LAXAppeal: why 197SAX is a failure

I have mulled over writing this piece – a critical review of the infamous University of Cape Town annual rag, SAXAppeal, and its place in the South African sphere of satire – for some time now. Alas, events conspired against me (the digital version was only made available online for download two weeks after print, so tough shit if you live outside of Cape Town; and it would seem my email to the SAXAppeal editor has been unanswered for weeks now – meaning that this entire controversy was irrelevant and dated by the time it reached me in Hermanus) and so it went unwritten – until I stumbled across older copies of the satirical publication in a coffee shop.

Reading previous editions and this latest one (entitled 197SAX) and seeing the glaring, stunning disparities between them made me change my mind. After all, it’s no secret to readers of this blog and those who know me that I have deep, deep love of the artform: satire has the power to shine a light on ridiculous topics and subjects in a way that traditional media or critiques cannot; unburdened by ‘factuality’, honed with wit and steeped in irony, the biting, scathing tone of satirical ‘journalism’ is what makes people like John Oliver and Charlie Brooker respected less as comedians and more as purveyors of quality reportage that not even ‘real’ newspapers can compete with.

SELLING SAX

For those of you who don’t live in a place where work starts at 9am, every year students at the University of Cape Town dress up (or down) and take to the streets of the Mother City to sell SAXAppeal, a satirical, humourous Uni rag that contains a variety of pieces – both funny and critical – that shed light and levity on student life.

This year, however, it would seem that a fit of puritan progressive wrath has swept through the editorial team: decrying their history as “problematic”, “sexist” and “elitist”, this year’s production has focused (almost entirely, but we’ll get to that in a bit) on serious pieces aimed at “a new narrative…. to amplify the voice of the students… pushing boundaries and challenging the status quo.” In a single word – stamped incessantly in bold, scary red through its pages – they’re looking for “controversy”.

“Today, when people think of SAX Appeal, they think of drunk, scantily-clad students selling an equally explicit magazine. A magazine that has been filled with blatant misogyny, racism and discriminatory statements, a magazine created by an overwhelmingly white editorial team, a magazine with no meaning or substance.”

And by throwing the baby out with the bathwater, controversy is what they’ve found.

BUT IS IT SATIRE?

Sitting in that coffee shop, paging through old editions of the ‘zine, it suddenly struck me how very much SAXAppeal had changed. The contrast is stark: a side-by-side comparison with any of the editions pre-2016 (or should that be ‘pre-woke’?) shows quite clearly how this fundamental shift in editorial vision has changed the publication.

Where before I could expect funny and unapologetic illustrations and articles that took on topics as varied as space, sex, sport, religion, homophobia, and how to use a condom, the latest pages are stripped bare of anything resembling satire. In the over 100 pages of content that the 197SAX brought me, I’d say that maybe 8 articles or images echoed the self-aware, self-deprecating humour of the previous writers.

The definition of satire is not, of course, fixed. While it is intended to be humourous, the main aim is social criticism – but a key marker of any satire is irony. Sarcasm, exaggeration, comparison, analogy, and a whole host of other tactics can be deployed, but the key here is that there exists some kind of an irony between the writing and the subject matter.

The most historic examples of the genre, like ”Johnathan Swift’s A Modest Proposal show that a biting, dark irony in the writing is what drives the art and how powerful it can be.

And yet it is this core idea that is sorely missing from the pages. Instead, a croaky, dry, humourless husk of “political correctness” (the mot du jour bandied about by critics on social media) is what greets you: but worse yet, this Politically Correct don’t-wanna-offend-anyone mantra has pervaded the publication to the point where the satire and jokes are explained or countered with disclaimers, author’s asides or outright explanations of why they’re just joking and we shouldn’t take it seriously.

“But maybe that’s the point?” I asked myself. “Maybe their shift in vision is aimed at introducing critical thinking and serious reflection into the student body? Maybe giving up laughter is the price we pay for a more equitable society?”

And yet I can’t believe that, because as serious and reflective as the included pieces are, they, too, are treated with this opt-out mentality: right at the very beginning of the publication, in stark, BOLD letters, says:

“Or even the authors themselves.” If the new SAX wants to be like the politically-minded, outspoken older SAX, then why the spineless vacillation?

But before I generalise with brush strokes too broadly, I want to critically review the “satire” contained within.

ALLERGEN WARNING: CONTAINS SATIRE?

With titles like “Dear White Boys”, “White South Africans”, “Ableism” and “Your Forgotten Privilege”, you can guess that this year’s edition wasn’t exactly packed with light-hearted chuckles. But before you’ve even given a peek at an article, readers are treated to a Trigger Warning-esque disclaimer in glaring red giving us an ALLERGEN WARNING that this mag contains SATIRE, CRITICAL THOUGHT and CONTROVERSY. Immediately following is a glossary of terms that will get you up to speed with how much of a privileged, problematic asshole you are, and then finally, a lovely condescending piece explaining how to “read” SAX and her “satire”.

Well, undeterred, I checked my privilege thrice, said a dozen “Hail bell hooks” and dove right in. After all, I’ve seen satire used to amazing effect in subversive themes: Key and Peele, Dave Chapelle, and dozens of other comedians have used irony and humour to shed light on serious ideas and make you think about your beliefs. Excited to see how SAX would use this as a tool to educate and inform us on controversial ideas, I scrolled down.

But as a satirist, I was wholly disappointed. With only 8 too-short-but-sweet satirical pieces peppered intermittently between heavy pieces on race, gender and privilege, there isn’t much in here that justifies the huge SATIRE stamp they overuse. (There’s lots of passable slam poetry, if that’s your thing).

The first, The State of the Nation Address, is a strong piece of satire taking the perspective of President Zuma. It’s filled with hard-hitting irony and snarky, dark jokes such as “I congratulate Miners Shot Down on winning an International Emmy. Maybe one day South Africans will see it” and “I have once again focused exclusively on the interests of the middle class, and neglected the important issues of land redistribution, affordable quality education and inefficient service delivery. Maybe those issues will make it into next year’s speech.”

However, it’s only 22 pages later that we’re treated to a second helping. Ameera Conrad’s Dear White Boys uses the stereotypical Plumstead-living, Mumford and Sons-consuming White Boy to dig at the idea of privilege and prejudice relating to your skin colour. A White Boy myself, I’d have to admit that I was kind of disappointed: is this the worst my skin colour can earn me as a stereotype? I was thinking that my premature baldness, tiny dick and rich father giving me a small loan of a million dollars would have Trump’ed these relatively benign traits, but each to her own I guess.

But it is right here that we start to see the cracks appear in SAX, thanks to tensions between their editorial mandate of Attacking Prejudice and Privilege and SAX’s mission as a comedic outlet. If we should be less prejudiced and steer away from stereotypes, then how can they turn a blind eye to the jokes in this piece that Muslim boys are misogynist and that Black Boys only want to fuck white girls? While satire can be an effective weapon in combatting stereotypes and educating readers, I don’t believe that the goals of humourless PChood and SAX’s vision this year are at all compatible. Satire *is* problematic. And that’s exactly what makes it so powerful and entertaining.

MAY CONTAIN TRACES – BUT ONLY TRACES - OF SATIRE

A few pages later, we’re treated to the shining example of the entire magazine: Pierre de Vos’s delightful, cheeky, self-deprecating and moving column looks back on the irony of learning under violent figures (“a torturer and a murderer”) from South Africa’s colonial history, and the fact that these monuments still stand in their places of reverence today. It’s a great piece that reveals how 197SAX’s vision could have been fulfilled without ditching the old humour and sharp writing.

But straight after that, we are shown how the goals of new leadership and the paper’s old identity do not gel. The next piece, a board game parody entitled MeNOPOLY, is a scathing indictment of the ANC’s actions and betrayal of their central tenets and vision. It acerbically pokes fun at how cronyism can infect a noble movement. But, again, in a quest not to offend, a clunky, awkward Disclaimer is tacked on, effectively making the joke completely redundant:

And this is 197SAX’s problem: that they’re afraid to commit to making a joke (even one that would otherwise perfectly meet their goals). In the next example, You’re Not That Liberal (Shannon Krausey, Nicole Dunn and Mikhail Moosa), that favourite White Liberal stereotype is the centre of focus. But rather than letting the joke speak for itself – the irony that the beliefs of this stereotype are self-contradictory and ridiculous though parodic quotes – they stop mid-joke and explain why this brand of liberalism is left wanting.

This is a huge disappointment. These kinds of White Stereotypes have been done so, so well: from Hard Eddy’s Gaaide To Laaif, Anton Taylor’s Jozi Shore, The Wayan Brothers’ White Chicks, or our local Tiger’s Guide, it’s incredible that such a huge opportunity was squandered. Apart from failing to recognise that “liberal” is a description and not a prescription (it’s a No True Scotsman fallacy - you can show liberal values without being liberal – ie egalitarianism or libertarianism), the tone comes across as a bossy mom telling you why you aren’t good enough.

It’s also around the same time that 197SAX shows its one-dimensional flatness. The next satirical piece up is “White Tears”, and – you guessed it – it’s about white people. But rather than being purely satirical, it’s really just a bunch of things that people say that - depending on context – may or may not be worthy of ridicule. Had this been fleshed out more – Christ, has no one watched Safferland’s incredible Tiphany’s (with a pee-aych-why) Guide to Sandton Survival? – it could have been a fantastic and biting piece that dismantles and ridicules first-world problems.

And while Shesus* writes a rather splendid piece called Feminism and Christianity pt3, the power of her irony is again undone by the incessant use of SATIRE trigger warnings and editorial disclaimers stating that :

Finally, the last in a too-sparse offering of laughs, the “News25” parody. It’s probably as close as any of the pieces come to Poe’s Law, that extreme of “wait, is this a joke or actually real, I can’t tell” (you know, unless the entire 197SAX was some ultra-subversive Poe’s Law parody of MustFallism and the progressive left – in which case I’m fucking blown away, well bloody done, mate, you got me). I’m not sure if merely recreating the hateful slurs of News24 actually says anything clever about society, but hey, I love me a good Penny Sparrow reference. If I could, I would bus in a dozen more.

BUT MATT, YOU’VE MISSED THE POINT!

… I hear you cry. “This is about CRITICAL THINKING. Who cares if it’s CONTROVERSIAL? It’s just SATIRETRIGGERWARNING. You haven’t even spoken about the serious, hard-hitting content in the rest of the magazine!”

Well, I’ve thought about that, and quite frankly if 197SAX is a project aimed at serving marginalised voices and repoliticising the students, I would say it’s too filled with awkward contradictions and small hypocrisies to be called a success.

In its opening, it denigrates magazines like Cosmopolitan and Heat. I don’t disagree – I’ve never like them; but then, they’re not my aimed at my demographic. They aren’t written for me – and besides, attacking a publication and dismissing everything they publish as mindless or irrelevant is fallacious. It would be like me saying “don’t buy SAX, it’s fuckin’ garbage”. Content should be judged on its own merit, and not prejudiced by where it’s published.

Then we have the awkward space of cultural appropriation and “marginalisation of lived experience in sex workers” to deal with. The former comes around once a Halloween, but often those brandishing the tar and feathers forget that the very concept of Halloween – right down to the costumes, masks, trick or treating, and candy – was ALL ‘appropriated’ from various cultures and systems of belief, going all the way back to Paganism and Wiccan beliefs. The same goes for “Mexican” sombreros or dreadlocks : Sombreros originate from 13th century Spain, and are thought to have been brought across by the Mongols before that; dreadlocks appear in a variety of cultures, societies and religions across history. No culture is pure, and any culture that tries to exist in a vacuum withers and dies. Just look at the Afrikaans (if you’re feeling butthurt, just remember my surname).

The latter is slightly more jarring. One of SAX’s first articles, written by the erudite and ‘woke’ Caitlin Spring, Selling Sax, throws itself on the altar of next-level liberal ultra-correctness, likening the act of selling a magazine on the streets (if you’re scantily clad, that is) to a heinous act that mocks and spits on the mistreatment of sex workers.

Now, I’m not sure what kind of massive leap of the imagination it took to make this tenuous, ridiculous link, or the selective vision that ignores the massive body of counterexamples and themed dress-ups and says, “yes, every woman selling SAX in the past few years has been dressed like a prostitute”, but if woman wearing heels and short skirts is being attacked, then isn’t that policing what women can and can’t wear? How is this massive jarring dissonance – between their apparent beliefs about being ‘woke’ and their policing women’s bodies instead of attacking legislation and politicians – be accepted? How is this hypocrisy not self-damning?

And that’s not even taking into account some of her more ridiculous claims: “As long as some men rape, all men are potential rapists”. I’m not even going to justify that with a rebuttal, except to say she is stupid, so therefore I’m going to treat all women as potentially stupid. Let’s just hope a minority doesn’t commit a crime: that might make things racist up in here.

And what about Nigel Patel’s The Decolonial Sex Project? This so-called “intersectional intercourse over colonised cocks” states in no uncertain terms that “your Tinder preference for white people is racist” but ALSO that “when you fetishise bodies of colour you participate in… racist throwback”. So you’re racist either way, I guess.

Let’s not forget Nicole Dunn’s The Holy colonial Spirit, which argues that secularity and shunning Christianity is a necessary part of the project of decolonisation (I would agree, but I think that it’s a wood for the trees argument that still doesn’t evaluate the existence of a conventional Creator). Doesn’t this contradict Conrad’s earlier demand that “when you speak to Brown Girl, don’t say ‘you’re too educated to be religious?’”.

And what about Dan Corder’s claim in Dress to Oppress that Harry Potter, Star Wars and Game of Thrones are ‘not black enough’ and that you shouldn’t try to express your love of fictional characters through cosplay or dress-up parties because it’s so problematic. Add this to Jordan Pickering’s inflammatory white guilt and self-effacement through “if you’re a white South African, you are either a racist or you’ve joined the same lifelong recovery program” (White South Africans). No, fuck you very much Jordan, because I don’t make it a habit to casually smear an entire ethnic group.

Their hypocrisy is even more obvious when you consider that Spur – which they lambasted in their opening editorial as “People with a taste for Cultural Appropriation” – has an entire, full-page in this edition. They might say they don’t get to pick advertisers, but they must also understand that these things undermine their very message. It would be like me writing a damning article about tax evasion and my newspaper taking a full-page advert for Mossack Fonseca or Jimmy Carr’s upcoming comedy tour.

Indeed, their narrative is further undone where they employ weasel words and readily accepted ideas without a statistical basis. Merely writing that “classism, misogyny, and trans*-antagonism…. Is rife in our tertiary institutions” does not make it true, and while I’m not enough of an idiot to pretend they don’t exist on campuses (across the entire world) I’d never presume to state they’re a rampant, out-of-control scourge that unilaterally defines all higher education.

TOO MANY SHORTCOMINGS

As a political project, I would also say that 197SAX’s new mission has a dire lack of critical self-awareness. Much content – as it stated in their magazine – is sourced from the organisations this school of thought supports, such as several universities’ charters of FeesMustFall movements. Now, in and of itself, this isn’t a problem. But having been on the ground at the Rhodes University fees protests and seen some of the (to borrow a word) “Problematic” behaviour and attitudes of these organisations, I would say that a free platform to disseminate their views without the CRITICAL THINKING they’re so sure they practice is truly dangerous.

By their nature, these student movements are not democratically elected. There is no set, universal mandate. There are no policy documents or membership criteria that can control and discipline aberrant behaviour or violent acts of so called “members”. Their demands and powers are, in effect, unlimited and subject to sudden, erratic change. Factionalism is rife. Hijacking by subversive political groups is too common. Without a clear leadership structure, how can university administrators, politicians or journalists critically engage with the movement? And how can we protect journalists who are – as at Rhodes University – harassed and told to stop filming, stop tweeting, forced to delete tweets and reportage from their phones, or asked to leave a university hall and cease all reporting in a public space? Looking at the track record of petrol bombings, riots and incinerated university buildings and vehicles, we can see that being careful and thorough with our beliefs – instead of morally smug and self-righteous, claiming we are ‘woke’ with some hidden, members-only knowledge that believers are under no expectation to share with those who question them (see pg78, Educating the Intolerant for more details – you know, “go do your readings” because “it’s not my job to educate you”) – is singularly crucial to uphold the central tenets of our shaky democracy.

In oversimplifying and abandoning their ways as ‘racist, elitist, sexist dude-bro tacky mom jokes’ they’ve missed a golden opportunity to introduce new concepts and debate ideas in a way that people can understand and empathise with. To say that there isn’t good content or ideas in this edition would be in bad faith (I enjoyed the interviews, especially with McKaiser), but the entire publication just comes across as aggressive and inflammatory.

197SAX is a fundamentally flawed failure, given its incessant polarised views. It claims to be the voice of students, of enlightenment, of a new narrative of freedom and equality, but really, all it does is judge and seek to control people, to shame and guilt them into self-flagellation and apologies: to tell them what to think and what to feel and what to wear and who to love and how to do it.

This year, SAX sucks.

If you’d like to support SAXAppeal, SHAWCO and RAG in their noble efforts to raise funds for underprivileged youth, please, check out their website and make a donation. if you want to read it for yourself, please purchase and download a copy of 197SAX.

Social media legal ‘experts’ to get Honourary Degrees

Citing the vast quantities of insightful expertise and legal opinion being offered incessantly on social media websites Facebook and Twitter, universities across the world have today announced their decision to confer thousands of Honourary Doctorates in Law to what they’re calling “the true legal geniuses of our time.”

According to Law Faculty Deans worldwide, what is most surprising of all is how these amazing and legally-literate opinions have all been produced after seemingly little to no prior study of the law, at any level.

“When we look back at some of the most popular and controversial legal cases of our time – the O.J Simpson trial, the Oscar Pistorius case, the Michael Jackson hearings, or even back as far as the Jacob Zuma inquiries – what we notice again and again is a wave, a veritable flood of thousands of social media users giving paragraphs-long and technically sound legal insights into these nuanced and complex cases,” said Dean of the Witswaterstrand University Law Faculty, Iona Gavel.

“Who would have known that so many hundreds of people, with little – if any – legal training or university knowledge of the Rome Statute, Constitutional Law, Due Process or even Crimen Injuria would be able to produce such lucid, confident, and not-at-all-pulled-out-their-arses legal commentary?” she said. “Often, at just a single glance at the case in question, they can instantly tell if someone’s guilty. Hell, I wonder why we even have universities or law faculties.”

However, many of the soon-to-be Honourary Doctors of Law are remain humble.

“It’s quite simple [how we did it],” explained mechanic and part-time understudy of famed Civil Law Barrister Judge Judy, Ree Parenjin. “You just look at the facts that they’ve reported in the newspaper and on my twitters, think about it for a few seconds, and the truth of the whole issue becomes immediately clear. Some people have an issue with what we say, but really there are some kinds of justice that are better and faster. Ag, some of these old judges have spent so much time in dusty libraries and boring classrooms reading cold, dull so-called ‘precedents’ that they no longer understand what justice is.“

And now, citizens everywhere are looking forward to the promise of a better, more efficient legal system.

“Oscar Pistorius was obviously guilty,” said Parenjin. “In a brighter future, we won’t have true justice delayed or cheated by pesky appeals processes or irritating subminimum standards of Reasonable Doubt. Oscar, those blerrie rhino poachers in the Kruger [National Park], and even corrupt ministers: they’ll all get the death penalty or life in jail, straight.”

Legal experts can’t wait.

“I look at some of the sentences and legal process changes these guys want, and I have to say I’m excited,” said Gavel. “I mean, what could possibly go wrong?”

Man in solidarity with French victims apologises for "selfish tweets, statuses"

Citing criticisms that he “doesn’t give a crap about anyone outside of Paris” following his obligatory “#PrayForParis” tweet and Facebook status yesterday, an area man has deeply apologised for his inconsiderate, selfish words of support and solidarity.

The man, 27-year-old accountant Jake Hendersen, approached the media this morning to confirm that he has since started a campaign to be more “equitable and considerate with his supportive tweets”.

“I’ve been reading some of the comments and criticisms of my messages on Facebook and twitter yesterday, and people are right,” he said. “And I’m not just talking about ‘being an ignorant fuck who conveniently doesn’t care about the senseless deaths of people until it’s white people dying’ or my being a ‘completely retarded insensitive Eurocentric moron’ – Obviously, I can’t care about senseless tragedies without displaying equal outrage for all death and tragedy everywhere else.”

"Without hundreds of clarifying tweets, my messages of solidarity and love are totally meaningless and myopic.”

The initial message, which read simply “my heart is with all of France #PrayForFrance”, attracted the ire of thousands of online commenters.

“Jake is an idiot,” said one person who appeared able to communicate only in all-caps. “My hashtag is #FuckFrance because of its heritage of evil and colonialism. Obviously the deaths of innocent people – people who could have been my sister or brother or mother or girlfriend – mean total jack shit to me. Why should I care about them or their grieving families when their government is so evil and twisted, even if those who died might not have voted for the majority political party, or even if they were, say, absolutely opposed to France’s involvement in international warfare or were outspokenly critical of their governments’ hurtful diplomacy with certain nations? Nah, fuck ‘em.”

In light of the controversy, Hendersen has promised to post an exhaustive and comprehensive collection of messages of support and solidarity with every country, city and nation in the world.

“It’ll take a bit of time to Photoshop my Facebook profile photo to have all the flags of the world, and to compose and post the hundreds of thousands of tweets and facebook statuses, but I think it’s totally necessary,” he said. “After all, how can anyone know that awful tragedies like these sadden me and that I care about the lives of those affected by terrorism, murder and war without having the relevant social media posts to prove it?”

It’s an issue not without difficulty.

“Oh, I’ve had some troubles,” he explained. “For example how can I rank all these atrocities and a bombings and killings? Should I listen to my detractors, and consider them all equally bad, even if this opens me up to attacks from the anti-#AllLivesMatter crowd?”

“And if all lives matter and I should care about all deaths equally, then must I make an ISIS flag Facebook profile picture mourning their deaths at the hands of a brutal, war-hungry coalition of Western nations? I’m still mulling these little quandaries over.”

Sources close to Hendersen now say that he is well on the way to proving to his some-600 Facebook friends and thousands of strangers on Twitter that he is against all tragedy.

“Given the sheer number cities, villages, hamlets and small townships in the world, he’ll probably have to post another 250 000 or more tweets to properly show he's in solidarity with all people who are suffering any kind of tragedy or horror,” said an unnamed friend. “But at least he’s halfway through posting the 196 individual transparent-flag-Facebook-profile pictures that show he cares about their struggles, so it’s a great start.”

Just some of the 196 transparent-flag-Profile-pics
that prove Jake really does care about people
dying in other countries.

And with the controversy boiling over, online commenters say it may be time for another support movement to start.

“Jake is being attacked, just as hundreds of #PrayForParis supporters are,” said one commenter. “We need to stand with these people in their time of need – which is why I propose we all Tweet messages of solidarity to those standing in solidarity with the French. #PrayForPeopleWhoPrayForParis.”

Want to know more about this developing story? Well, just log onto Facebook.com and see literally any of your friends’ goddamn statuses and comments.

Instagrammer comes to blindly obvious conclusion, quits Instagram

Gut-wrenching feelings of shock and betrayal persist today, after 18-year-old Instagrammer Tay Kasselfey came to the self-evident conclusion that Instagram is “contrived perfection made to get attention” and deleted her account.

Kasselfey, who had to this sudden and utterly self-apparently epiphany this weekend, has slammed Instagram, saying that despite the social media platform's devilishly misleading realism, the service is actually built on “carefully constructed lies that didn’t eat that morning and also had to suck in their belly”.

“Instagram might look totally real. If you scroll down it and see all the glossy, filtered and yet also hyperrealistic photos of coffee and stunningly attractive, thin woman dressed and made up to perfection, you could be easily tricked into thinking, ‘yeah, this is a totally realistic and accurate representation of the daily lived experience of every human being currently alive’,” she said. “But – brace yourself – it isn’t.”

She explained at length.

“Look at this photo of myself. Now, from this photo alone and no other information, you might easily think that I study in a skimpy bikini in the sun with books of different subjects all opened at the same time and strategically placed and turned to random pages while I pose in a super-uncomfortable yet sexy angle that accentuates my butt, flat, toned stomach and boobs,” she said. “But what if I told you that it was totally posed and took several dozen shots and careful post-editing to capture? It’s shocking and incredible to hear, I know, but that’s the truth.”

“And looking at any of the millions of photos on Instagram, you might think that every woman currently alive is a smokingly gorgeous perfect 10 with abs and boobs – but that just isn’t true. I mean, how is anyone supposed to figure that out on their own?”

And the disappointment doesn’t stop there.

“All those hashtags that we all think are there to accurately label and classify the images into neat categories that allow users to easily find content that suits their tastes and search criteria?” she asked. “Well, I hate to be the one to break this awful news, but actually they are just abused and piled up to try and get as many views and as much reach as possible, and often don’t even describe in any logical way at all what is in the photo.”

“I mean, I once used #goals #life #future #books #intellect #nerdy #dreams #workhard and #college on a selfie of me wearing glasses and holding a science textbook. How could anyone possibly have known that none of those tags actually meant anything?”

Kasselfey – who in real life is an overweight 42-year-old man who works in IT - has now sworn off the “narcissistic, self-obsessed, egotistical” Instagram, and has started a new campaign to try and create a more meaningful world that cares about other people.

“My new campaign features hundreds of photos of me in sexy poses that expose how shallow the whole thing is,” he explained. “We should care about things that truly matter, and not try to force the world to obsess about themselves or flood their spheres with endless pictures of themselves.

But despite this selfless awareness drive, public reaction has been mixed.

“I simply don’t believe it,” said one man. “You’re telling me that the vast majority of women aren’t oversaturated-colour-tinted models constantly wearing clothes that leave little to the imagination, and that all those photos weren’t taken in one spontaneous, off-the-cuff snap and hence don’t give a realistic depiction of real life? PSHT. Pull the other one.”

“I think it’s fantastic,” said a woman. “I’m not a size-zero supermodel, and so when I say that Instagram is fake and constructed, people just think I’m being a jealous, insecure hater bitch. I’m just glad that there’s someone much thinner and more beautiful than myself and thousands of other women who people will actually listen to about how women don’t look like that.”

But not all of the public is positive.

“She’s obviously lying,” said one angry commenter. “I mean, there’s no way it’s fake. Why would thousands of people spend hours on hair and make-up and positioning their Pina Colada very carefully on the edge of the table to get a perfect snap of the sunset, and dozens of minutes choosing the perfect filter to best exaggerate your image’s qualities? So that they can assuage their insecurity? So that they can garner more followers and possibly get asked to shoot a sponsored post that earns them thousands of dollars just to drink a cup of tea?”

“No ways – how gullible do you think I am? Next thing she’ll try to tell us that Wrestling is fake.”

Turning topic into race, gender issue “exactly what was needed”

True progress showed itself on Facebook today, after an innocent, inoffensive status was immediately turned into a racial and gender issue.

The post, which was a harmless joke about the Springbok’s match last weekend against New Zealand, only lasted 12 minutes before being skewed and twisted out of context and proportion to become an embittered flamewar about racism and sexism in the white-supremacist-capitalist patriarchy of televised sports culture. In just one day it attracted thousands of comments and arguments from incensed online commenters.

The status’s author, Jake Hendersen, now says that he’s glad they’ve started a “conversation” around race and sexism.

“You know, when I posted my status I just wanted to poke fun at New Zealand friends about this weekend’s match and say ‘springboks r the best lol all blacks are so useless’, not knowing my awful spelling would cause a digital meltdown,” he told reporters this morning.

“But now that hundreds of people are typing out ALL-CAPS hate speech, racial slurs, ad hominem attacks and demands that the idiots on the opposing side go read a fucking book, I’m glad to see a ‘discussion’ has started. This is just the first step one a long, arduous journey to a future free of racism, gender-based hatred, and harmless humour.

The post, which now stands at 21 485 likes and 11 792 comments, has been called “just what we all needed” by Human Rights advocacy groups.

“This is how we change the world: by getting people coming together, talking, discussing, and calling each other 'total retards who haven’t even read a book in their damn lives',” said chief researcher for Rights For All, Nelson King Jr. “You know, a lot of people might say, ‘oh, Nelson, but completely misunderstanding and detracting from the simplistic comedic value of the original post and embroiling the entire internet in a foetid clusterfuck of ad hominem attacks and fallacious, shallow arguments littered with faulty logic or emotional jabs will just divide and separate us all,’ but that’s where they’re wrong,” he said.

“This is how true progress is made: by just putting everything on the table, showing our cards, and turning every internet user against each other in a horrible, embarrassing hate-thread that everyone tires of in just minutes.”

However, internet analysts now believe such a peace could be all too brief.

“People have the ability to overcome great barriers and create a better, more tolerant future of peace and prosperity devoid of casual humour,” said web expert Hilby Bloggin.

“But come on, this is the 21st century. How could there ever be lasting peace when every ten minutes we have something like Caitlyn Jenner or Cecil the Lion to hate each other over?”

Man gives to charity without making elaborate viral video

The philanthropic community is in uproar today, after a man reportedly donated a large sum of money to a charity organisation without filming an elaborate viral video.

According to the man, who for some reason beyond the comprehension of modern man wishes to remain anonymous, he didn’t even tweet that he had done it, or even take a selfie or use any hashtags like #charity.

This isn’t the first time he’s pulled such a mad stunt – sources close to the man say that back in August 2014 he didn’t dump a bucket of ice water over his head before giving R50 000 to an organisation working to find a cure for ALS.

And while many people say this is pure madness, scientists say that the science is feasible.

“We’ve been looking into the neurochemistry and psychology behind such irrational acts, and we have to say that the science is sound,” said lead researcher for the study, Cora Layshin. “Turns out, you actually can donate money without making it about you or yelling to the entire world in hashtagged ALL CAPS that you’re so goddamn selfless and giving and kind.”

But this is just the beginning, say scientists conducting similar research.

”We’ve been looking into the innate, very natural links between being a good human being and making sure that it’s also tagged on Facebook and linked to your Instagram account,” said Dr Narsa Sistique of the Institute of Brain Studies. “Peer-reviewed research and carefully experimentation shows that – in an utter contrast to popular belief and going against everything certain Youtubers know to be true – you can donate money or food to homeless shelters without making exploitative Social Experiment videos that make thousands of dollars in ad revenue.”

International Charity organisations have jumped onto this trend, and are now challenging thousands of budding social media philanthropists to the bold and daring new "Just Donate some Goddamn Money" challenge.

”We know that it’s difficult to comprehend, but dozens of peer-reviewed papers on the matter have shown that you can do things like asking your girlfriend to marry you without having to stage some huge viral flashmob video,” said Dr Sistique. “Every time you do something like have a cup of coffee or a vegetarian quiche at a local bistro, or go to the gym, or go for a 22km bike ride on a Friday, you can actually do it without flooding everyone’s social media feeds with it. It’s crazy, but true.”

However, not everyone is too fazed by this shocking discovery.

“There may be one or two people who upset the system by giving money without making a viral video,” said online philanthropy expert Jack Givvens, “but as long as there are hundreds of people who make viral videos or do a No Makeup Selfie challenge without giving a cent, we figure it kinda all balances out.”

Study finds something that can’t be easily turned into clickbait

Confusion abounds today, after a ten-year scientific research program found something that can’t be oversimplified or easily turned into clickbait.

According to researchers at the Centre for Galactic Astrophysics, who have been looking into the nature of blackholes and how they interact with space-time, the results of their study, while incredibly important for the advancement of astrophysics as a science, cannot be easily turned into an image-heavy and arbitrarily-numbered list of things that will totally blow your mind or leave you speechless.

“We’ve been looking at the results, and we must say that we’re conflicted,” said Dr Theo Reece of the CGA. “I mean, the data really does change the way astrophysicists look at the complex equations and science of spatio-temporal interactions between objects of astounding mass, but when it comes to telling Buzzfeed readers that ‘These Scientists Have Been Researching Blackholes – And What They Found Will Completely Blow You Away’ we come up totally empty-handed. I mean, what good is scientific advancement if it can’t be completely reduced to an overly simplified misinterpretation for idiots to share on the ‘I Fucking Love Science’ Facebook page?”

CGA researchers now say that they are back at work searching for four more facts in their massive study that will fill a 10-item, 150-word listicle.

“It’s going to be a difficult task – like finding a needle in a haystack, or original content on Buzzfeed,” said Reece, “but we’re confident that, by early January at the latest, we’ll have found something dull and uninspired enough to get you through the last four points on the list so that you can read item 10 and do your obligatory reshare on Facebook and ‘lol’ comment.”

However, “writers” at the social media viral sites now say that they’ll probably just go ahead with the article anyway.

“We’ll just churn out the listicle anyway,” said Killean Jurnlizm, section editor for the sciences beat at the viral website. “I dunno, maybe there’s something on Reddit we can just steal and paste in… Besides, since when did our readers care about scientific accuracy anyway?”

Facebook to distribute likes to cancer victims

Social media giant and philanthropic website Facebook have announced that, starting today, they will now be distributing the accumulated likes, shares, and statuses aimed at ending cancer.

According to Head of Facebook's Charity wing, Sharon Lyks, the decision has been a long time coming.

"Ever since that first photo of a small girl smiling sadly at the camera, her bald head shining tragically in the little-girl-hating, cancer-giving sun, we knew we had to do something to stop this awful illness," she said in an interview with Muse and Abuse this morning. "Of course, we all know that the best way to end the combined pain and suffering of the victims of disease is to like and share photos of the internet."

The response, said Lyks, has been amazing.

"Since sharing that photo and putting it on everyone's wall, the picture has garnered over 4 billions likes and 18 billion comments," she said. "We're not sure, but we're pretty sure that's gotta be worth a lot of Internet Money."

Lyks and the Facebook team intend on taking these likes and comments to the Internet Monetary Exchange Bank later today.

The secret to its success, she said, was in Facebook users' tendency to repost the picture again and again, even if they know other people had seen it before.

"That's how much they cared about this campaign," said Lyks with a big smile. "They'll share it on all their friends' walls, even if that friend is a cancer-loving douche who replies 'oh, it's a hoax' and 'you should check these things to see if they're real, or just donate to a recognised charity', the cancer-apologist arsehole."

Facebook first shared that seminal photo in early 2003, but have now extended their charitable goodness to other worthy causes.

"World hunger, poverty, water shortages, homelessness... These are just a few of the things on the list of tragedies we are eliminating, one mouse click at a time."

Facebook's early estimates now state that homelessness and poverty are a mere 43 243 likes away from not existing.

"When it comes to creating a perfect utopian world of wonder, we believe that Facebook is right up there with those other bastions of social change: you know, email chain letters and online petitions on Change.org.

Facebook introduces new revolutionary new features

Social media users should brace themselves for a whole Facebook experience filled chock-a-block with features set to revolutionise the way you live in the online world.

“We’re changing everything,” said head of the R&D team at Facebook, Cody Compyler, “and not just the colour and logo font.”

“Facebook forces users to go through their entire lives, photos, opinions, thoughts and personality, and choose only a tiny fraction of a percentage of what is true to impress the people around you,” he said, “but most of us got Facebook when we were 16-year-old morons who thought liking a page called ‘Beer and Cigarettes’ made us look like rebellious bad boys. How can you pretend to be cool on Facebook if there’s over three years of evidence to the contrary that you can’t delete for fear of making it look like you joined Facebook this year, like your grandmother?”

This issue, says Compyler, is expounded only by its corollary.

“Then, when your mother or grandmother or someone close to you goes on Facebook, they judge you or start worrying because the only photos of you are taken at parties or trance festivals, making them say they’re worried about your ‘drinking problem’ when actually you’re not even that much of a lady-slaying party animal.”

In light of this, they’re introducing two new features: the ‘Real User feature, and the ‘Make Me Cool’ feature.

“Let’s see these features in action. If we go to my friend Jake’s profile, we can see he has photos of himself in the gym, at the beach with his really hot girlfriend, and driving around in his badass car. All of this makes me feel pretty inadequate. So if I press the ‘Show Me The Real Jake’ button over here, Facebook immediately shows me pictures of his girlfriend in a Onesie without makeup on, and here it gives us some really embarrassing childhood pictures, and here we have a collection of desperate and awkward messages to his grandmother and his ex-girlfriend who he apparently still loves to death. This is great, because now I know that Jake isn’t as cool as he seems, and also that my life isn’t that shit in comparison.”

“Now, if I go to my own profile, we can see that I have over 2943 photos and six years of likes, comments, posts and shares. I can’t possibly go through all of this and sweep all the embarrassing stuff under the carpet – that would take hours. So I just click the ‘Make Me Cool’ button and voilà! Thanks to Facebook’s coolness algorithm, I no longer liked ‘Beer’ and ‘Fast Cars’ and ‘The Hangover’ when I was 16, but instead I liked ‘The works of Noam Chomsky’ and ‘Psychodynamic analysis of postmodern literature’.”

The R&D team now report that they are working on a feature that will half the time it takes to ignore, trivialise or mock people on your newsfeed.

“It used to take as much as an entire hour to entirely debase someone’s existence and being, but we’ve cut down that time to as little as sixty seconds,” they said. “Hell, the only thing it doesn’t do for you is groan, roll your eyes and moan ‘how fucking retarded are some people?’”

Court finds MRA misogynist “deserved” to be assaulted, murdered

Justice has been served today, after the South African Supreme Court acquitted and released a man wrongfully charged with murder, saying that the victim’s dress sense, irresponsibility and consumption of alcoholic beverages proved that he was “asking for it”.

28-year-old Eric Manson was cleared of all charges of murdering well-known men's rights blogger and Men's Rights Activist, Andrew Hamaray, after courts looking into some of Andrew's compelling posts on the internet found that "it only makes sense, really".

”Some might consider this a sickening, heinous crime, and our judgement a gross usurpation and betrayal of the very idea of justice,” said Supreme Justice Victor Ree, “but we have to ask ourselves very important questions, like ‘what was he wearing at the time?’ and ‘why was he in a dangerous area alone at night?’ and even ‘how much did he drink before being stabbed multiple times in the chest and neck?’”.

Judges examined what was soon revealed to be very damning evidence.

“First of all, he was wearing an expensive, Italian leather jacket,” said Ree, counting the condemning proofs off with his fingers. “He was flashing around his wallet and talking openly on his phone in a risky part of town, and he had drunk a lot of alcohol before the incident. This leaves one conclusion: that he was asking to be robbed and butchered. That it was his fault.”

This judgement is supported strongly by police testimony.

“He waited almost three hours to report the crime,” said the sergeant on duty who took the initial statement. “Why? And don’t give me that ‘he was bleeding to death in a hospital’ bullshit. If this crime was so serious he would have reported it immediately, ICU life-suppport or not.”

Lawyers representing the wrongfully accused agreed, asking why the alleged victim waited so long to come forward to be slandered and discredited by their legal team.

“If they had really had a case based on facts and truth, they would have come forward to be belittled and attacked by us and rabid social media users much, much earlier than they did.”

So strong has the initial evidence been that police have not even needed to consult forensic evidence.

“The fingerprints we took from the scene and blood samples are sitting in their kit on a dusty shelf in the evidence room,” said the sergeant. “It’s clear that we don’t need any more evidence. Real men don't get robbed.”

Social media has also voiced its opinion, emphasising its agreement with the judge’s findings.

“He was an affluent manwhore prick," said one of many thousands of comments that weren't made under anonymity. "All these Men’s Rights Activists make me sick, saying men should be allowed to wear what they want and drink what they want. They should just STFU and go back to the garage repairing cars where they belong."

Family of the man have fully supported the court’s decision, saying, "we stand by Drew's words."

“Drew was always very vocal about the issues he cared about on social media, and never failed to air these exact same opinions on his twitter page,” they said. “We accept the court’s findings. Really, when you look at it closely, it’s what Dan would have wanted.”

New App revolutionises how we remember Huge Life Events

Life-changing experiences will never be the same again, thanks to a new App that is making huge waves in social media circles.

Insta-Mem, which has been downloaded 6 million times since it hit the App Store this weekend, automatically takes your boring, unspecial photos and diary entries from incredible experiences and journeys and converts them into a more representative and social-media friendly format.

“Times have changed, and with ever-ubiquitous modern technologies in our increasingly digitalised world, it’s about time we updated and modernised the way we remember the special moments in our life,” said creator of the application, Ian Staygram. “Let’s say I went to Naples and lay on the warm white shores of the Mediterranean, gently out my slowly-bronzing legs out on the beautiful soft sands just meters from the warm waters and taking in the simple pleasures of life in a moment that hope will stay with me until I die - how am I supposed to remember that without multiple selfies, social media check-in posts and filter-heavy shots of the local cuisine?”

Thousands have agreed.

“What, really, is the holiday of a lifetime if it isn’t posted online for your friends to like and comment on? And if you do take photos of the mountains or scenery, how am I supposed to know that I, or anyone who was apparently there, was *actually* there?” asked internet user and fervent Mem-er Jake Henderson. “I think we can all agree that, whether you’re diving in the Pacific Ocean with Whalesharks and Sunfish, or sitting on Mount Everest watching the sun rise over the distant smoky hills like a magnificent orb made from burning gold, the most important thing is that everyone you know knows that you – you, with your face, maybe your mouth curled into a cheesy grin with an accompanying peace sign or thumbs-up – were there. Everything else is meaningless.”

Social-media users no longer need to fear forgetting these magical moments, says Staygram.

“The app is so simple to use, that even a Twitter user wouldn’t struggle. All you do is take a photo of yourself, and our Smartscan technology will do the rest. All those yawn-provoking shots of the scenery and panoramic views of the island snoozefest you were staying in will now be updated to have you in them, even if you didn’t take any selfies on the trip,” he said. “Hell, if you didn’t even take pics at the place, the app just searches Google for sunsets and snaps in that area and edits those into your album. It’s not like anyone will be able to tell the difference between sunsets or check that you actually took the pictures.”

The app also automatically adds a relevant filter and hashtags.

“When I visit memorable locations, I don’t want to have have the stress of taking periodic selfies that reaffirm that I do actually exist and am actually in Paris,” said another user Mary Marie. “I don’t want to bother with the profound hassle of picking between ten slightly different pre-set image filters, or the philosophical wrestling match of coming up with seventeen hashtags that adequately sum up the profound, life-altering trip I’ve taken. With Insta-Mem , never again will I forget that I travelled and visited the Top Ten places in Paris that I read about in a listicle."

Already, many thousands are wishing they had had this app when they travelled the globe to broaden their understanding of the myriad different cultures and peoples of our beautiful, rich planet.

“Nowadays I just sit in my chair trying to work out what I did between the years of 1968 and 2010,” said senior citizen Jerry Attrick. “We didn’t have Twitter or Facebook back then, so how were we supposed to remember those moments that changed us deeply and profoundly for the rest of our lives?”

Staygram now says they have their eyes set on video format technologies.

“Let’s say you go to a concert and forgot to record the entire thing from eighty-seven seats back in the cheap section on your 2.8 megapixel cameraphone. Well, with the app we’re developing, we’ll just take DVD-quality official footage and convert it to be smaller, blurrier, and filled with uncompressed, low-quality sound complete with barely audible songs being drowned out by the cheering and screaming. Imagine you’re bobbing for apples in a tub of Vaseline after corneal damage.”

Photos: Everest by Luca Galuzzi; Great Wall of China by Severin.stalder. Both Creative Commons.

7 of the most offensive, disgusting images ever published on the internet (that we have the decency, ethical values and common sense not to republish or share)

The internet – and indeed the world – is a disgusting, horrifying place.

Every day, everywhere, there are acts that are being carried out that are so contrary to common decency and humanity that if you knew about them you would buy a gun and climb a clock tower: acts so heinous that they go against the very idea of what it is to be a living, thinking human on this earth; acts so utterly unspeakable that, if there were images of them out there, would make the whole internet-going audience click them and link them and share them again and again and make for incredible web traffic and advertising revenue.

But unlike most websites, we’re better than that.

And so here they are. The seven most horrifying, disgusting, vomit-inducing and shocking pictures you’ll ever not see on the internet, all curated on one website.

1. This book
   

   Throughout history there have been books and literature that have touched a little too roughly on the protruding jagged and sensitive bone jutting out the broken leg of contemporary society. And thus, many, many books have been banned.

   None like this, however. Christ, the hatred in the passage above (which we’ve edited to save you endless consternation and fury) alone is just shocking. Racism. Sexism. Arguing in favour of eugenics. “But Muse and Abuse,” I hear you argue, “wouldn’t showing us this image sate our morbid curiosity AND garner you tonnes of pageviews and money? Isn’t it win-win?”. Well, yes. But we like to think that we’re better than stooping to such lows just to make the number in the top-right-hand corner of this blog a little bigger.

2. Animal abuse and cruelty
   

   Vivisection. Animal cruelty. Abuse. Sadism. Just these words are enough to make you vomit out the murdered cow or mass-slaughtered poultry you had for lunch. This picture, however, would make you outright rage and do everything in your power to repost and share your outrage online to all your friends. You know, stuff that will really change the world and end these horrific practices that you despise so much. And so, we’ve taken out everything that will purposefully offend you just because we believe that getting a few more readers than last month is simply not as important as protecting society from unnecessary depictions of senseless cruelty.

   If it helps, imagine that this image has a picture of an adorable kitten smiling innocently in a shoe three times bigger than it instead of a cow whose neck has been slit open, its helpless, tied-up hooves scraping a desperate, futile final few mad jerks as its vital fluids pool in a shallow crimson pool under its lolling tongue and insane, terrified bulging eyeballs.

3. This racist, bigoted post on Facebook
   

   We all have that friend on Facebook who defends blackface or posts News24 articles saying why black people are stupid and lesser beings. But god, this post (which we won’t share because controversy breeds controversy and doing this won’t challenge the status quo but only provide a wider audience to this person to disseminate their hateful, backward views) just takes the cake. The eugenics-supporting, supremacist, Vanilla-only-no-chocolate-allowed cake. It makes Steve Hofmeyr look like Martin Luther King for godssakes. Why would we want to share that?

   Sometimes it’s better to use our silence to doom something to die in its own stupidity and obscolecence than create a domino effect of controversy just because we want to show off how progressive and outraged we are.

4. This tweet
   

   This tweet – which links directly to an ISIS beheading video – will end your faith in humanity. That’s why – unlike CNN, the BBC or any other major news network which technically acts as an intermediary for scary terrorist training videos and PR campaigns – we have blacked it out. We know fear sells, but seeing how we don’t want to make money off people’s fear and how, because this blog has no advertising revenue activated, we actually cannot make money off your endless fear, we just won’t. We like to think we’re progressive like that.

5. This picture
   

   Honestly, this image was so unspeakably disgusting that we won’t even edit out specific parts of it. Maybe it’s child abuse. Maybe it’s sexual slavery. Whatever it is, there isn’t a need for ad-revenue-and-pageview-hungry sites like this to make these sorts of things widely accessible to a large internet-faring audience. But hey, what better way to raise awareness to stop these sick acts than to keep spreading the content they produce and gloat about on social media, right?

6. This, god help us all.
   

   This. You can't guess what’s going on in this picture (just the way it should be), but Jesus, if you had finer details, you’d want to kill yourself. Imagine the worst thing you can, and then multiply that by Satan to the power of Ebola times infinity times Justin Bieber. Whatever this image was before we tastefully redacted it, it’s simply better that you don’t live your life in constant, ceaseless terror of leaving your house.

7. This disgusting sexual act
   

   For god’s sakes, people, there might be be children out there seeing every post that you accidentally have defaulted to “public”. We would hate for these images to fall into young, innocent hands. At the most, we’re stopping accidental exposure of graphic images to blissful juvenile minds unaware of such horrors. Although, we might still make kids get a sexual fetish for shadows or silhouette porn.

   Our bad.

Pics courtesy of Photoshop God and resident editor of photography Matthew de Klerk

Incredible! Young girl gets crippling student loans, broken dreams at just 14!

Most people would wait until their mid-twenties to mount up crippling student debt and a mountain made entirely out of the shards of shattered, pointless dreams – but 14-year-old Thessalonika Arzu-Embry isn’t most people.

Yes, you heard us. At just fourteen, Thessalonika has done what most would only dream of: get a piece of paper that entitles you to a ceaseless job-quest in a market saturated with equal qualifications and desperate graduates and lets you finally be a part of the horrific system of modern indentured servitude that will have you paying off your tuition until you’re lying on your death-bed, signing away your kidneys to a loan-shark.

“It wasn’t easy,” she said to reporters. “It always helps to have your family around you, supporting you every step of the way.”

Social services are now investigating this abuse.

However, despite this incredible news, some doubt the credibility of her degree.

“A degree at fourteen?” said one fellow graduate. “How can that be a real degree? How are we supposed to take you seriously as a critically-thinking member of worldwide academia and intelligentsia if you’ve never been utterly trashed in a bar on a Friday night rehashing the same old tired arguments to people you’ve just met about why Marxism or Socialism isn’t the answer, or about what the relative merits are of a capitalist democracy in today’s ever-changing political atmosphere? It just doesn’t make sense.”

Others agree.

“Oh, Jesus, when I was fourteen I was also a snotty bookworm,” said one guy who reiterated that this wasn’t a rant borne from ugly, embittered cognitive dissonance and jealousy. “I mean, I could easily have gotten a degree too. Just, you know, I was busy. With stuff.”

Even large corporations have added their voice.

“We congratulate the young girl on this fantastic accomplishment,” said food giant McDonalds, “but we also don’t understand it. She is far too young to work in one of our many chains across the country. Why would you want a degree in Psychology?”

However, Thessalonika remains adamant in the face of heated criticism.

“Many people say that the qualification isn’t worth the piece of paper it’s printed on,” she said, wearing her robes and posing for a photograph that would of course go immediately viral, because people can’t believe that fourteen-year-olds are capable of doing anything more than garbled idiocy.

“I totally disagree. It *is* worth the paper it’s printed on.”

Rhodes student officially Most Awkward Male in SA

A Rhodes student has cause to celebrate this week after being officially awarded the title of Most Awkward University Male in South Africa, leaving bad-hug-givers and monosyllabic-answer contenders across the country in the dust.

According to the Institute for the Study of Human Behaviour, which oversaw the massive nationwide contest, 21-year-old BSc student Jake Henderson (also known by many as “That Guy”) has blown away the competition to earn first place by miles.

"Henderson first came to our attention early this year,” said head of the competition’s panel of judges Sue Seyetie. “We got reports that he would frequently walk down the street and then, suddenly realising that he was going in the wrong direction, check his mobile phone, frown at it, and then spin and walk the other way.”

Henderson’s efforts to cinch the coveted title were emboldened by many other key strategies that most other socially awkward guys didn’t do.

“His other feats include walking side-by-side down Prince Alfred street with his best friend and then accidentally holding hands after their arms collided during a sidestep around a puddle,” said Seyetie, “as well as accidentally liking that photo of a girl he knows in a bikini on Facebook from two years ago.”

However, at this stage of the game, there were still many contenders putting up a strong fight.

“It was a tough decision,” said co-panellist Oork Ward. “We had one guy at Wits who accidentally made the name of the girl he was trying to look up on Facebook as his status, and yet another guy at NMMU who would stand in the middle of a circle of friends, cutting one or two people out, and then always crack a topically relevant joke just as the subject changed. It was a close call for a while there.”

However, it was Henderson’s final acts that cemented his place on the podium.

“Jake was at a friend’s house for a party. Not only did he sit down at a table and accidentally footsie another dude opposite him while wearing leather sandals, he also later sat down too close to a guy he didn’t know on the couch by the TV, having their leg hair rub together. He then went on to dig for chips out of the bag on the aforementioned male’s lap,” said Ward. “However, the final nail in the competition’s coffin was with Jess, your friend from Durban.”

According to eyewitnesses at the party, Henderson reportedly tried to turn a handshake with her into a hug, ending up with the horrific combination of a body lean and a back pat that looked like two people trying to hug each other while not touching.

“I saw the whole thing,” said Megan Astley, a bystander who had to be treated for severe muscle damage after her cringe shut down her entire nervous system. “Right after that, he tried to pat her arm and ended up hitting her in the boob. I passed out just after that.”

Henderson is set to receive his trophy next weekend in Johannesburg at the National Awkward Symposium, where attendees will mingle sipping drinks and dancing badly while not talking to anyone.

“It is set to be a very special occasion,” said Ward, “although we’re thinking of changing the MC who gives out trophies. He’s a well-known rap DJ, you see, and we don’t want Jake going in for a fist-bump and then morphing it into a hip-hop cupped-handshake-slash-shoulder-slap thing at the last moment. That would just be too much.”

Man definitely not racist

pic: wikimedia commons

A man who posted a racist rant to facebook yesterday attracting the ire of hundreds of online comments and posts has been found to be "definitely not racist" by the Institute for the Study of Racist Behaviour.

According to officials from the SRB, the post by 46-year-old Sandton businessman Johan van der Westhuyzen may have at first seemed racist, as it contained several harsh slurs, including the words nigger and k****r and phrases like "these bloody blacks", but a second revision of both the content, the poster, and the circumstances under which the post was made shows that the status was actually benign in its nature.

"If we take a second look at what he said, we can see that he started off with some very insightful preceding statements," said Dr Ray Cist of the SRB. "If you look at his status, he started off by convincingly telling us that 'I'm not racist, but...'. Statements like these are societal agreements that whatever we say after that will be totally devoid of hate speech."

Cist went on to point out that Van Der Westhuyzen also went on to point out that "some of my best friends are black", saying that this is also the mark of a forward-thinking, unprejudiced individual.

"It's well known that if you talk to black people every once in a while, you can't physically be racist. Fact," he said. "He also said that he hates Darren Scott and thinks places like Orania are backwards. I mean, you can't argue with logic like that."

Cist said that the Racism Research Team they put to task also found that the offended facebook users who were up in arms over the innocent post totally ignored the context in which the post was published.

"Again, there are times and places where shouting racist or hateful slurs is socially okay," said Cist. "Just look at Shoot the Boer. Johan had a really bad day, and that car guard did get a scratch in his expensive Merc."

Johan has since retracted his apology on facebook, saying that it was "just typical" how "those people" react to "innocent freedom of speech".

Van der Westhuyzen has, however, promised that in future, he would be more equality-minded and politically correct.

"I know that this country is filled with different races and cultures, all of which play a vital role in our society," he said. "Next time, I'll try to slander as many different races as possible."