decency” commission to ban AC/DC from the airwaves, effectively alienating them from their listeners and eliminating an entire channel of revenue for the band.
March 19, 2012 at 3:12 am
My problem isn’t even so much with feminists per se. My problem is that they’re being taken so seriously by so many people when any other activist group that does and says the same things for any other segment of the population would be ridiculed into oblivion left to comfort each other in drum circles somewhere far from civilization or preferably within padded walls.
Even on TED talks you have Even -vagina monologues – Ensler declaring in all seriousness that she, in fact, became her vagina. TED ffs !!!! And they all sit there listening quietly and respectfully to somebody so deranged.
Link (for intellectual masochists):
March 19, 2012 at 10:56 am
I think one of the mistakes you folks are making is this illusory and completely false implication that feminists are one solidified group of consensensus. That’s exactly the kind of error in logic that people like Lousy Canuck, Myers, and most of the Watsonistas make. The only difference is the fence side: their version is along the lines of anyone who doesn’t follow their rules of feminism is just not a feminist.
There is a vast range of thought, philosophy, and ideals amongst feminists, ranging from the profoundly misandrist and antisocial RadFem hub type feminists, up to people like Christina Hoff Sommers. And myriad variations therein.
There are a lot of wise, intelligent, thoughtful feminists, and over the years the feminist movement has produced many highly beneficial social changes. To write it all off with such empty headed simplicity is ludicrous. These all-inclusive statements you folks are making are sheer nonsense, and place you in the same non-critical thinking vein as the Baboons et al.
Now, that being said, it is true to some degree that certain specific groups pf feminists are being given the religious treatment, or perhaps the jewish treatment, in that disagreement and/or criticism of them, their ideas, and their actions is considered highly improper. And that, of course, is an approach that should no more be tolerated for those groups of feminists than it should be tolerated for religious groups. Believing in something that may be right and just in the big picture does not therefore bequeath either the belief or the believer with some kind of sacrosanct perfection.
March 19, 2012 at 11:38 am
Fair enough Greg. Let me rephrase my issue in a more nuanced way:
The main problem is not the feminists – or any variant of them. The problem is how pretty much anything coming from any of the feminist factions goes virtually unchallenged, not by merit but because of what I suspect to be a fear of standing up against what the mainstream falsely presumes to be a representative of pussy-interests. In other words, mainstream falsely assumes that any feminist demands are equivalent to women’s demands, and challenging women’s demands is politically incorrect. Hence the safe response for any politician or journalist or employer is to just give them what they ask for. Better than being branded misogynist or rape apologist and any truth or justice that goes out the window, well, that’s just collateral damage.
The ironic implication of that is that feminism, in most of its incarnations, draws it’s power from sexism. It’s truly fun to be alive today – and see where this circus will take us.
March 19, 2012 at 1:58 pm
Adi, given that feminist demands go unchallenged, and its been like that for decades, is there any reason to think that they wont OR have not abused that power? In history, how many people in power do we know that have not abused the power? And do such abusers not become the MAIN problems after a while?
for e.g During the recession of 2008, in the US jobs were lost 80%men-20%women.. so when Obama came up with a job creation plan, feminists lobbied hard to see to it that newly created jobs went to women at a greater rate.. 58%men-42%women.
http://aei.org/article/society-and-culture/race-and-gender/no-country-for-burly-men/
I also oppose the recent free-contraception to women in the US, but I dont see many opposing voices in MSM. Contraception has always been covered in the US (except in Catholic institutions..we know about religious “freedom”, but lets leave that aside for now). Why in fucks name is anything to be given for free?? So far, freebies are given by Govt to people who have earned them (such as pensions, retirement benefits), or people who are “incapacitated” somehow (food stamps for the unemployed etc). FREE contraception for ALL women? Even wealthy women who can easily afford it on their own? (Its 35$ per month it seems). Why?
The reason feminists get away with it? IMO, by playing the biggest and saddest victims, and whining and crying about how their world is.. the opposition’s defenses go down. And you know how men are when it comes to dealing with women.. just a few tears and the dudes defenses are overcome. IMO, there’s a whole lot of human psychology at play here, and this goes way before feminism.. into human history.
March 19, 2012 at 7:18 pm
@ AstroNj,
but you’re basically saying what I’m saying – that the power base for feminism is due to people’s irrational and sexist ways of treating women. And fixing that (assuming we can) is the way to fix the problems that feminists cause. Incidentally that would also help feminists because there seems to be a lack of self scrutiny among most of them. Many, like that Eve Ensler don’t seem to even realize how far removed they are from reality.
Interestingly, the solution might have unwittingly been feminists themselves. It was no doubt feminists that raised the awareness for sexism in our society. But like I said, sexism is their power base and with today’s younger generation of people who are sensitized to sexism, they are far less likely to buy into the dogma uncritically. Optimistic I know, but that’s my nature.
March 19, 2012 at 4:50 pm
Do not insult me with tiresome statements of the blindingly obvious. I find myself dismissive of your scolding, given that everyone except you seems to realize what “kind” of feminist is being discussed by way of context.
What, do you need everything spelled out for you?
March 19, 2012 at 7:20 pm
I understand your sentiment, but I must say I appreciate Greg’s “scolding”. It helps me self-reflect and find mistakes in my thought process- quite independently of whether he’s right or wrong.
March 19, 2012 at 1:19 pm
These all-inclusive statements you folks are making are sheer nonsense, and place you in the same non-critical thinking vein as the Baboons et al.
John, Can I suggest that you dont pontificate on this? Everybody thinks that they are the “critical thinking” and others are not. So lets cut that out.
Now, I know that feminism is a bush with many branches, like any ideology that lasts a long time. Just like religion does. Religion has indeed been a force for “good” as well in the past in terms of social cohesion, individual inspiration at a time of great social upheavals etc. But when we assess religion, one ends up talking about religion’s fucked up aspects in its current shape, and assess it as a whole for convenience’s sake. Same with feminism. I fully understand that there’s a spectrum of thought.
There are a lot of wise, intelligent, thoughtful feminists
My criticism of feminism is based on its actions (primarily the actions of its influential organizations like NOW i.e card-carrying members), and when required its theory. Even Christina Sommers works against feminist-actions as over the last 20 years. Go look at her articles at aei.org. Although she seems to have created the “equity feminism” tag as some kind of last ditch effort to save feminism, she does not work FOR any feminist action. Camille Paglia, Warren Farrell have also distanced themselves from it long long ago. Do you know any good actions feminism has taken in the last 10 years? (And when I say “good”, I mean good for everyone.. not Robinhood type of good). I bet I can show you an equal number of bad actions in the same period.
March 19, 2012 at 7:30 pm
Yes, you mention an interesting point: time. I can’t think of anything honorable that today’s feminists have done in recent times. The biggest event that springs to mind is the slutwalk and that is nothing but a giant woman-pleasing fest very closely related to Elevatorgate. Though I know of feminists who are very critical towards the slutwalk too – still being disagreement within a movement, does not absolve it from criticism. There were also NAZI party members who didn’t and wouldn’t harm anyone – yet calling the NAZIs disgusting and hateful ideologists remains quite appropriate.
So the question becomes, how many dissenters or critics must there be within a movement, to make it immune from generalizing judgment? And the followup question is, has feminism enough of that disagreement to qualify for the “we’re not a monolith” defense?
March 20, 2012 at 3:36 am
Agreed Adi. In the west, the most debilitating damage done by feminism is in the law..such as in family courts.. divorce proceedings/child custody and domestic violence/rape.. and to a lower extent but still widely damaging in social norms. The discourse in the atheist community touches only on a small fraction of the social norms (such as elevatorgate), but experienced people in the anti-feminist camp slam it on individual issues as well as address it as a whole/monolith. For e.g Barbara Kay of Canada in this vid from many years ago..
June 6, 2012 at 3:36 pm
Hell Franc, back in ’80, or ’79, there was a band that toured with The New Barbarians( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_New_Barbarians_%28band%29). They opened the show, and rocked the house. It was a group of motley punk fuckers, and I have never been able to find their music. It seems that they released an album, about then.
Any lead will be most appreciative.